Viewing Author

Entries for 'Gary Pearce'

30
A suspicious-minded sort at breakfast wondered if there was more than coincidence behind these two stories running the same day: “N.C. voters want stronger actions from lawmakers on coal” (Weekly Independent) and “Duke deal could lower power bills in eastern NC towns” (WRAL-TV).
 
No doubt the ElectriCities deal has been in the works for a long time, long before the coal ash spill and the subsequent political spillover.
 
But the Suspicious Mind asked: “With Duke under fire from every politician you see and with the U.S. Attorney issuing subpoenas in every direction, don’t you suppose Duke needs all the friends and allies can get right now?”

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

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

29
Democrats and progressives routinely decry Big Outside Money (BOM). Maybe they should recalculate. BOM has fundamentally reshaped the U.S. Senate race – in favor of Senator Hagan and against Speaker Tillis.
 
A flood of ads sponsored by pro-Hagan groups like the Senate Majority PAC have painted Tillis as the friend of CEOs, yacht-owners and polluters and the dedicated foe of the environment, education and schoolchildren everywhere. Polls show Hagan opening up a measurable lead in what inevitably will be a tight race.
 
Conventional wisdom is that Tillis has been hurt by the long legislative session. Don’t believe it. Voters aren’t following what is happening at the legislature. Here’s a political rule of thumb that will always serve you well: Voters are paying a lot less attention than you think. And they’re paying a hell of a lot less attention than you are.
 
No, the changed race is a function of the information that voters are getting on TV. And what’s happening on TV in the Senate race this summer should be a lesson to Democrats: (1) This is a big, rich country. (2) There are a lot of rich people who have Democratic views and values. (3) There is enough of that money to beat the Republicans at the game they invented.
 
There was a time when Republicans confidently thought Obamacare would carry them to an easy victory in November. They need to recalculate too.

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (2) RSS comment feed |

24
It’s an argument I’ve heard for 40 years: “Southern Democrats, meet your future: No more Republican lite.”
 
That’s the headline on a recent article by Bob Moser, Senior Editor at the National Journal. He wrote, “Candidates like (Kay) Hagan are stuck between the past, when Southern Democrats’ recipe for victory involved courting white moderates and conservatives, and a future in which they’ll be able to successfully campaign as full-throated, national-style Democrats.”
 
Call me a curmudgeon. But put me down as skeptical. As much as my heart wants to believe it, my head and my gut tell me that is no better advice today than it was 10, 20 or 40 years ago.
 
It gains credence because Obama carried North Carolina in 2008 and narrowly lost it in 2012. But his candidacy was an outlier, fueled by the history-making opportunity to elect and reelect an African-American President. Also, Obama, as candidate and President, hasn’t always been a “full-throated” liberal.
 
North Carolina remains a moderate and, yes, even conservative state. No, Democrats will not get many, if any, votes from conservative whites. But they need votes with people who have some moderate and even conservative parts in their political makeup.
 
North Carolina’s electorate today is nearly equally divided between natives and newcomers. Natives, no matter how liberal on some issues, still can be conservative on issues like spending and the role of government and sometimes on social issues.  They’re for Good Government, but not necessarily always Big Government. Newcomers are generally liberal on social issues and human issues like education and health care. But they too bring a healthy skepticism about government and all big institutions.
 
Most telling: If people really loved “full-throated, national-style Democrats,” wouldn’t they register that way? They don’t. They register as Independents, even voters who registered just so they could vote for Obama.
 
Maybe you wish it wasn’t true. But wishing doesn’t make it true.

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (2) RSS comment feed |

24
President Obama has taken to slipping the surly bonds of office, going out to Starbucks for a coffee, asking friends to set up late dinners with interesting, intellectually stimulating people (as opposed to the people he deals with in Washington, presumably). When he escapes, he jokes that “The bear is loose.”
 
Surely, Presidents deserve a break. But Obama somehow sends out a vibe that he can’t wait to leave the Presidency for good, that he is at wits’ end having to deal with the John Boehners and Mitch McConnells. (Remember his classic response to the suggestion that he sit down for a drink with McConnell: “Really? Why don’t you have a drink with Mitch McConnell?”)

We feel his pain, but …
 
Which brings us to the President who is the yin to Obama’s yang, his sometime ally and one-time antagonist and the looming figure who threatens to overshadow his Presidency – Bill Clinton.
 
You never thought Clinton was ready to leave the Oval Office or give up the combat, the challenges and the sheer high-stakes chaos of politics at the most stratospheric, oxygen-deprived, death-defying levels. He practically had to be dragged out of the office in 2001, spraying pardon-bombs on his way out the door.
 
Obama is more like George W. Bush, who seems deliriously happy to be away from the cares of office and free to pick up a golf club or paint brush.
 
Again, it’s understandable, but …
 
We want our Presidents to enjoy the job. We feel unsettled when a chief executive constantly reminds us of how difficult, lonely and miserable it can be at the top. We want to say: Stop whining! We don’t care! You wanted the job, and we gave it to you. Do it. And look like you’re enjoying it.
 
In a world that seems so complicated and dangerous – think Ukraine, Gaza Strip and child immigrants at the border – we feel better if we feel like the job isn’t too big for the President.
 
Somehow it all reminded me of the difference between Rory McIlroy and Tiger Woods at the Open last weekend. Last week, and even back when Tiger was winning, he never seemed to be having fun. Certainly last week, but also even when Rory is losing, he seems to be having fun.
 
