Rasmussen President Obama Job Approval Poll 

How would you rate the job Barack Obama has been doing as president?

• Strongly approve 25%
• Somewhat approve 24%
• Somewhat disapprove 13%
• Strongly disapprove 37%

President Obama Job Approval

• Approve 48%
• Disapprove 50%
  

Daily tracking results are collected via telephone surveys of 500 likely voters per night and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. To reach those who have abandoned traditional landline telephones, Rasmussen Reports uses an online survey tool to interview randomly selected participants from a demographically diverse panel. The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 1,500 Likely Voters is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

Quinnipiac Virginia 2013 Gubernatorial Poll

• Terry McAuliffe (D) 43% (38%) {38%} [40%] (41%) 
• Ken Cuccinelli (R) 38% (40%) {38%} [39%] (37%)

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Ken Cuccinelli 31% (30%) {30%} [33%] (29%) / 24% (24%) {25%} [25%] (24%) {+7%}
• Terry McAuliffe 22% (20%) {23%} [23%] (17%) / 17% (16%) {16%} [16%] (13%) {+5%}

Survey of 1,286 registered voters was conducted May 8-13, 2013. The margin of error is +/- 2.7 percentage points. Results from the poll conducted March 20-25, 2013 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted February 14-18, 2013 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 4-7, 2013 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted November 8-12, 2012 are in parentheses.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

There are now so many serious Obama administration scandals in front of the American public that it is, for the moment, difficult to assess their full impact.

I am reluctant to make final judgments until more of the facts are known, but since the Obama administration has conceded that most of the allegations of wrongdoing are true, there can be no reasonable question that the political damage, not to mention the damage to the credibility of government itself, will be enormous.

Typical of Mr. Obama’s stewardship of the White House and the executive branch, we are now engulfed with finger-pointing to minor officials, laughable rationalizations, virtual total avoidance of responsibility, and a dismissive tone about some of the most serious breaches of federal intrusion on the citizenry in memory. It would appear that Mr. Obama and his associates regard much of the U.S. constitution as an “impediment” to running the country.

Among the charges in just one scandal, the IRS intimidation of conservative organizations and individuals, is the allegation that information obtained by the IRS was, in turn, used against the 2012 Romney campaign. That is not yet proven, but if it is, that allegation alone raises the case to the level of Watergate (when President Nixon attempted to obtain information to be used against his Democratic opponent in the 1972 presidential election).

But that seems to be only the tip of the iceberg. Singling out conservative organizations and others potentially hostile to the Obama administration, while ignoring any improprieties of liberal organizations and other friends of the president, represents a naked attempt at imposing illegal and totalitarian government. (As noted, it was a Republican president, Richard Nixon, who brought us the scandal of Watergate. Malfeasance in office is not something which happens with only one political party.)

But the IRS scandal is only one of many now before us. In the case of the tragedy in Benghazi, the administration has been accused of a massive cover-up directly related to helping President Obama’s re-election in 2012. Testimony in recent hearings by diplomats and public officials with first-hand information about Benghazi directly contradict the administration’s explanation of events. Both President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have adamantly denied responsibility for what happened in Benghazi. The testimony of those present and involved so far indicate they are not telling the truth.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has been attempting to induce private donors, including large insurance companies, to pay for part of the establishment of Obamacare (which the Congress has deliberately refused to pay for). Newt Gingrich has described her actions as a “shakedown” of the private healthcare industry.

As if the above were not enough, it has been admitted by the administration that it placed wiretaps on the Associated Press (AP), presumably in order to track down “leaks” of a political nature. What makes this so remarkable and devastating is that AP is part of the Old Media establishment which has been so slavishly favorable to Mr. Obama for the past five years, so uncritical of him while at the same time so critical of his opponents. However despicable it is for a government to use its power to go after its political “enemies,” it is bewildering to observe a government to go after its “friends” in the media. (It is important to remember that these wiretaps are not allegations, they have been admitted to by the Obama administration.)

Those are the four major scandals unfolding in front of the American public at this time, but there is at least one more major scandal soon to come to light. This is the scandal of Obamacare itself, its full regulatory details, its true insurance costs to individual Americans, and its ultimately “scandalous” future impact on an already struggling economy.

Although Watergate rightly aroused profound anger, and by both Democrats and Republicans, it might prove ultimately an “amateur” government trespass compared to what has already occurred, and is even now occurring, under the administration of President Obama.

“Obamaismo” is no longer sitting imperiously on its “royal” wall. All “King” Obama’s (media) horses, and all the king’s men might not be able to put this administration back together again.

______________________________________________________________________________________________

-Copyright (c) 2013 by Barry Casselman. All rights reserved.

Rasmussen President Obama Job Approval Poll 

How would you rate the job Barack Obama has been doing as president?

