California By the Issues
ArchPundit
WBUR is running a vote by platform web quiz that is quite good. It provides who you match up with on each issue area.
2003
Let’s Play 2: CUBS WIN!
CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!CUBS WIN!
Democratic Cattle Call 9/26
1. Dan Hynes. At the head of the polls and still the nominal front runner. Has tons of organizational support with the Carpenter’s Union backing him this week. While union endorsements only go so far, and unions aren’t always as united as they may seem, 50,000 pieces of literature to union voters is nothing to squawk at.
2. Blair Hull. The money is paying off with 9 percent in the most recent poll. Creating name ID is the name of the game and he seems to be doing that while not creating huge negatives.
3. Barack Obama. A high profile state lege member shouldn’t be falling behind (even within the margin of error) a political neophyte, but he is close. Apparently not active in some neighborhoods in Chicago where he should be able to draw on an activist base.
4. Gery Chico. Still has cash and isn’t doing too badly in the polls. Still hasn’t cracked the Hispanic vote. If he can’t do that, he isn’t going anywhere.
5. Maria Pappas. New rule. To be in the top four, you have to be in the race.
6. Joyce Washington. Not bad in the poll, but still not getting any coverage or attention besides as a spoiler.
7. Nancy Skinner. Got beat in the poll. Gotta be on the radar to make a run for it.
8. Matt O’Shea. I’m quickly running out of snarky things to say here.
9. Frank Avila. I hope I have him in the right party. Bueller?
10. Estella Johnson-Hunt. I hope she has herself in the right universe.
11. Vic Roberts. Please, please let him in any debates. A quick measure of a candidate is if they can handle crackpots. Remember McCain handling Alan Keyes? He’d separate the talented from the empty suits. And when is that interview coming Eric Zorn?
FEC reports won’t be out for a couple weeks, but they could be very telling this time. Chico and Hynes have the most at stake. Chico goes low, money won’t follow. Hynes doesn’t outpace Obama and he looks weak.
Republican Cattle Call 9/26
1. Jack Ryan. Top of the poll even though everyone is in the margin of error. Appealing to those who aren’t even that familiar with him. Seems to have the intangible of charisma.
2. Steve Rauschenberger. Lot’s of help from Lege supporters and straddles the line between the moderate and conservatives. Continuing budget problems play to him since he is the go to guy in the Lege for the press on budget issues. Lost the beard now looks like generic Republican candidate.
3. Andrew McKenna. Still has the connections and is getting generally good press from conservatives. Many still wary of his threatened challenge to Fitzgerald.
4. Jim Oberweis. Doing all right in polling–hasn’t seemed to win over wary social conservatives.
5. John Cox. Even in second race statewide doesn’t seem to be cracking the Republican primary electorate. Then again, Oberweis hasn’t jumped out either.
6. John Borling. Maybe boring, but is registering in the polling.
7. Chirinjeev Kathuria. Still getting good press, and stood up for principle on his beard and is keeping it. Didn’t make a dent in the polls, but seems to be genuinely liked by the press. That may help later.
8. Jonathan Wright. Nothing.
9. Antonio Davis Fairman. As Marie mentioned in comments, as a runner-up prize, Illinois is looking for a poet laureate. Hopefully we’ll keep looking.
Fox Senate Poll
Two leaders emerge, but not by much.
On the Democratic side, Dan Hynes pulls in 10 percent to 9 for Hull, Obama with 8, Chico with 7 and Joyce Washington with 5. The big winner when everyone is at 10 or below? Hull. He is almost tied with two high profile candidates who are both office holders. His commercials and efforts are increasing name recognition which is exactly what he needs to do right now. 40 percent of the Democratic electorate is expressing a favorite candidate so there is a long way to go.
On the Republican side, Jack Ryan hits 10 percent, but you have to wonder if that is due to the Ryan name and sharing a name with a Tom Clancy hero. Ryan is doing well, but that seems a bit inflated.
On the GOP side, dairy and investment magnate Jim Oberweis received 9 percent; retired Air Force Gen. John Borling and lawyer John Cox each had 8 percent; businessman Andrew McKenna took 6 percent, and state Sen. Steve Rauschenberger received 5 percent.
I’m at a bit of loss as to how Borling is up that high, but that may well be due to the small sample size and even smaller differences. Oberweis and Cox both have high name ID so there results aren’t surprising. Despite good news from Lege endorsements, Rauschenberger still has a way to go.
Just call me Mr. DeLay
As is the story lately–later tonight or early tomorrow for the Cattle Call. Sorry for the Delay.
50,000 Hits
Thanks, looks like the 50,000 hit came from Kos. Pretty amazing for being up just over a year and being largely centered on state and local politics.
Stupid Article of the Day at the Leader
Jill Stanek makes the mistake of basing her argument on a document that directly contradicts her claim.
The article she links to is here
Stanek:
This was followed by a detailed report released last month that is quite shocking in its description of just how severe the world underpopulation crisis really is, particularly after we?ve been told the opposite for so long. I suspect the situation is worse than the report indicates, since the study was conducted by the very organization that was duped into causing this calamity in the first place.
Got that? An underpopulation crisis now.
But what does the UN say?:
The 2002 Revision confirms key conclusions from previous revisions. Despite the lower fertility levels projected and the increased mortality risks to which some populations will be subject, the population of the world is expected to increase by 2.6 billion during the next 47 years, from 6.3 billion today to 8.9 billion in 2050. However, the realization of these projections is contingent on ensuring that couples have access to family planning and that efforts to arrest the current spread of the HIV/AIDS epidemic are successful in reducing its growth momentum. The potential for considerable population increase remains high. According to the results of the 2002 Revision, if fertility were to remain constant in all countries at current levels, the total population of the globe could more than double by 2050, reaching 12.8 billion. Even a somewhat slower reduction of fertility than that projected in the medium variant would result in additional billions of people. Thus, if women were to have, on average, about half a child more than according to the medium variant, world population might rise to 10.6 billion in 2050 as projected in the high variant.
The other factor is that AIDs is having more of an impact than expected.
Whether Stanek is stupid or dishonest is left to the reader.
UP DATE: To make clear, I don’t buy catastrophic projections of population growth, but I do think the additional pressures from population are detrimental both environmentally and in terms of world stability. Addressing population growth in developing nations is important to maintain peace and avoid pressures due to overpopulation. She demonstrates no understanding of this and seems to believe the world population would be decreasing significantly. She only devotes on sentence to policy problems in the developed world.
That said, Stanek’s article is even worse when you read further down,
But there?s still more. Due to medical advances, and despite the AIDS epidemic, the world population is living longer. This is great, except elder care programs such as Social Security will be unsustainable because there won?t be enough of the younger generation to pay for them.
But never fear. The U.N. proposes the same solution for ?overpopulation? at the end of life as at the beginning, saying, "The proposal is that, if projected life expectancy at the country level turns out to consistently surpass 100 years for both sexes combined, a limit of 100 years will be imposed artificially? (page 35, #96).
For a glimpse of that future, rent the supposedly ?science fiction? 1973 movie classic, Soylent Green, this weekend.
One problem, she is quoting a passage from a section on how to calculate long range projections of mortality. It isn’t a policy prescription, it is a methodological note.
Cattle Call Comment Period
Dems–who is up who is down? Why? Any leads out there?
Cattle call will be up Friday–and other posts will be later tonight.
Cattle Call Comment Period
Republicans–who is up who is down? Why?