Drinking Liberally
Join us at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally for an evening of electoral politics under the influence. We officially meet at 8:00 pm at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E.
Many of us will show up earlier than that and enjoy the excellent cuisine while watching returns from the Potomac Primary.
Tonight’s theme song is inspired by Republican State Chair L. Esser: Lesser Things by Jars of Clay. Thanks for all the giggles, snickers, ROTFLs, and guffaws, Luke!
If you find yourself in the Tri-Cities area this evening, check out McCranium for the local Drinking Liberally (I heard a rumor that George Feairng, now officially a 4th CD candidate, may attend). Otherwise, check out the Drinking Liberally web site for dates and times of a chapter near you.
Current Polling for the Washington State Caucus and Primary
SurveyUSA has released a new Washington state primary and caucus poll. The poll was conducted Thursday and Friday, and after Mitt Romney’s surrender.
I take a more detailed look at the poll here, but the take home message is pretty simple. Barak Obama should win big over Hillary Clinton in the caucus today, and probably in Tuesday’s (February 19) beauty contest as well.
Likewise, John McCain should easily win in the caucus as well as in Tuesday’s primary. The more interesting race today will be for second place—Ron Paul doesn’t trail Mike Huckabee by much among those who plan to caucus.
Open Thread
Those recurring charges:
(This and some sixty other media clips from the past week in politics are now posted at Hominid Views.)
Water Billing
A few weeks ago I got a water bill from the City of Redmond. The bill listed the “Previous” meter reading at 191,800, the “Current Read” as 192,000, and “Consumption” as 1,000. Hmmm…. A calculator verified my hunch that the math was somewhat fuzzy. And an examination of earlier bills showed that, previously, the computer had always done the math correctly.
Last year, during the same two-month billing period, we had used about 1,000 cubic feet of water, but we had had a houseful of guests for an extended stay over the holidays. This year our normal two-person household had been reduced to a one-person household for the billing period and was even reduced to a zero person household for about 1/3 of that time while I was visiting the second person on the east coast.
When I called the water company they had a very simple explanation for their fuzzy math. The reading just seemed too low to them. So they figured the meter was stuck and “estimated” I used 1,000 cubic feet based on last year’s consumption.
“What! The! Fuck?” I was thinking as I politely explained the largely empty house during the billing period. I felt like I had just been pick-pocketed by my friendly city government and water provider. I suggested to the person on the phone that they should at least denote on the bill whenever they’ve entered an “estimated” amount. I mean, who the hell sits down and does the math from the raw meter readings every bill? “But…but…but” they had sent a meter reader out twice, she protested, as if that could somehow differentiate between a stuck water meter and an empty house.
In any case, I got the extra 800 cubic feet knocked off of my bill—all $11.68 of it. (Hey…it was the principle.)
A week later…a maintenance crew shows up and replaced the meter in front of my house. Uggggh!
The whole episode seemed like a big waste of time and resources—if they had simply called to ask about water usage in that billing period they’d have saved the expense of the second meter reading, the costs of sending a two-man crew to replace the meter, and the cost of the replacement meter.
I suppose one could use this as an example of the government being both inefficient and incompetent—you know…the way certain uninformed and hypocritical Wingnuts do in the comment threads all the time. In the big scheme of things my Redmond Water Utility experience is a drop of water in an ocean of government inefficiency and incompetence. Here’s the big picture version of my little story….
Drinking Liberally—Super-duper Tuesday edition
Join us at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally for an extraordinary evening of electoral politics under the influence. We officially meet at 8:00 pm at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E.
Many of us will show up at 5:00 pm (when the place opens), and enjoy the excellent cuisine while watching the election returns.
Tonight’s theme song? Alice Cooper’s Elected, of course:
If you find yourself in the Tri-Cities area this evening, check out McCranium for the local Drinking Liberally. Otherwise, check out the Drinking Liberally web site for dates and times of a chapter near you.
WA caucus and primary poll
SurveyUSA just published results of a primary and caucus poll in Washington state.
On the Republican side McCain leads with 40% support, and Romney is a distant second at 26%. Huckabee gets 17% and Paul shares 9% with the undecideds. (Yeah…there is probably an anti-Paul conspiracy involved in these results. Right.)
Obama leads the Democratic field with 53% to Clinton’s 40%.
Given (1) the fluidity of the Democratic race, (2) the fact that Super Tuesday comes before next Saturday’s Washington Caucus, (3) that polls–which assume statistical independence among respondents–don’t represent social processes like caucuses very well, and (4) that the poll excluded independents, I won’t be placing (or taking) any bets on the outcome. Even so, Sen. Obama must be happy with Washington state right now.
Personally, I don’t really care what the outcome is. I see great, if different, strengths in either of the Democratic front-runners.
Who plans on participating? About 26% of those questioned said they would participate in their party caucuses. But when subdivided by party, 28% of Democrats said they will participate in their caucus versus 22% of Republicans.
Overall, 88% said they would participate in the primary election, including 91% of Republicans and 86% of Democrats. The Democratic primary counts for almost nothing (except bragging rights for the winner, I suppose), whereas the Republican primary will determine about half the delegates.
Perhaps it’s wishful thinking on my part, but the higher planned participation by Democrats in the caucuses and the surprisingly high planned participation by Democrats in a meaningless primary election sure makes it look like the Democrats have the edge in enthusiasm.
(The more detailed poll cross-tabs are given here.)