• Strongly approve 26%
• Somewhat approve 22%
• Somewhat disapprove 12%
• Strongly disapprove 39%

President Obama Job Approval

• Approve 48%
• Disapprove 51%
  

Daily tracking results are collected via telephone surveys of 500 likely voters per night and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. To reach those who have abandoned traditional landline telephones, Rasmussen Reports uses an online survey tool to interview randomly selected participants from a demographically diverse panel. The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 1,500 Likely Voters is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

Quinnipiac Virginia 2016 Presidential Poll

• Hillary Clinton (D) 50%
• Paul Ryan (R) 40%

• Hillary Clinton (D) 51%
• Marco Rubio (R) 38%

• Mark Warner (D) 50%
• Paul Ryan (R) 37%

• Mark Warner (D) 51%
• Marco Rubio (R) 33%

Survey of 1,286 registered voters was conducted May 8-13, 2013. The margin of error is +/- 2.7 percentage points. Party ID: 35% Democrat; 25% Republican; 31% Independent; 8% Other.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

Marquette University Law School Wisconsin 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary Poll

• Hillary Clinton 61.5%
• Joe Biden 13.0%
• Elizabeth Warren 4.8%
• Andrew Cuomo 4.2%
• Deval Patrick 1.5%
• Martin O’Malley 1.1%
• Mark Warner 0.7%
• Someone else 1.5%
• Don’t know 11.0%

Survey of 333 registered Wisconsin Democratic voters was conducted May 6-9, 2013. The margin of error is +/- 5.5 percentage points.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

Rasmussen President Obama Job Approval Poll 

How would you rate the job Barack Obama has been doing as president?

• Strongly approve 26%
• Somewhat approve 23%
• Somewhat disapprove 12%
• Strongly disapprove 38%

President Obama Job Approval

• Approve 49%
• Disapprove 50%
  

Daily tracking results are collected via telephone surveys of 500 likely voters per night and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. To reach those who have abandoned traditional landline telephones, Rasmussen Reports uses an online survey tool to interview randomly selected participants from a demographically diverse panel. The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 1,500 Likely Voters is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

PPP (D) 2016 National Presidential Poll

• Hillary Clinton (D) 47% (46%) {46%} [44%]
• Chris Christie (R) 44% (42%) {41%} [42%]

• Hillary Clinton (D) 51% (49%) {49%} [51%]
• Marco Rubio (R) 41% (42%) {41%} [37%]

• Hillary Clinton (D) 51% (49%)
• Rand Paul (R) 41% (43%)

 

• Chris Christie (R) 49% (49%) {44%}
• Joe Biden (D) 40% (40%) {44%}

• Joe Biden (D) 46% (46%) {48%}
• Marco Rubio (R) 45% (44%) {43%}

• Joe Biden (D) 46% (47%)
• Rand Paul (R) 44% (43%)

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Chris Christie 42% (39%) {44%} [51%] (48%) / 28% (28%) {22%} [23%] (26%) {+14%}
• Hillary Clinton 51% (50%) {49%} [54%] (57%) / 43% (42%) {42%} [39%] (36%) {+8%}
• Elizabeth Warren 24% (23%) {28%} [30%] (25%) / 24% (22%) {20%} [22%] (27%) {0%}
• Marco Rubio 32% (35%) {35%} [33%] (35%) / 33% (30%) {29%} [27%] (27%) {-1%}
• Susana Martinez 14% (14%) {13%} [17%] / 19% (17%) {15%} [17%] {-5%}
• Paul Ryan 35% (42%) {44%} [38%] (41%) / 40% (39%) {41%} [45%] (42%) {-5%}
• Rand Paul 33% (36%) {35%} [32%] (32%) / 39% (37%) {39%} [44%] (38%) {-6%}
• Kirsten Gillibrand 12% (11%) {11%} [11%] / 19% (18%) {18%} [20%] {-7%}
• Bobby Jindal 23% (24%) {26%} [26%] / 30% (28%) {29%} [31%] {-7%}
• Deval Patrick 12% (11%) {10%} [11%] (10%) / 19% (15%) {13%} [16%] (17%) {-7%}
• Joe Biden 41% (40%) {48%} [48%] (46%) / 48% (47%) {44%} [43%] (44%) {-7%}
• Andrew Cuomo 24% (22%) {24%} [26%] (23%) / 32% (36%) {33%} [33%] (33%) {-8%}
• Jeb Bush 33% (30%) {35%} [33%] (38%) / 41% (37%) {33%} [40%] (38%) {-8%}
• Martin O’Malley 7% (7%) {6%} [8%] (5%) / 16% (13%) {13%} [13%] (17%) {-9%}
• Mark Warner 9% (11%) {8%} [12%] (9%) / 19% (15%) {14%} [12%] (16%) {-10%}
• Ted Cruz 15% / 27% {-12%}
• Brian Schweitzer 3% (5%) {4%} [5%] (4%) / 16% (13%) {11%} [13%] (16%) {-13%}
• Rick Santorum 25% (27%) (30%) / 42% (41%) (40%) {-17%}

National survey of 1,099 registered voters was conducted May 6-9, 2013. The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points. Party ID: 41% (38%) {42%} [43%] (44%) Democrat; 33% (34%) {33%} [34%] (32%) Republican; 26% (28%) {25%} [23%] (24%) Independent/Other.  Political ideology: 31% (31%) {28%} [29%] (32%) Moderate; 24% (23%) {25%} [24%] (24%) Somewhat conservative; 19% (19%) {18%} [16%] (15%) Very conservative; 17% (16%) {19%} [17%] (18%) Somewhat liberal; 10% (11%) {11%} [13%] (11%) Very liberal.  Results from the poll conducted March 27-30, 2013 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted January 31 – February 3, 2013 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted January 3-6, 2013 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted November 30 – December 2, 2012 are in parentheses.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

PPP (D) 2016 Democratic Nomination Poll 

Given the choices of Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Andrew Cuomo, Kirsten Gillibrand, Martin O’Malley, Deval Patrick, Brian Schweitzer, Mark Warner, and Elizabeth Warren, who would you most like to see as the Democratic candidate for President in 2016? 

