Nate Silver Projects That Dems Narrowly Hold On To U.S. Senate In 2014

 

 

 

One of the new celebrities to emerge from the 2012 elections was Nate Silver of the New York Times. He project both the electoral vote and popular vote perfectly for the presidential election. Since his outstanding work doing the election, Silver has been much in demand and his every pronouncement is listen to with care.

Silver has issued his first projections for the United States Senate races in 2014. In his introduction, he writes:

"Democrats, faced with a daunting set of Senate races in 2012, not only survived but thrived, adding two seats to their majority.

The party will face a difficult map again in 2014, however. Twenty-one of the 35 seats up for election are now held by Democrats. Moreover, most the states that will be casting ballots for the Senate in 2014 are Republican leaning: 7 of the 21 Democratic-held seats are in states carried by the former Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, while just one of the Republican seats is in a state won by President Obama.

Democrats could also suffer from the downside to presidential coattails. Most of the seats up for grabs in 2014 were last contested in 2008, a very strong Democratic year. Without having Mr. Obama on the ballot, and with an electorate that is likely to be older and whiter than in presidential years, some Democrats may find that their 2008 coattails have turned into a midterm headwind instead.

Are the conditions favorable enough to make Republicans odds-on favorites to gain six seats and win the Senate majority? Not quite. Six seats are a lot to gain, and Republicans are at risk of nominating subpar candidates in a number of races. But it would not take all that much to tip the balance toward them."

Openly Gay Man Leads Democrats Battle To Keep United States Senate In 2014!

 

 

 

Guy Cecil is viewed as one of the great political minds in American politics. The political strategist who is responsible for the Democrats good showing in both the 2010 and 2012 United States Senate races is profiled in today's New York Times written by Jonathan Weisman.

Cecil has just agreed, at the urging of Senator Michael Bennet to stay as head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee one more term in order to protect the Democratic margin in the 2014 elections. The handsome and talented strategist is much in demand within the beltway and could be making big bucks. However, Cecil served as Senator Bennet's Chief of Staff and could not turn him down.

Here are excerpts from the Times profile:

"After two grueling election cycles, Guy Cecil, the brains behind the Democrats’ improbable Senate showings in 2010 and 2012, was expected to set aside his political combat boots for tasseled loafers and a sinecure somewhere in this city that pays handsomely for success.

Mr. Cecil, center, helped lead Democrats through tough campaigns to keep control of the Senate.

Then his old boss, Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado, reluctantly took the helm of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, looking at another brutal map for Democrats eager to stay in control of Congress’s upper chamber. He had one demand: Keep Guy Cecil aboard.

“It was critically important that Guy stay in the job,” said Mr. Bennet, now reunited with Mr. Cecil, the former chief of staff who spent the last months of his 2010 campaign sleeping in the senator’s Colorado basement. “He is just excellent at what he does.”

Mr. Cecil’s return as executive director of the committee is notable in a city accustomed to political consultants cashing in for big money “downtown” — at lobbying firms and with influence peddlers off Capitol Hill. In 2010, Mr. Cecil helped engineer Mr. Bennet’s successful defense of his seat, one of the unexpected wins that kept Democrats in control of the Senate even as the party suffered a historic defeat in the House. Most assumed Democrats would lose the Senate as the 2012 season began. With Mr. Cecil directing forces, the party gained two seats.

But do not tell the reigning Democratic political wunderkind that he has a tough job. That only gets him started.

At 23, he was a Southern Baptist minister in Miami. Then he came out as gay, left a conservative church that would not accept him and went to Boston because it seemed diametrically opposite of the world he had fled. His first job was in retail, paying $19,990 a year.

His grandmother had started the family’s hard-knock cycle, running from an abusive marriage in Ohio to Miami, where she raised five children as a waitress for 40 years. His father is a boat mechanic in South Florida. His brother, born with a malignant neuroblastoma, was not supposed to walk, if he survived his first birthday. He is 32 now, with chronic health problems — and two children.

“I really have no need to complain about how hard my job is,” Mr. Cecil, 38, said with a shrug.