Ann hearts Hillary
Rick Santorum and Pat Buchanan aren’t the only right-wing wack-jobs that really, really hate John McCain….
(This is an open thread)
Drinking Liberally
Join us tonight for a fun-filled evening of politics under the influence at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally. We meet at 8PM at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E.
Some of us will be there early to watch coverage of the Florida primary election. The early results show it too close to call between Sen. John McCain and Gov. Willard Mitt Romney. Either way, tonight’s theme song will be War Pigs by Deep Purple.
Perhaps we will make a drinking game out of Mayor 9iu11iani’s concession speech.
Not in Seattle? Check out the Drinking Liberally web site for dates and times of a chapter near you.
Open Thread
Dino Rossi’s State of the State Denial:
(Some 70 other media clips from the past week in politics are now posted at Hominid Views.)
Drinking Liberally
Join us tonight for a fun-filled evening of politics under the influence at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally. We meet at 8PM at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E.
Tonight’s theme song, in support of the Mitt for Michigan movement: Free for all by the Motor City Madman, Ted Nugent.
Not in Seattle? Check out the Drinking Liberally web site for dates and times of a chapter near you.
Open Thread
Brit Hume has a fireside chat with Dick Cheney:
(This and over 80 other media clips from the last week in politics are now posted at Hominid Views.)
Open Thread
In case you didn’t catch the short story (published in 2001)…now it’s out on video: Jane and the Metro Bus…a silent film.
Drinking Liberally—New Hampshire primary edition
Join us tonight for a fun-filled evening of political pontification and primary punditry under the influence at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally.
The official event begins at 8PM at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Some of us will show up around 5PM to catch the early returns out of New Hampshire.
Tonight’s theme song: Live and Let Die by Paul McCartney and Wings, with a mash-up of a song by Free. (Definitely not All Right Now, however.)
If you find yourself in the Tri-Cities area this evening, check out McCranium for the local Drinking Liberally. Otherwise, check out the Drinking Liberally web site for dates and times of a chapter near you.
The “Wrong Winner” Problem and the National Popular Vote Plan
New Yorker Political columnist Hendrik Hertzberg writes about the National Popular Vote plan.
The National Popular Vote plan is the state compact that, if enacted by enough states, would have member states award all of their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. Essentially, the plan is a constitutional way of creating a national popular vote without the difficulties of amending the U.S. Constitution. The National Popular Vote plan has been championed by Dr. John R. Koza, who is Chairman of National Popular Vote Inc.
Hertzberg looks at Koza’s research into the “wrong winner” problem, in which the winner of the electoral college vote loses the popular vote (like happened in 2000). Koza uses national head-to-head general election polls and compares them to state head-to-head polls. Hertzberg writes:
A 2000-style disaster for democracy could easily befall us again this year, as Koza has just written an interesting analysis to show.
By compiling state-by-state polling data, Darryl Holman, a University of Washington social scientist, has run eight mock general-election pair-ups between Democratic and Republican candidates, showing who would win and who would lose in the Electoral College if the election were held today. What Koza has done is to compare Holman’s findings with a calculation of what the national popular vote would be, using national polls taken in the same time periods.
Koza’s startling finding: In three out of Holman’s eight head-to-head face-offs, the national popular-vote winner loses the electoral vote—and with it, of course, the mock election.
(Hey…I’m glad someone found those analyses useful!)
Hertzberg provides Koza’s entire analysis.
It is hard to argue in favor of our current system of electing our Presidents via the winner-take-all Electoral College approach. (Well…ignoring the “It’s how we’ve always done it!” argument, anyway.) Two hundred years ago the system might have made some sense, but today we really should be electing the President through a popular vote.
One thing is certain though…the Electoral College is not going to go away anytime soon. But since the Constitution give the states control over how electors are selected, the National Popular Vote compact (if enacted by enough states to control the majority of the Electoral College votes) would effectively and legally create a popular vote for President. And with no need to amend the U.S. Constitution.
Think of the advantages to this system…. First, candidates will no longer spend the vast majority of their time pandering to a few important swing states like Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania. Right now, a voter in Ohio has far more influence in electing the President than you have. It just shouldn’t be so. In an ideal democracy, every person’s vote should carry the same weight.
A popular vote would encourage candidates to campaign more broadly so as to reach as many voters as possible. It would mean that candidates visiting Washington for fundraising would actually engage in this activity called campaigning. Imagine that…Washington state no longer being treated like an ATM machine!
Finally, a popular vote gets rid of the embarrassing (albeit rare) situation—like we saw in 2000—where the loser of the popular vote ends up being President.
The Washington state legislature is about to take up work on a National Popular Vote bill:
The 10 legislative sponsors of the National Popular Vote bill in Washington State include Representatives Joe McDermott, Shirley Hankins, Mark Miloscia, Mike Armstrong, Fred Jarrett, and Tom Campbell and Senators Eric Oemig, Darlene Fairley, Craig Pridemore, and Jeanne Kohl-Welles. The House bill is HB 1750 (Status of HB 1750), and the Senate bill is SB 5628 (Status of SB 5628).
If you like the idea of Washington state participating in the compact, contact your Washington state Senator and Representatives. Here is a good place to start.
To learn more about the progress of the compact in other states, visit the National Popular Vote web site.
(Cross-posted at Hominid Views.)
- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 171
- 172
- 173
- 174
- 175
- …
- 184
- Next Page »