• Hillary Clinton 63% [64%] (58%) {57%} [61%] (57%)
• Joe Biden 13% [18%] (19%) {16%} [12%] (14%)
• Andrew Cuomo 4% [3%] (3%) {4%} [5%] (5%)
• Mark Warner 3% [2%] (1%) {2%} [1%] (2%)
• Elizabeth Warren 3% [5%] (8%) {4%} [4%] (6%)
• Martin O’Malley 2% [1%] (1%) {3%} [2%] (1%)
• Kirsten Gillibrand 1% [1%] (1%) {1%}
• Deval Patrick 1% [1%] (0%) {2%} [1%]
• Brian Schweitzer 1% [1%] (0%) {1%} [1%] (1%)
• Someone else/Undecided 10% [6%] (9%) {10%} [12%] (12%)

Given the choices of Joe Biden, Andrew Cuomo, Kirsten Gillibrand, Martin O’Malley, Deval Patrick, Brian Schweitzer, Mark Warner, and Elizabeth Warren, who would you most like to see as the Democratic candidate for President in 2016?

• Joe Biden 38% [49%] (57%) (32%)
• Elizabeth Warren 13% [11%] (13%) (8%)
• Andrew Cuomo 10% [10%] (5%) (18% )
• Mark Warner 3% [3%] (3%) (2%)
• Deval Patrick 3% [2%] (2%)
• Martin O’Malley 3% [1%] (1%) (2%)
• Kirsten Gillibrand 2% [7%] (4%)
• Brian Schweitzer 1% [2%] (0%) (1%)
• Someone else/Undecided 26% [15%] (14%) (32%)

If neither Hillary Clinton nor Joe Biden ran for President in 2016, who would you most like to see as the Democratic nominee? 

• Andrew Cuomo 25% [22%] (25%) {19%} [21%] (27%)
• Elizabeth Warren 17% [18%] (21%) {16%} [16%] (9%)
• Deval Patrick 6% [4%] (3%) {6%} [8%]
• Kirsten Gillibrand 5% [5%] (3%) {5%}
• Martin O’Malley 5% [8%] (5%) {7%} [5%] (4%)
• Mark Warner 4% [5%] (4%) {4%} [3%] (4%)
• Brian Schweitzer 1% [1%] (2%) {2%} [2%] (2%)
• Someone else/Undecided 38% [36%] (36%) {40%} [45%] (46%)

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Hillary Clinton 85% [84%] (81%) {79%} [86%] (86%) / 12% [11%] (12%) {15%} [10%] (10%) {+73%} 
• Joe Biden 73% [73%] (80%) {73%} [80%] (70%) / 16% [15%] (13%) {22%} [14%] (21%) {+57%}
• Elizabeth Warren 42% [43%] (48%) {47%} [45%] (28%) / 13% [13%] (8%) {13%} [12%] (17%) {+29%}
• Andrew Cuomo 40% [37%] (37%) {36%} [37%] (32%) / 20% [20%] (17%) {20%} [21%] (24%) {+20%}
• Deval Patrick 20% [18%] (21%) {17%} [17%] / 14% [12%] (9%) {10%} [15%] {+6%}
• Kirsten Gillibrand 19% [21%] (18%) {16%} / 15% [14%] (12%) {14%} {+4%}
• Martin O’Malley 11% [10%] (9%) {12%} [7%] (8%) / 14% [12%] (10%) {11%} [17%] (17%) {-3%}
• Mark Warner 14% [15%] (12%) {15%} [11%] (11%) / 21% [13%] (13%) {13%} [17%] (18%) {-7%}
• Brian Schweitzer 5% [6%] (6%) {6%} [5%] (7%) / 16% [13%] (11%) {12%} [19%] (17%) {-11%}

Survey of 589 Democratic primary voters was conducted May 6-9, 2013. The margin of error is +/- 4 percentage points. Political ideology: 37% [39%] (36%) {37%} [32%] (36%) Moderate; 31% [30%] (32%) {24%} [32%] (30%) Somewhat liberal; 14% [17%] (20%) {23%} [20%] (16%) Very liberal; 12% [9%] (9%) {13%} [12%] (13%) Somewhat conservative; 6% [5%] (3%) {2%} [4%] (5%) Very conservative. Results from the poll conducted March 27-30, 2013 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted January 31 – February 3, 2013 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conductedJanuary 3-6, 2013 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted November 30 – December 2, 2012 are in square brackets.Results from the poll conducted April 12-15, 2012 are in parentheses.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

Steve Miller, acting commissioner of the IRS, has resigned. More to come…

PPP (D) 2016 GOP Nomination Poll 

Given the choices of Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Ted Cruz, Bobby Jindal, Susana Martinez, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan, and Rick Santorum, who would you most like to see as the GOP candidate for President in 2016? 