Which is a good thing, because he could have a lot to complain about.

After the struggles of 2010 and 2012, the road ahead for Senate Democrats does not look much smoother. Incumbents are likely to face tough races in the red states of Alaska, Arkansas, Louisiana, Montana and North Carolina. Democratic retirements in Iowa and West Virginia have opened new fronts for Republicans eager to avoid a third strike in their quest to regain Senate control. Both parties are awaiting a decision by Senator Tim Johnson, a Democrat, about whether to run again in South Dakota.

Beyond that, freshman Democrats, swept to power in the Obama wave of 2008, face their first re-election campaigns in the swing states of Colorado, Minnesota, New Hampshire and Oregon. Only once in 75 years has the president’s party not lost seats in the midterm election of his second term.

Mr. Cecil’s goal: “To hold the majority, that’s it,” he says. "

You can read the entire article here....

Troubled Minds

 

 

 

Almost every day the front page of newspapers have disturbing stories of mentally challenged people hurting themselves or others. Adam Lanza in Newtown, Oscar Pistorius in South Africa and now Country-Western star Mindy McCready are prime examples of very troubled minds.  They are people who might have sought help or at least receive adequate treatment if the stigma of mental illness was not so prevalent in our society.

Despite amazing progress both in the science of the mind and unlocking the mystery of troubled minds, the stigma is still strong. Even more importantly the availability of compassionate and effective programs to help those who are in torment are rare. You can break a bone or have cancer and America is ready to provide you with every specialist possible but if you your mind is torn the choices are very limited - if you are even willing to seek help.

In my early 30's, I had a total nervous break down from the pressures of life. Fortunately for me, my dear friends made sure I got the best psychiatric care possible and stood by me as I healed my mind. Never will I forget the total fear, loneliness and helplessness that overtook me as my mind struggled to stay on an even course.

Nor will I forget the number of people who warned me against seeking the assistance of mental health professionals for fear that it would be a life long stigma. Politics still does not look kindly on those who have sought help for mental challenges.

The New York Times on Monday wrote about a new project being proposed by President Obama that will be as historic as the understanding of our DNA and genetics. The paper reports:

"The project, which the administration has been looking to unveil as early as March, will include federal agencies, private foundations and teams of neuroscientists and nanoscientists in a concerted effort to advance the knowledge of the brain’s billions of neurons and gain greater insights into perception, actions and, ultimately, consciousness.

Scientists with the highest hopes for the project also see it as a way to develop the technology essential to understanding diseases like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s, as well as to find new therapies for a variety of mental illnesses.

Moreover, the project holds the potential of paving the way for advances in artificial intelligence.

The project, which could ultimately cost billions of dollars, is expected to be part of the president’s budget proposal next month. And, four scientists and representatives of research institutions said they had participated in planning for what is being called the Brain Activity Map project. "

As those with mental challenges continue to impact our society, their families and themselves it is important to not only look for solutions and healing but keep in touch with our compassion. A mind out of control is an unbelievable horror for the person suffering such an event.

Frank Bruni Writes About Our Most Dangerous Senator

 

 

 

There is nothing I like better than my Sunday morning ritual of the New York Times, coffee and morning talk shows. The highlight of the Sunday Times is usually Frank Bruni. His column is always insightful, extremely well written and right on target.

His most recent column is about Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) who is one of the most dangerous Senators in the United States Senate. The Tea Party freshman Senator is extremely bright and lacks a moral center. Doing the Hagel confirmation battle he kept referring to Hagel receiving money from the North Koreans. Of course that never happen nor even came close to happening.

Senator Cruz slandered former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel without any information. Cruz who has never served a day of his life in the military questioned the patriotism of a man who served in Vietnam and has received two Purple Hearts for being injured in combat.

Bruni writes:

And Ted Cruz, a Republican freshman in the Senate who has been front and center in his party’s effort to squash Chuck Hagel’s nomination as secretary of defense, has a problem. He’s an ornery, swaggering piece of work. Just six weeks since his arrival on Capitol Hill, he’s already known for his naysaying, his nit-picking and his itch to upbraid lawmakers who are vastly senior to him, who have sacrificed more than he has and who deserve a measure of respect, or at least an iota of courtesy. Courtesy isn’t Cruz’s métier. Grandstanding and browbeating are.

He sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and during its final meeting on Tuesday about Hagel’s nomination, he made such nefarious and hectoring insinuations about Hagel’s possible corruption by foreign influences that McCain, who’d gleefully raked Hagel over the coals himself, more or less told Cruz to cool it. It was an unforgettable moment, and one that Republicans shouldn’t soon forget, because Cruz, 42, isn’t simply the latest overeager beaver to start gnawing his way through the halls of Congress. He’s a prime illustration of what plagues the Republican Party and holds it back.

******************************************

ONLY three senators voted against Kerry’s confirmation as secretary of state. Cruz was among them.

He has an affinity for opposing, a yen for obstructing. He belonged to the minority of 22 senators who voted against the Violence Against Women Act, which passed with 78 votes. He also voted against suspending the debt ceiling for three months and against aid to victims of Hurricane Sandy.

He has already flagged his disagreement with the immigration reform proposal by a bipartisan panel of senators. He has already indicated antipathy to the new push for meaningful gun control. During an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” when he was twice asked about the broadly reviled National Rifle Association ad that brought the president’s daughters into the debate on guns, he more or less defended it.

He’s been quick to seize spotlights like the one presented by “Meet the Press,” and while newly minted senators often keep a relatively low profile, he reportedly holds forth in Senate conferences at great and off-putting length. And he’s drawing unusual admonitions from senior Republicans.

“I think he’s got unlimited potential,” Senator Lindsey Graham told Politico. “But the one thing I will say to any new senator — you’re going to be respected if you can throw a punch but you also have to prove you can do a deal.”

Indeed, the challenge for Republicans now — a challenge that, to limited and varying degrees, Rubio and even Eric Cantor are beginning to grasp — is to be seen and to act as a constructive force, as a party that’s for things, that wants to be inclusive and that operates with a generosity of spirit, not an overflow of spite. With his votes and his vitriol, Cruz undermines that. He brings himself plenty of attention. He’ll bring Republicans nothing but grief.

To see Bruni's entire column click here......

WILDLIFE: New National Park In Congo Home To 15,000 Western Lowland Gorillas!

 

 

 

For years the news out of the Congo has been devastatingly grim. Over six million people have died in a variety of wars taking place especially in the eastern part of that troubled nation. At last we can report some good news. A new National Park was opened on December 28th which hopefully will provide protection to over 15,000 Western Lowland Gorilla's. These magnificent animals have been on the critically endangered list.

The New York Times Reports:

"The locals said it could not be done. It was 1999, and the hardheaded ecologist J. Michael Fay was determined to tromp across 2,000 miles of the Congo Basin. In a northeastern patch, he ran into a swampy tangle so thick that he struggled to advance by a single mile in under 12 hours.

“He later said it was one of the most difficult things he had ever attempted in his life,” said Paul Telfer, director of the Wildlife Conservation Society’s Congo program. When Dr. Fay, also a staff member at the conservation society, emerged from his journey 455 days later, he referred to that wild forested place as “the green abyss.”

Now the government of the Republic of Congo has declared the area a national park, ensuring that the green abyss remains just that. Gorillas, it turns out, do not mind the forests’ tangle.

In 2008, the Wildlife Conservation Society discovered that an estimated 15,000 western lowland gorillas were living there, which helped spur the government to make a decision to protect the forest. “The density of gorillas in this area turned out to be surprisingly high,” Dr. Telfer said. “As big as gorillas are, it’s surprising how nimble they are in these dense understories — it’s their preferred habitat.”

With this new population taken into account, the northern Republic of Congo now supports an estimated 125,000 gorillas.

