Skip to main content

If the GOP wins the Senate, it is NOT a referendum on President Obama

So, what's the reason for the GOP likely winning control of the Senate tonight? If you ask ten conservatives, at least nine will likely tell you, "It's a referendum on President Obama and his policies."

I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. President Obama's approval numbers aren't great, but they are a heck of a lot better than that of Congress. In the the three most recent such polls, Obama's approval rating is at 42.7% and his disapproval is at 53.0% (net -10.3%). As far as Congress goes, the four most recent polls have its approval at 12.0% and their disapproval at 78.5% (net -66.5%). So, President Obama's approval is 3.56 times that of Congress and Congress' disapproval is at 1.48 times that of the president.

The fact of the matter is the American people can't stand Congress and want to vote incumbents out. Due to Republican gerrymandering, however, they will continue to control the House. On the other hand, the Senate will likely switch parties from Democrat to Republican.

Not only that, but this change in party control is a trend historically during mid-terms of a president's second term.

Pretty much from day 1 of President Obama's first term, it's been the Republican Party's goal to either make him a one-term president or to make him a lame-duck president in his second term. It's been their goal to minimize his effectiveness to try and win control of the House, the Senate, and the Oval Office. Even if tonight's election results follow that mid-terms-of-a-president's-second-term trend and the GOP takes control of the Senate, it's more due to the country being angry at Congress than at President Obama. It cracks me up to hear Congresspeople or individuals running for Congress talking about the president's low approval ratings. The president's approval is near 43%, compared to 12% for Congress. That'd be like a student saying a fellow student's 80% grade on a test was low when his was 22.5%.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/?state=nwa

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Mentioned on Crooks and Liars and Hinterland Gazette!

Due to some tweets of mine, I got mentioned on the following two sites (all my tweets can be viewed here -  https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki ): https://crooksandliars.com/2019/04/trump-gives-stupid-advice-george https://hinterlandgazette.com/2019/03/istandwithschiff-is-trending-after-donald-trump-led-gop-attack-on-adam-schiff-backfires-spectacularly.html

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...