• Marco Rubio 16% [21%] (22%) {21%} [18%] (10%)
• Chris Christie 15% [15%] (13%) {14%} [14%] (21%)
• Jeb Bush 15% [12%] (13%) {14%} [12%] (17%)
• Rand Paul 14% [17%] (10%) {5%} [7%] (4%)
• Paul Ryan 9% [12%] (15%) {16%} [12%] (7%)
• Ted Cruz 7%
• Rick Santorum 5% [5%] [4%] (12%)
• Bobby Jindal 3% [4%] (4%) {3%} (3%)
• Susana Martinez 1% [1%] (1%) {2%}
• Someone else/Undecided 15% [10%] (8%) {7%} [7%] (10%)

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net} 

• Paul Ryan 67% [75%] (78%) {76%} [74%] (47%) / 13% [11%] (9%) {11%} [15%] (11%) {+54%} 
• Marco Rubio 57% [62%] (59%) {60%} [62%] (53%) / 13% [10%] (12%) {11%} [11%] (10%) {+44%}
• Rand Paul 58% [60%] (61%) {55%} [53%] (42%) / 16% [16%] (13%) {20%} [22%] (20%) {+42%}
• Jeb Bush 56% [51%] (59%) {59%} [63%] (71%) / 17% [16%] (12%) {15%} [14%] (13%) {+39%}
• Rick Santorum 48% [49%] [56%] (63%) / 20% [18%] [17%] (23%) {+28%}
• Bobby Jindal 38% [42%] (46%) {47%} (43%) / 15% [10%] (10%) {11%} (9%) {+23%}
• Ted Cruz 27% / 13% {+14%}
• Chris Christie 42% [41%] (42%) {44%} [49%] (62%) / 29% [29%] (27%) {29%} [28%] (12%) {+13%}
• Susana Martinez 19% [16%] (19%) {23%} / 16% [16%] (14%) {15%} {+3%}

Survey of 806 Republican primary voters was conducted May 6-9, 2013.  The margin of error is +/- 3.5 percentage points.  Political ideology:38% [35%] (41%) {39%} [38%] (41%) Somewhat conservative; 36% [39%] (41%) {37%} [39%] (36%) Very conservative; 19% [19%](14%) {16%} [16%] (16%) Moderate; 5% [5%] (2%) {5%} [6%] (4%)Somewhat liberal; 2% [1%] (1%) {2%} [1%] (3%) Very liberal.  Results from the poll conducted March 27-30, 2013 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 31 – February 3, 2013 are in parentheses.  Results from the poll conducted January 3-6, 2013 are in curly brackets.  Results from the poll conducted November 30 – December 2, 2012 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted April 12-15, 2012 are in parentheses.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

Marquette University Law School Wisconsin 2016 GOP Presidential Primary Poll

• Paul Ryan 27.1%
• Marco Rubio 21.2%
• Scott Walker 16.1%
• Chris Christie 10.6%
• Rand Paul 6.9%
• Jeb Bush 4.6%
• Bobby Jindal 0.8%
• Someone else 1.6%
• Don’t know 10.5%

 Survey of 302 registered Wisconsin GOP voters was conducted May 6-9, 2013. The margin of error is +/- 3.7 percentage points.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

Marquette University Law School Wisconsin 2016 Presidential Poll

• Hillary Clinton (D) 48.5%
• Paul Ryan (R) 43.5%

• Hillary Clinton (D) 46.5%
• Chris Christie (R) 40.0%

• Hillary Clinton (D) 50.2%
• Scott Walker (R) 41.7%

• Hillary Clinton (D) 50.8%
• Rand Paul (R) 37.2%

• Hillary Clinton (D) 51.1%
• Marco Rubio (R) 34.9%

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net} 

• Chris Christie 35.4% / 16.4% {+19.0%}
• Hillary Clinton 53.3% / 37.1% {+16.2%}
• Marco Rubio 23.8% / 17.8% {+6.0%}
• Paul Ryan 43.7% / 38.5% {+5.2%}
• Joe Biden 44.2% / 39.3% {+4.9%}
• Scott Walker 48.9% / 44.6% {+4.3%}
• Rand Paul 23.8% / 28.6% {-4.8%}

Survey of 717 registered Wisconsin voters was conducted May 6-9, 2013. The margin of error is +/- 3.7 percentage points. Party ID: 46.4% Democrat; 42.1% Republican; 8.8% Independent.  Political views: 6.4% Very conservative; 33.6% Conservative; 32.5% Moderate; 17.2% Liberal; 5.4% Very liberal.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

From the official release:

No court can ever provide proper relief for the unimaginable pain that Kermit Gosnell inflicted on women and their children. His atrocities shed light on the truly gruesome acts of late-term abortion. We need to keep working to prevent such crimes against humanity–deliberate infanticide–from happening again. May we all remember this heart-breaking case as a vivid example of the urgent need to protect innocent human life at all stages.