After several years of study, consultation and dialogue among various governmental bodies, a 1,765 square-mile patch of land became Ntokou-Pikounda National Park. “We celebrate and acknowledge the efforts of the Congolese government to protect this extraordinary ecosystem,” said Cristián Samper, the president and chief executive of the Wildlife Conservation Society. “There are three national parks established in this region now, so we’re really looking at a major piece of the Congo rain forest being preserved and managed in a sustainable way.”

**************************

"In addition to protecting gorillas, the park shelters the great apes’ forest neighbors, including around 800 elephants and 940 chimpanzees. “This park is a great victory not just for gorillas but for conservation,” said Jerome Mokoko, the associate director of the Congo program. “What should not be overlooked is that this park supports wetlands with huge numbers of fish, crocodiles and Congo’s largest and most secure population of hippos.”

Ntokou-Pikounda National Park’s relative inhospitality to humans helps to protect wildlife dwelling by deterring poachers or at least making poaching more challenging. But pressures on great apes remain high on the forest’s eastern border, where some communities reportedly have a preference for gorilla meat. "

Governor Cuomo Has It Right

 

 

 

Finally a politician has the courage to speak up for sane and sensible plans when it comes to recovery from Hurricane Sandy. Tens of thousands of homes are literally smashed along the New York and New Jersey coast lines. Obviously the heart of the victims is to rebuild on the exact same land where their home lies in ruins. Historically, tax dollars would have rightfully assisted in the rebuilding effort.

That was before climate change and the rising oceans and more powerful storms.

Governor Andrew Cuomo has proposed that a bold plan that makes sense. He wants to buy the homes/land from the owners and build barrier reefs and wetlands to protect our shores. If the victims of Hurricane Sandy rebuild in flood and storm areas, the likelihood is that over the next decade we will have to rebuild their homes two to three times more. By spending the money now for the buyouts not only are we protecting homeowners the stress of surviving storm after storm but also saving hundreds of millions of dollars in future relief.

The New York Times reported:

Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo is proposing to spend as much as $400 million to purchase homes wrecked by Hurricane Sandy, have them demolished and then preserve the flood-prone land permanently, as undeveloped coastline.

The purchase program, which still requires approval from federal officials, would be among the most ambitious ever undertaken, not only in scale but also in how Mr. Cuomo would be using the money to begin reshaping coastal land use. Residents living in flood plains with homes that were significantly damaged would be offered the pre-storm value of their houses to relocate; those in even more vulnerable areas would be offered a bonus to sell; and in a small number of highly flood-prone areas, the state would double the bonus if an entire block of homeowners agreed to leave.

The land would never be built on again. Some properties could be turned into dunes, wetlands or other natural buffers that would help protect coastal communities from ferocious storms; other parcels could be combined and turned into public parkland.

In the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, which swept through the region on Oct. 29, Mr. Cuomo has adamantly maintained that New York needs to reconsider the way it develops its coast. He has repeatedly spoken, in blunt terms, about the consequences of climate change, noting that he has responded to more extreme weather in his first two years as governor than his father, Mario M. Cuomo, did in his 12 years in the job. Last month, in his State of the State address, he raised the prospect of home buyouts, declaring “there are some parcels that Mother Nature owns.”

“She may only visit once every few years,” Mr. Cuomo said, “but she owns the parcel and when she comes to visit, she visits.”

See the entire article here.....

Will Los Angeles Elect A Gay Republican Mayor This Year?

When I was living in Los Angeles in the 1980's Kevin James was a liberal openly gay Democrat. He protested in the streets Governor Wilson's veto of a LGBT rights bill. Kevin was one of the most effective fundraiser's in the battle for LGBT rights and to stop HIV/AIDS. A significant number of LGBT community and political organizations had him on their board.

Times change and so did Kevin James.

James became a well known talk show host who was increasingly conservative and provocative in his views. While becoming more conservative and even outrageous on issues he has always supported marriage equality, the right to choice and the fight against HIV/AIDS.

Now he is the Republican running to be Mayor of Los Angeles.

The New York Times in an article by Adam Nagourney reported on his race this weekend. Here are two excerpts:

"Kevin L. James, a conservative talk show host running for mayor of Los Angeles, was sitting in his campaign office recently pondering which was his bigger obstacle to victory: being openly Republican, or being openly gay.

