Viewing Author

Entries for 'Carter Wrenn'

16
After Hagan’s first round of attacks calling Tillis a Tea Partier, a few Swing Voters decided to vote for Hagan, a few decided to vote for Tillis, but most stayed Undecided. Ambivalently Undecided. They didn’t want to vote for Obama-Hagan. But they didn’t want to vote for Tillis either.
 
The bad news for Tillis was Hagan, by driving up his ‘negatives,’ had put him in a corner. The good news was Tillis had time to get out.
 
But then, suddenly, Hagan changed directions.
 
A year ago when the Moral Monday demonstrators descended on Raleigh it was a little like a circus – but it was a circus that got lots of press. Mountains of press. And the protestors’ message was simple.
 
Republicans in the legislature, they said, were against education. And teachers. And women. And children. And the poor, sick and infirmed.
 
Over and over they said Republicans had cut spending on public schools.
 
Now, that wasn’t quite so.
 
The Democratic Superintendent of Public Instruction, June Atkinson, had proposed a budget that said legislators should increase spending on education hundreds of millions of dollars and, in fact, Republicans cut that proposed increase by $500 million.
 
But that wasn’t exactly a hard cut that meant the state would spend $500 million less on education than the year before.
 
In fact, since Republicans won a majority in the legislature in 2011 they’ve increased education spending a total of a billion dollars – or 14% – and even when you factor in the costs of increased enrollment and inflation spending on education has still increased 3%.
 
Republicans didn’t increase spending as much as Democrats like June Atkinson wanted – but there was no staggering $500 million cut.
 
The problem (for Tillis) was a year ago when the  Moral Monday demonstrators charged Republicans had cut spending, no chorus of Republican voices had answered, Wait a minute. That’s not so.  Instead, for a year, voters heard Democrats saying Republicans had cut education and when they didn’t hear a contrary word from Republicans they just, naturally, figured it must be so.
 
For Republican legislators in ‘safe seats’ that didn’t matter much but Thom Tillis wasn’t running in a safe seat – he was running statewide and as soon as Kay Hagan finished telling Swing Voters Tillis was a Koch-Brothers-Tea-Partier the next words out of her mouth were he’d cut education spending $500 million.
 
A month later Tillis was still stuck in a corner – Independents were still looking at Hagan-Obama and saying, I don’t want to vote for her. But they were also looking at Tillis and saying, I don’t want to vote for him either.
 
To be continued …

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

16
When Thom Tillis started his campaign his prospects looked promising. Obama wasn’t just unpopular, his unpopularity was a plumb line cutting through the electorate – you were either for Obama or against him and Kay Hagan was on the wrong side of the line.
 
Tillis, himself, back then wasn’t too well known but he could count on the Republican base falling in line and with 70% of the Swing Voters disapproving of Obama it looked like they’d fall in line, too, and send him sailing to victory.
 
Then, even before Tillis won the Republican Primary, Kay Hagan (and her Super PAC allies) lit into Tillis calling him a Koch-Brothers-Tea-Partier and, then, instead of sailing to victory, the earth shifted beneath Tillis’ feet.
 
To be continued …
 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

15
When I saw Kay Hagan’s first ad saying Thom Tillis was supported by the Tea-Party-leaning-Koch-Brothers I thought, Now, that’s odd – after all, the Koch Brothers weren’t on the ballot and no one cared a hoot who they supported.
 
But I was dead wrong.
 
Because it wasn’t the Koch Brothers who mattered – it was the Tea Party. Hagan had figured out Swing Voters disliked the Tea Party almost as much as they disliked Obama – so she set out to make Thom Tillis a Tea Partier and ten million dollars later Swing Voters (who still didn’t like Obama) were looking at Tillis and saying, I don’t like him either.
 
To be continued …

 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

15
Months ago, back when she started her campaign, Kay Hagan faced a knotty problem: She was going to get the Democratic base vote; her opponent was going to get the Republican base vote; but the Swing Voters didn’t like President Obama and, so, were on track to vote Hagan out of office.
 
Now, theoretically, Hagan could have rolled up her sleeves and gone to work to make Obama popular but, as a practical matter, Obama’s popularity was beyond Hagan’s control.
 
Hagan could also have tried to distance herself from Obama – Democratic candidates had been doing that for years. But after voting for Obamacare that looked dicey too.
 
Which left one alternative: Hagan could go to work to get the Swing Voters who disliked Obama to dislike Thom Tillis even more.
 
Then she might just win.
 
To be continued …

 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

14
If you think about it DENR’s proposal was pretty odd.
 
Last winter, when tons of water from a coal ash pond poured into the Dan River, there was consternation and gnashing of teeth. The U.S. Attorney started investigating. The Governor ordered every coal ash pond cleaned up. The legislature said Amen.
 