Rasmussen Generic Congressional Ballot Survey

• Democrats 40%
• Republicans 38%

The national telephone survey of 3,500 Likely Voters was conducted by Rasmussen Reports from April 22-28, 2013. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 2 percentage point with a 95% level of confidence.

Rasmussen President Obama Job Approval Poll 

How would you rate the job Barack Obama has been doing as president?

• Strongly approve 28%
• Somewhat approve 23%
• Somewhat disapprove 11%
• Strongly disapprove 37%

President Obama Job Approval

• Approve 51%
• Disapprove 48%
  

Daily tracking results are collected via telephone surveys of 500 likely voters per night and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. To reach those who have abandoned traditional landline telephones, Rasmussen Reports uses an online survey tool to interview randomly selected participants from a demographically diverse panel. The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 1,500 Likely Voters is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

From the official release:

The first degree murder conviction of Kermit Gosnell brings some closure to this horrific case, but we must act to address the broader problems highlighted by this tragedy. Congress should conduct a thorough investigation into the practices of late-term abortions in America with the goal of ensuring that these atrocities are never repeated in the future. My wife, Jeanette, and I hold the victims of Mr. Gosnell’s violent abuses in our prayers. While the lives lost and ruined because of a monster like Kermit Gosnell can never be recovered, we must strive to ensure that women and unborn children don’t fall prey in the future to greedy and overzealous abortion doctors. Life is precious at every stage, and America’s policies must reflect this fact at every turn.

In a letter to Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, Sen. Rubio calls for IRS Commissioner’s resignation over the targeting of conservative organizations:

May 13, 2013

The Honorable Jack Lew
Secretary
U.S. Department of the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220

Dear Secretary Lew:

Recent revelations about the Internal Revenue Service’s selective and deliberate targeting of conservative organizations are outrageous and seriously concerning. This years-long abuse of government power is an assault on the free speech rights of all Americans. This direct assault on our Constitution further justifies the American people’s distrust in government and its ability to properly implement our laws.

The American people deserve answers about how such seemingly unconstitutional and potentially criminal behavior could occur, and who else was aware of it throughout the Administration. It is imperative that you, your predecessor, and other past and present high-ranking officials at the Department of Treasury and IRS immediately testify before Congress.

The public expects your complete cooperation with both congressional investigations and potential criminal inquiries. If investigations reveal that bureaucrats or political appointees engaged in unconstitutional or criminal targeting of conservative taxpayers, they must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. At a bare minimum, those involved with this deeply offensive use of government power have committed a violation of the public trust that has already had a profoundly chilling effect on free speech. Such behavior cannot be excused with a simple apology.

Furthermore, it is clear the IRS cannot operate with even a shred of the American people’s confidence under the current leadership. Therefore, I strongly urge that you and President Obama demand the IRS Commissioner’s resignation, effectively immediately. No government agency that has behaved in such a manner can possibly instill any faith and respect from the American public.

Sincerely,

Marco Rubio

Dartmouth Rockefeller Center New Hampshire 2016 Presidential Poll

• Hillary Clinton (D) 37.1%
• Chris Christie (R) 32.3%
• Unsure 30.6%

• Hillary Clinton (D) 44.3%
• Marco Rubio (R) 33.2%
• Unsure 22.5%

Among Independents 

• Hillary Clinton (D) 37%
• Chris Christie (R) 24%
• Unsure 40%

• Hillary Clinton (D) 43%
• Marco Rubio (R) 19%
• Unsure 38%

Among Moderates

• Hillary Clinton (D) 42%
• Chris Christie (R) 21%
• Unsure 37%

• Hillary Clinton (D) 51%
• Marco Rubio (R) 19%
• Unsure 30%

Among Men

• Hillary Clinton (D) 36%
• Chris Christie (R) 35%
• Unsure 29%

• Hillary Clinton (D) 41%
• Marco Rubio (R) 36%
• Unsure 23%

Among Women 

• Hillary Clinton (D) 38%
• Chris Christie (R) 29%
• Unsure 32%

• Hillary Clinton (D) 48%
• Marco Rubio (R) 30%
• Unsure 22%

Survey of 433 registered voters was conducted April 22-25, 2013. The margin of error is +/- 4.7 percentage points. Party ID: 32.0% Republican; 26.5% Democrat; 40.1% Independent/Undeclared.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

Dartmouth Rockefeller Center New Hampshire 2016 Presidential Poll

• Hillary Clinton (D) 37.1%
• Chris Christie (R) 32.3%
• Unsure 30.6%

• Hillary Clinton (D) 44.3%
• Marco Rubio (R) 33.2%
• Unsure 22.5%

Among Independents 

• Hillary Clinton (D) 37%
• Chris Christie (R) 24%
• Unsure 40%

• Hillary Clinton (D) 43%
• Marco Rubio (R) 19%
• Unsure 38%

Among Moderates

• Hillary Clinton (D) 42%
• Chris Christie (R) 21%
• Unsure 37%

• Hillary Clinton (D) 51%
• Marco Rubio (R) 19%
• Unsure 30%

Among Men

• Hillary Clinton (D) 36%
• Chris Christie (R) 35%
• Unsure 29%

• Hillary Clinton (D) 41%
• Marco Rubio (R) 36%
• Unsure 23%

Among Women 

• Hillary Clinton (D) 38%
• Chris Christie (R) 29%
• Unsure 32%

• Hillary Clinton (D) 48%
• Marco Rubio (R) 30%
• Unsure 22%

Survey of 433 registered voters was conducted April 22-25, 2013. The margin of error is +/- 4.7 percentage points. Party ID: 32.0% Republican; 26.5% Democrat; 40.1% Independent/Undeclared.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

Rasmussen President Obama Job Approval Poll 

How would you rate the job Barack Obama has been doing as president?