“Depending on what room you’re in here, sometimes it’s easier coming out gay to Republicans than it is coming out Republican to gays,” he said.

By any measure, Mr. James, 49, is a bit of a long shot. He is a Republican brassy former prosecutor running in a Democratic city at a time when California is marching steadily to the left, making his first bid for office in a field of establishment candidates.

Yet in the first major election since President Obama’s victory in November — voting that relegated the California Republican Party to the margins — Mr. James has become, at least for a few national Republicans, something of a lifeline. They see in his candidacy in the March 5 vote an outside chance to grab what could be a spirit-lifting victory, and perhaps even signal a way to get back in the game in California.

Fred Davis, a Republican ad producer based in the Hollywood Hills who worked for the presidential campaign of Senator John McCain, created a political action committee to finance an advertising campaign to help Mr. James compete with his better-financed competitors. Mr. Davis was looking to raise $4 million from Republicans across the nation; he has since scaled back that goal a bit (he had raised $700,000 as of Friday).

And Mr. James has retained John Weaver, a Republican political consultant who has long advised Mr. McCain, as his senior political adviser. Mr. Weaver has increasingly warned that Republicans are marginalizing themselves by moving to the right on issues like abortion, gay rights and immigration.

“He is from central casting about what a future Republican candidate can look like in an urban or blue state and win,” Mr. Weaver said. “It’s important for the party. We have not done well nationally since we stopped winning in California.”

Mr. James’s draw for these men is not only that he is a fiscal conservative who supports abortion rights and same-sex marriage, or that he is a colorful show horse in a field of gray. (At a debate the other night, he kept standing up when it was his turn to speak, even as everyone else settled politely into their chairs.) "

*************************************

“On the national stage, he is the perfect example of the Republican dilemma,” said Bill Carrick, a Democratic consultant advising one of Mr. James’s Democratic rivals, Eric Garcetti, a member of the City Council. “He has to both energize a shrinking base of Republican voters who are decidedly more conservative than the rest of the city’s electorate, at the same time he reaches out to the ultimate Democratic voters. It’s a hell of a challenge.”

But Mr. James could well affect the final outcome here. Given Mr. Davis’s effort and the crowded field, Mr. James is positioned to squeeze his way into a two-way runoff this spring. If he does, it will probably be at the expense of Wendy Greuel, the city comptroller, who is competing for the same votes in the San Fernando Valley where Mr. James has a constituency. Mr. James has directed most of his attacks against her.

Whether he could beat a Democrat in a two-way race — polls suggest that the opponent would be Mr. Garcetti — is decidedly less likely."

Read the entire article here......

Another Reason For Hagel: He Took On Bush's Iraq Policy

 

“This is the neocons’ worst nightmare because you’ve got a combat soldier, successful businessman and senator who actually thinks there may be other ways to resolve some questions other than force,”

-Richard L. Armitage,

Neocons and Republicans Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham can't stand the fact that former Senator Chuck Hagel supported the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Given their vehemence against Hagel you would think that the Secretary of Defense nominee stayed neutral doing World War II.

Nope, Hagel had the good sense to question American soldiers dying in a war based on huge lies and deception. The former Nebraska Senator remembers the lies fed to the Congress and the public about Iraq including about nuclear weapons and the country being a base for terrorism.

A Sunday New York Times Article by Jim Ruthenberg entitled "Hawks on Iraq Prepare For War Again, Against Hagel". The first paragraphs of the story says it all but you should read the entire informative article.

"In the bitter debate that led up to the American invasion of Iraq in 2003, Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska said that some of his fellow Republicans, in their zest for war, lacked the perspective of veterans like him, who have “sat in jungles or foxholes and watched their friends get their heads blown off.”

Those Republicans in turn called him an “appeaser” whose cautious geopolitical approach dangerously telegraphed weakness in the post-Sept. 11 world.