Then, with hardly a soul noticing, last August DENR signed off on a plan to clean up coal ash ponds – by dumping the water in the ponds directly into rivers and lakes.
 
Which sounded, more or less, like what had happened on the Dan River.
 
Which was odd.
 
And what happened next was even odder.
 
EPA nixed  DENR’s plan (and the controversy exploded in the newspapers again) then DENR announced it had simply been following orders (or an Executive Order) from the Governor. And did an about face.
 
In other words, DENR threw the Governor under the bus – which is something you don’t see happen in state government every day.

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

07
Here’re the three tartest comments I heard about the Ellmers-Aiken debate.
 
“He has the silliest pompadour since Jim Hunt.”
 
“She was catty.”
 
“The person on stage most qualified to serve in Congress was David Crabtree.”

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (1) RSS comment feed |

24
The other day our top General went over to the Senate and said turning the Iraqi army into a real fighting force may not be possible ;--then he said no one knows who the ‘moderate’ Syrian Rebels will attack once they’re armed – they might attack ISIS or might attack Bashar Assad and, regardless of who they attack, arming just 5000 ‘moderate’ Syrians (as the President proposes) isn’t going to be nearly enough to whip anyone.
 
Meanwhile the same day, over in Iraq, the success of our bombing campaign was limited to blowing up a truck, an artillery piece, and two small boats on the Euphrates River.
 
This is an odd – but familiar – picture.
 
It’s beginning to look a lot like we may be getting into another ‘political’ war: If the President does nothing he gets pilloried but if he does what it takes to destroy ISIS (by putting boots on the ground) he gets run out of town on a rail – so he’s sailing down the middle ground uneasily doing what’s popular and avoiding what’s unpopular which may come back to haunt him – like it has other Presidents.

 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

23

Two things happened the other day: One nasty. The other confounding.
 
First ISIS posted a video on the Internet telling President Obama (in no uncertain terms) to watch out – it is going to target every American soldier he sends to Iraq.
 
Second, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, our top General, added a new wrinkle to the meaning of the words ‘no boots on the ground’ – telling Congress it may just turn out, one of these days, that he might recommend American soldiers join Iraqi troops in “attacks.”  That wouldn’t, he added , mean GI’s would be in combat. Instead, they’d simply be “close combat advisors.”
 
Now think about that.
 
It’s a pretty bad thing to send a soldier into combat alongside a brigade of his buddies – who’ll stick with him through thick and thin.
 
But it’s a lot worse thing to send him into combat with a brigade of Iraqis – when that happens a ‘close combat advisor’ could wind up alone in a foxhole with no buddies in sight.

 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (1) RSS comment feed |

22
The way the President figures it the Iraqi army’s going to supply the ‘boots on the ground’ to whip ISIS but the other day, up in Congress, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs said half the Iraqi army isn’t fit to fight and the other half will have to be rebuilt “with U.S. training and equipment” before it can fight.
 
Part One of the President’s plan to whip ISIS is bombing – and that’s going fine.
 
But Part Two – putting Iraqi boots on the ground – just took a nosedive.

 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (1) RSS comment feed |

20
This came as a surprise: Iraq’s new Prime Minister does not want American troops in Iraq. They’re not welcome. And, he says, not needed.
 
It’s tempting, since Prime Minister al-Abadi figures he can whip ISIS on his own, to just say, Yes, sir. We’re out of here. But, on the other hand, we landed in this mess because ISIS whipped the entire Iraqi army hands down (and took Mosul and some dam and half the country).
 
From there, Iraqi politics gets even more confusing. Or, maybe, cleverer.
 
Where the U.S. should attack ISIS, al-Abadi suggested, is Syria.
 
Now that’s not as straightforward as it sounds: Because it turns out our allies the Iraqis are also allied with our enemy the Syrians, and not just allied – our Iraqi friends have been meeting with our enemy Bashar Assad  in Damascus to figure out how to work together to whip ISIS which is attacking both of them.
 
And that’s not all: It turns out our ally Iraq is also allied with our enemy Iran -- which is helping al-Abadi by sending ‘Shiite militias’ to whip Sunni ISIS.
 
In fact the other day in Paris, where we were busily at work building a coalition to whip ISIS, al-Abadi held a press conference and said he found it puzzling we hadn’t invited Iran to join us then added, That puts me as prime minister of Iraq in a very difficult position.
 
It’s a heck of a muddle. Our friends are allied with our enemies, one set of our enemies is attacking another set of our enemies, and we’re not welcomed in Iraq where we don’t want to be anyway.  
 
As they used to say in World War II: It’s pure FUBAR.
 

 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Posted in: General, Issues
Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (1) RSS comment feed |

Page 2 of 155First   Previous   1  [2]  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next   Last   
Copyright (c) Talking About Politics   :  DNN Hosting  :  Terms Of Use  :  Privacy Statement