• Strongly approve 25%
• Somewhat approve 25%
• Somewhat disapprove 13%
• Strongly disapprove 35%

President Obama Job Approval

• Approve 50%
• Disapprove 48%
  

Daily tracking results are collected via telephone surveys of 500 likely voters per night and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. To reach those who have abandoned traditional landline telephones, Rasmussen Reports uses an online survey tool to interview randomly selected participants from a demographically diverse panel. The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 1,500 Likely Voters is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

PPP (D) Massachusetts 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary Poll

Given the choices of Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Andrew Cuomo, Kirsten Gillibrand, Martin O’Malley, Deval Patrick, Brian Schweitzer, Mark Warner, and Elizabeth Warren, who would you most like to see as the Democratic candidate for President in 2016?

• Hillary Clinton 55%
• Joe Biden 17%
• Andrew Cuomo 4%
• Deval Patrick 4%
• Elizabeth Warren 4%
• Martin O’Malley 1%
• Kirsten Gillibrand 0%
• Brian Schweitzer 0%
• Mark Warner 0%
• Someone else/Not sure 14%

Survey of 666 Democratic primary voters was conducted May 1-2, 2013. The margin of error is +/- 3.8 percentage points. Party ID: 41% Democrat; 17% Republican; 42% Independent/Other.  Ideology: 33%Moderate; 22% Somewhat liberal; 20% Somewhat conservative; 17%Very liberal; 8% Very conservative.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

NBC News/Marist New Jersey 2016 Presidential Poll

• Hillary Clinton (D) 52%
• Chris Christie (R) 41%

• Chris Christie (R) 51% 
• Joe Biden (D) 40%

Among Indepedents 

• Chris Christie (R) 46% 
• Hillary Clinton (D) 45%

• Chris Christie (R) 56% 
• Joe Biden (D) 33%

Among Men

• Chris Christie (R) 48% 
• Hillary Clinton (D) 45%

• Chris Christie (R) 54% 
• Joe Biden (D) 38%

Among Women

• Hillary Clinton (D) 59%
• Chris Christie (R) 35%

• Chris Christie (R) 49% 
• Joe Biden (D) 42%

Survey of 1,080 registered voters was conducted April 28 – May 2, 2013. The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points.  Party ID: 37%Democrat; 22% Republican; 40% Independent.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

Gabriel Gomez, the Republican nominee for the U.S. senate seat special election in Massachusetts on June 25, 2013, is suddenly being taken seriously as a Democratic poll shows him trailing the Democratic nominee, Congressman Ed Markey, by only 44-40  (16% undecided). That’s an ominous sign for the Democrats who initially thought this race would be a no-contest in the heavily Democratic Bay State.

When a special election was held in this state in January, 2010 to fill the seat of the late Edward Kennedy, Democrats also assumed the seat was automatically theirs, and were stunned when Republican newcomer Scott Brown won. This time, the seat has been vacated by John Kerry when he resigned to become U.S. secretary of state.

Incumbent Brown was defeated last year in a bitter contest, and despite being well-liked by Massachusetts voters, he could not overcome the huge Democratic turnout caused by the presidential election. But 2013 is not a presidential year, and Mr. Markey, although a long-time U.S. house veteran, is considered aloof and a relatively weak statewide candidate.

Mr. Gomez is a former Navy Seal, but his political personality has not yet been widely established, and that represents an opportunity for both the Republicans and his Democratic opponent. Cash will thus play a large role in this race, as political advertising is a major component of creating or denigrating a new political figure. It should be no surprise that Mr. Markey has challenged Mr. Gomez to sign a pledge not to accept campaign contributions from outside the state. Mr. Markey is already well-funded from within the state, and greatly fears that GOP donors from around the country could equalize the race financially.

This is, in my opinion, a major test of how seriously the national Republican Party will contest the 2014 midterm U.S. senate elections to regain control of the Congress. Mr. Gomez is reportedly a bit more moderate on social issues than some southern and midwestern GOP senators, and funding for his campaign has reportedly been slow so far.

The national Republican Party is a conservative party, particularly on economic, entitlement and defense issues. But certain regions in the nation, particularly the northeast, produce a different kind of conservative. Senator Susan Collins of Maine and Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee are cases in point. There are Democratic incumbent senators who are vulnerable in 2014, but they could only be defeated by GOP opponents who reflect the general views  of their states on social issues, and that means a willingness
by Republican donors and officials to support their strongest candidate in each race, notwithstanding their “purity” or 100% “orthodoxy” on individual issues.