It also recalls Obama’s listless, lackluster performance at his first debate with Mitt Romney in 2012. He seemed disengaged and disinterested. And that discourages no one more than his supporters.
 
Go to Starbucks, Mr. President. Have a stimulating, pleasant dinner. Get away from the responsibilities every now and then. But then get back to work, and have fun. We’ll all feel a lot better.

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (2) RSS comment feed |

23
Here’s another example of how two different journals this week reported on the same political story:
 
“Goodbye to the GOP wave?” The New York Times.
 
“Odds of a GOP Wave Are Increasing” The National Journal.

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Posted in: General
Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (2) RSS comment feed |

22
Art Pope’s critics often accuse him of “buying the State of North Carolina.” If he did, he got it cheap.
 
The Washington Post this weekend published its obligatory profile about the mild-mannered retail magnate who became the Superman ruling over North Carolina’s budget, politics and university system.
 
Two numbers catch your eye.
 
First, the story reported that “Pope’s family foundation has put more than $55 million into a robust network of conservative think tanks and advocacy groups, building a state version of what his friends Charles and David Koch have helped create on a national level.” That money was spent, the story said, over a “quarter-century.”
 
Let’s see, $55 million over 25 years. That works out to $2.2 million a year.
 
But that investment – or purchase – didn’t pay off until the 2010 and 2012 elections, when Republicans took control of the General Assembly and Governor’s Office.
 
Enter the second number: “Pope and his family played a significant role, donating more than $500,000 to state candidates and party committees in 2010 and 2012, according to an analysis of state campaign finance data by the Institute for Southern Studies, a liberal research group. His company, Variety Wholesalers, gave almost $1 million more to outside groups that ran independent campaigns.”
 
So let’s get this straight. Pope & Co. spent just over $2 million a year for over 25 years, with no real impact. Then they spent $1.5 million over two election cycles to achieve their long-term goal of world (or, least, state) domination.
 
Now, when you think of someone “buying” North Carolina, you think billions of dollars. After all, this is North Carolina! But that’s all, a measly of measly million dollars a year? Not to mention the considerable help of a favorable national political climate in 2010 and Governor Perdue’s late decision not to run in 2012?
 
If that’s the case, there are a bunch of people around who can “buy back” North Carolina. Which leads us to the question: “Where is the Democrats’ Art Pope?”

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (2) RSS comment feed |

22
At breakfast, two of the guys were bemoaning the challenges of life.
 
Tom, a generous contributor to political candidates, sighed, “Having a politician for a friend is worse than having a child in college.”
 
A while later, Phil looked up from his paper. “You need new glasses when you’re drawn to a headline that says, ‘Does Hagan want a condom tax?’ That got my attention. After squinting hard, I realized the story is about a carbon tax.” 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

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

21
They’re not highway numbers, or ages. They are the two big numbers driving North Carolina’s education debate this year.
 
When you take an eight-miles-high view of the legislature, setting aside the partisan debates and vitriol, the most striking thing is that Republicans are arguing this year over whether to raise teacher pay 5-6 per cent (the House and Governor McCrory) or 11 percent (the Senate).
 
Now, set aside for a moment Democrats’ objections that neither 5,6 or 11 is real, as all the pay raise proposals come with big holes and big cuts in other education areas. The point is that, one year after freezing teacher pay, Republicans are competing to claim they raised teacher pay.
 
Enter this story and map by Dave Dewitt and Keith Weston from WUNC radio: “Why is a teacher raise suddenly so important?...In 64 of North Carolina’s 100 counties, a local school system is the largest single employer. A local school system is the second-largest employer in 24 other counties. In only 12 counties a school system not in the top two.”
 
These numbers recall what a long-time lobbyist predicted last year: “The legislators are going to go home and find out that a lot of school teachers and school employees are Republicans.”
 
And so they did.
 
Which leads to the other number: 48. That’s where education advocates say North Carolina ranks in per-pupil spending, and they say we’re in race to the bottom.
 
Behind all this, you can be sure, is another set of numbers that has caught Republican’s attention: the polls on their approval ratings.

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

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

18
New Yorker magazine, as I recall, once had a department called: “Which newspaper do you read?” It juxtaposed totally opposite headlines about the same story. To wit this week:
 
“Clay Aiken outpaces GOP candidate in 2nd quarter fundraising” (Sandhills Tribune).
             
“Rep. Ellmers ahead of Aiken in fundraising in 2nd Congressional District” (Fayetteville Observer).
 
In fairness, if you study the numbers hard enough, you might find that both stories are true. But, as it’s beyond me, I’m hoping Representative Ellmers will bring it down to my level. Maybe a pie chart or something.

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (2) RSS comment feed |

16
A discerning reader adds a twist to my theory (see “Pat Versus Phil” blog below) that Senator Berger might back a primary opponent against Governor McCrory: It could be Lt. Governor Dan Forest: “Can't help but notice Senate budget included Forest's pet project for more education revenue but they didn't include any of Gov’s pet projects. If I was Phil Berger I could see how Forrest is just the right empty suit for the Governor’s Mansion.”
 
Of course, Phil Berger Jr.’s loss in the Sixth Congressional District might give Forrest pause.
 
On that topic, the same reader reported this nugget: “McCrory controversial former Press Flack is busy rubbing salt in the Berger family wound this morning.”
 
That would be Ricky Diaz – late of DHHS $80,000-a-year fame – who tweeted: “With loss of his son in NC-6, BIG defeat for Senate President Phil Berger.”
 
No love lost here.
 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (2) RSS comment feed |

Page 1 of 224First   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