The campaign now being waged against Mr. Hagel’s nomination as secretary of defense is in some ways a relitigation of that decade-old dispute. It is also a dramatic return to the public stage by the neoconservatives whose worldview remains a powerful undercurrent in the Republican Party and in the national debate about the United States’ relationship with Israel and the Middle East.

To Mr. Hagel’s allies, his presence at the Pentagon would be a very personal repudiation of the interventionist approach to foreign policy championed by the so-called Vulcans in the administration of President George W. Bush, who believed in pre-emptive strikes against potential threats and the promotion of democracy, by military means if necessary.

“This is the neocons’ worst nightmare because you’ve got a combat soldier, successful businessman and senator who actually thinks there may be other ways to resolve some questions other than force,” said Richard L. Armitage, who broke with the more hawkish members of the Bush team during the Iraq war when he was a deputy to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell. "

The journalist later writes:

"Mr. Hagel’s earliest concerns arose before the Congressional vote authorizing the use of force. “You can take the country into a war pretty fast,” he said in an interview with The New York Times in 2002, “but you can’t get us out as quickly, and the public needs to know what the risks are.” In the interview, he took a swipe at Mr. Perle, then one of the most visible promoters of the war, saying, “Maybe Mr. Perle would like to be in the first wave of those who go into Baghdad.”

Mr. Perle had never served in the military. Along with Mr. Hagel’s comment in Newsweek that many of the war’s most steadfast proponents “don’t know anything about war,” his criticism prompted a national discussion about “chicken hawks,” a derisive term for those advocating war with no direct experience of it. And his comments drew a rebuke from The Weekly Standard that Mr. Hagel was part of an “axis of appeasement.”

Mr. Hagel’s words appear to sting to this day. “Normally you hope your cabinet officers don’t resort to ad hominem argument,” said Mr. Perle, who is now a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. In an interview, he said his opposition to the nomination stemmed from his fear that Mr. Hagel was among those who “so abhor the use of force that they actually weaken the diplomacy that enables you to achieve results without using force.”

Yet Mr. Hagel did ultimately vote to give Mr. Bush the authority to go to war. He has said that he did so to give the administration diplomatic leverage and that he now regrets it. Explaining his vote on the floor of the Senate, he warned, “We should not be seduced by the expectations of ‘dancing in the streets’ after Saddam’s regime has fallen.”

The Top Five Best Constituencies For President Obama On Election Day!

 

 

A great deal of reporting has been covered in the election but the New York Times published a chart yesterday that gave detailed breakdown of both President Obama and Governor Romney's vote. The newspaper's charts have proved to be amazingly interesting and especially for the LGBT community.

One of the facts was that White Born Evangelical Christians voted for Romney with 78% to 21% for Obama. They made up 26% of the vote in the election.

Another interesting fact is the the total LGBT vote was greater than both Asian and Jewish Americans. 

Here are the top five constituencies that voted for President Obama's re-election:

1. African Americans:

Total Vote For Obama: 93%
Percentage of Total Vote: 13%
Advantage for Obama: +87%
Vote for Romney: 6%

2. LGBT Americans:

Total Vote for Obama: 76%
Percentage of Total Vote: 5%
Advantage for Obama: +54%
Vote for Romney: 22%

3. Asian Americans:

Total Vote for Obama: 73%
Percentage of Total Vote: 3%
Advantage for Obama: +47%
Vote for Romney: 26%

4. Hispanic Americans:

Total Vote for Obama: 71%
Percentage of Total Vote: 10%
Advantage for Obama: +44%
Vote for Romney: 27%

5. Jewish Americans:

Total Vote for Obama: 69%
Percentage of Total Vote: 2%
Advantage for Obama: +39%
Vote for Romney: 30%

Nate Silver Shows Slow Trend Toward Obama

 

 

Nate Silver, columnist for the New York Times has taken all the national polls released and show the average lead that Obama had over Romney. As you can see below, Obama has increased every single day.

Silver posted on Twitter this 'simple average of national polls released':  

Thursday: Obama +0.9.

Friday: Obama +1.2.

Saturday: Obama +1.3.

Sunday (partial): Obama +1.4