My calculation is that there are now about nine or ten Democratic-held senate seats that could be won by Republicans in 2014, but only about four or five that now appear likely to change hands (even that, as we learned in 2012, is no certainty). Republicans need to regain at least six senate seats to win control.

Scott Brown demonstrated that even in an overwhelmingly liberal Democratic state such as Massachusetts an attractive Republican candidate can win statewide office.  When Brown won a special election to succeed the late Ted Kennedy, it portended the 2010 GOP midterm landslide later that year.

But the issue is larger than one special election. The real question is whether or not Republicans are prepared to govern again. While it is true that the nation is now rather polarized between conservatives and liberals, regional and urban/rural demographics most accurately define the American voter and make political issues

Grover Norquist, a favorite target of Democrats and liberals for demonization, has recently been speaking about a more pragmatic GOP approach to the elections of 2013-14. Associated with the hard-line lower taxes issue, he has now, without compromising his primary issue, argued that the first function of a political party is to win elections. He knows that any Republican majority is far more likely to respond positively to his issue than any Democratic majority. If more conservative leaders approach 2014 as Mr Norquist has, the GOP has much brighter prospects than if those self-styled conservative leaders  who want GOP candidates to reflect their own views 100% would prevail.

That is why the special U.S. senate election in Massachusetts this year is so important.

_____________________________________________________

-Copyright (c) 2013 by Barry Casselman. All rights reserved.

NBC News/Marist New Jersey 2013 Gubernatorial Poll

Among Likely Voters

• Chris Christie (R) 62%
• Barbara Buono (D) 28%

Among Registered Voters 

• Chris Christie (R) 60%
• Barbara Buono (D) 28%

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Chris Christie (R) 68% / 27% {+41%} 
• Barbara Buono (D) 24% / 18% {+6%}

Do you approve or disapprove of the job Chris Christie is doing as governor?

• Approve 69%
• Disapprove 24%

Among Democrats

• Approve 54%
• Disapprove 37%

Among Republicans

• Approve 91%
• Disapprove 7%

Among Indepedents 

• Approve 72%
• Disapprove 21%

Survey of 1,080 registered voters, including a subsample of 707 likely voters, was conducted April 28 – May 2, 2013. The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points among registered voters; +/- 3.7 percentage points among likely voters.  Party ID (among registered voters): 37%Democrat; 22% Republican; 40% Independent. Party ID (among likely voters): 36% Democrat; 23% Republican; 39% Independent.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

NEW YORK — “When you’re in a car, you’re inside, and you’re outside, and you’re moving, and you’re completely still — all at the same time.”

Such wry words of wisdom filled Jerry Seinfeld’s scintillating performance at Stand Up for a Cure’s recent benefit for the American Diabetes Association (ADA). Judging by the hilarity that Seinfeld unleashed, just after Colin Quinn’s very funny opening set, diabetics in the Manhattan crowd likely giggled their glucose back to normal. Endorphins surely gushed across the cerebella of the audience’s diabetics and non-diabetics alike.

The ADA is exactly the sort of private-sector, civil-society organization that conservatives identify as crucial to advancing common problems. Among other things, the ADA supports educational efforts for diabetics and summer camps to teach young diabetics how to manage this chronic condition. It also backs diabetes research, so that this ailment can join polio and yellow fever as things about which Americans no longer worry. Thus, Seinfeld gave a powerful boost to an excellent cause.

In knee-slapping, breathtaking fashion, Seinfeld also demonstrated that he is — if anything — sharper, quicker, and wittier than when he dominated American popular culture. As his eponymous NBC series left the airwaves on May 14, 1998, Seinfeld ruled the ratings, and viewers from coast to coast begged him not to go.

Seinfeld’s program actually contributed a glossary full of words and phrases to the American lexicon. There would be no “yadda, yadda, yadda” without Seinfeld. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that.)

Seinfeld walked away at the top of his game. Now 58, he is fit and trim at a self-reported 172 pounds. He has been married for 13 years and is the father of three children, something he considered nearly unspeakable at age 45.

“When I was single, I had married friends,” Seinfeld said. “I would not visit their homes. I found their lives to be pathetic and depressing. Now that I am married, I have no single friends. I find them to be meaningless and trivial individuals. In both cases, I believe I was correct.”

“Marriage is not chess, it’s checkers.” Seinfeld elaborated. “But the board is made of flowing water, and the pieces are made of smoke.”

In spite of his domestication and lack of a demanding weekly network production schedule, Seinfeld has done anything but go to seed. His rapid-fire 70-minute set at The Theater at Madison Square Garden (a comfortable if dimwittedly named venue) teemed with Seinfeld’s trademark observations about life’s easily missed minutiae. The Brooklyn native has a stunning ability to isolate things that have stood out in the open for decades and discover hidden facets about them, as if they were artifacts that just landed on Earth after a NASA deep-space probe. Among his meditations:

• “The seat is the biggest part of the achievement of going out to a show,”

Seinfeld noted. “My job is to distract you slightly while you enjoy sitting in a different chair.”

“Your whole life is chairs. If you think about it, you go from one chair to another chair to another chair. Your whole life is just home chair, car chair, work chair. As soon as this show is over, you’re going to stand up – ‘Alright. Let’s go sit down somewhere. Where are we going to go? We don’t want to be standing around. Where can we go and sit down?’”

• “The mission of the beverage industry is to come up with a drink for every micro-moment of the human experience. Alcoholic coffee drinks.  Alcoholic coffee drinks. How rare is that set of circumstances when you need to be whatever the opposite of tired and sober is? ‘We’re gonna get trashed and alert tonight!’…‘I know my car was all over the road, officer. I saw every second of it.’”

“Five Hour Energy Drink. You ever see those little bottles by the cash register? Five hours! That’s a weird amount of time. ‘I’m working 1:00 to 6:00.’ What the hell does it feel like suddenly to find yourself in deficit of five hours of energy? ‘Give me five hours of energy RIGHT NOW!’…If you need five hours of energy, go to bed!”

• Seinfeld also explained how beverages make decisions so you don’t have to.

“You order one beer. That beer orders the next beer. Next thing you know, the beers are driving, and you’re in the back seat going wherever they are.”

‘Where are we going?’

‘To get more beer.’

‘All right!’”

• Turning to telecommunications, Seinfeld discussed *69 service.

“Sixty-nine? Is that the number they picked for this thing? Can someone explain to me how that slipped through the entire organization? There’s not one person who works at the phone company who went to junior high school? How can that possibly have happened? 69? Really? ‘We can pick any number we want… 68!’ I can’t wait to hear what they’ve got for three-way calling.”

• “Can we stop calling e-mail ‘mail?’ Is there any real relationship between e-mail and the postal system? One is this hyperkinetic, super digital, hyper-speed form of communication. The other is this dazed and confused distant branch of the Cub Scouts. They cover the streets in embarrassing shorts and these jackets with meaningless patches and victory medals.”

Seinfeld has buffed his routine to a glimmering sheen. What appears totally spontaneous and off-the-cuff actually is the product of months and months of writing, practice, delivery, and rewriting. (The 2003 film Jerry Seinfeld: Comedian documents the meticulous method behind his brilliant madness.) Nonetheless, Seinfeld’s act never feels labored or forced. His on-stage demeanor is as easygoing as an evening between flannel sheets.

At one point, about half a dozen slivers of confetti slipped loose from the ceiling and slowly trickled down beside Seinfeld’s face. Without missing a beat, he perfectly ad-libbed: “I’m the presidential nominee.”

At the end of the show, Seinfeld expressed his appreciation for the audience’s enthusiasm by fielding a few questions.

One gentleman asked if he ever spent the night with Elaine on his sitcom.

“Let me explain to you something about Elaine, George, and Kramer that you may not be fully grasping,” Jerry Seinfeld replied. “These people, while being very amusing and enjoyable, are in reality fictional characters. They are not really real as you and I are real. I am the only character who survived the end of the show.”

Photo Image: Deroy Murdock and Brett Shisler

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

-Deroy Murdock is a Manhattan-based Fox News Contributor, a nationally syndicated columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service, and a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University. A version of this piece originally appeared at National Review Online.

NBC News/Marist Virginia 2016 Presidential Poll

• Hillary Clinton (D) 52%
• Bob McDonnell (R) 41%

• Bob McDonnell (R) 49% 
• Joe Biden (D) 42%  

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Bob McDonnell 60% / 24% {+36%}
• Hillary Clinton 60% / 34% {+26%}

Survey of 1,095 registered voters was conducted April 28 – May 2, 2013. The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points.  Party ID: 31%Democrat; 27% Republican; 40% Independent.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

NBC News/Marist Virginia 2013 Gubernatorial Poll

Among Likely Voters

• Ken Cuccinelli (R) 45%
• Terry McAuliffe (D) 42%

Among Registered Voters 

• Terry McAuliffe (D) 43% 
• Ken Cuccinelli (R) 41%  

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Ken Cuccinelli (R) 42% / 27% {+15%}
• Terry McAuliffe (D) 32% / 24% {+8%}

Survey of 1,095 registered voters, including a subsample of 692 likely voters, was conducted April 28 – May 2, 2013. The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points among registered voters; +/- 3.7 percentage points among likely voters.  Party ID (among registered voters): 31%Democrat; 27% Republican; 40% Independent. Party ID (among likely voters): 29% Democrat; 29% Republican; 39% Independent.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

Um… hooray?

Republican Mark Sanford has defeated Democrat Elizabeth Colbert Busch in South Carolina’s 1st Congressional District special election. The victory caps a dramatic comeback by the scandal-tinged former governor, whose political career was left for dead four years ago when he was caught lying about an extramarital affair.

With three quarters of precincts reporting, Sanford led 54 percent to 45 percent for Colbert Busch, and the Associated Press called the race.

The biggest surprise in this race is not that Sanford won. This is a district that Mitt Romney carried by 18 points, but the few polls in the race, including our favorite polling firm PPP, had the race extremely close. According to the news sites that talked with operatives in the state, everyone expected a tight race and some were even predicting a possible recount. Instead, Sanford won by a solid 9 point or 13,000 vote margin.

Perhaps the best response to this comes from Speaker Boehner who was asked about the possibility of Sanford winning at his press conference this afternoon. Speaker Boehner said “we don’t get to choose our colleagues”.