Elendil's Journal

KY US Senate Poll - Red Edition

Tue, 9 Mar 2010 21:24:00 -0500

When Grayson won the race for Kentucky Secretary of State 6 years a go, it was obvious that he was an up and comer in the GOP. He followed up his first win with another victory 4 years later when Gov Fletcher was significantly beaten by Beshear. That victory was amazing since he accomplished it without gubernatorial coat tails. Even though he scored an impressive victory, I wondered how strong his name recognition really was in the state. I knew everyone involved in politics knew him, but I wondered how well known he was with the general electorate.

Three years after his re-election campaign, he saddled up to run for the U.S. Senate. What surprised me the most was that early polling only showed him with support in the 30s. That is when I knew that he was suffering from a lack of name recognition with the general electorate.

Enter Rand Paul. Paul used his father's celebrity status to not only raise a significant amount of money, but was able to leverage it into television appearances on the the national level. The media buzz he created along with Grayson's low key campaign propelled Paul to a commanding lead in the polls.

What is interesting about the latest SurveyUSA poll is how consistent Paul's lead is across pretty much every demographic. It is the same type of lead a well known candidate would have over a lesser known candidate. It seems like a lead built upon name id. So what does it mean?

I think the challenge for Grayson going forward will be to increase his name recognition with the electorate. His campaign has been too passive and hasn't really engaged the state. He still has 20% of the electorate which is undecided. I think he can grab a big chunk of it if he gets out there and defines himself with the public.

The challenge for Paul is a different one. He has to be able to defend his lead in the polls. His biggest challenge will be to retain 40+% he has amassed so far. Especially since he is the libertarian candidate in the race. It will be interesting to see how well he stands up to not only the pressure of the campaign, but the attacks on the soft spots of the libertarian ideology among Republicans.

One thing he can't afford to do is go on the defensive. No one wins a defensive war. Decisions like backing out of a forum because it might not be friendly is not a good idea. For one thing it brings more attention and news to the event than if he would have attended. These guys have been in a number of forums together and none of them have made much news. But now the story is Paul skipping out on the event. It makes him look weak and scared. A situation that is easily exploitable by his opponents.

Needless to say, it is going to be an interesting 10 weeks till primary day.

KY US Senate Poll - Blue Edition

Mon, 8 Mar 2010 21:15:00 -0500

The latest poll from SurveyUSA has been released and Conway is in trouble. He finds himself down 18 to Mongiardo with 10 weeks until the primary. The biggest problem for Conway is the break down by regions.

Conway leads in Louisville, but trails by 40 points in the eastern and western parts of the state. The poll numbers tell me that Mongiardo has been able to successfully brand Conway as the big city slicker politician and have used it to bludgeon him in the more rural parts of the state. The only thing left in Conway's favor is his huge war chest. He should be able to swamp Mongiardo in paid media over the next 10 weeks..

The only question remains is can he utilize that advantage to redefine himself with voters in the state. Or has he been pigeonholed as a candidate. I just have a hard time believing he will be able to ingratiate himself with the rural electorate. But then again all he has to do is be respectable and win the central part of the state big. Regardless, he is up the stream and needs to start paddling hard before his campaign goes over the waterfall.

Latest Rand Paul Ad

Sat, 6 Mar 2010 17:29:00 -0500

After some early skirmishes between Paul and Grayson, it seems that the campaigns are starting to get back to the basics of campaigning. The first step is introducing yourself to the electorate. The latest advertisement by Rand Paul is a solid attempt at it.

As a student of politics I love the imagery of this ad. Morning in Kentucky harkens back to Ronald Reagan's Morning in America campaign. The only question is will the average person connect it back to the Morning in America theme? This leads to my biggest problem with the ad. I think the imagery and feeling it generates is strong, but the overall message is weak. It tells us very little about Rand Paul and why we should vote for him. For that reason, I think they missed on an opportunity at creating a truly great ad.

Ky Dems Are Getting Desperate

Fri, 5 Mar 2010 18:15:00 -0500

Kentucky Democrats are screwed. New polling in the state shows both Conway and Mongiardo trailing either Grayson or Paul by double digits. They are trailing anywhere from 13 to 18 points. The lead is greater than the percentage of voters who are not sure. Such dismal inevitability leads to acts of desperation. Conway hoping to score points on Paul and Grayson's support of Sen Bunning ran the following advertisement.

Let's rewind the situation a bit. Why is he claiming that Bunning is throwing high and wild? Because Bunning decided to block a unanimous consent measure that blocked funding for out of work benefits. While it seems like he is scoring political points for his demagoguery, he is really opening himself up to a devastating line of attack. Bunning blocked the bill because he wanted it paid for rather than continuing to run up the federal debt. I guess Mr Conway is OK with spending money he doesn't have.

The reason we are having a voter revolt this year is because of massive debt piled up by irresponsible spending. Apparently, Conway is against what the voters in this country want. It is difficult winning an election when you are on the wrong side of an important issue.

But the desperation doesn't end with a wild stab at populism. He just makes up stuff about his record. I remember him continuing Stumbo's law suit on "price gouging" by big oil. I also remember Conway joining the national lawsuit against big pharmaceuticals. What I don't remember is hearing about him winning any of those cases. So he is just making crap up about saving taxpayers millions of dollars.

The biggest reason this whole ad reeks of desperation is that he is attacking the Republican front runners in the primary season. Last time I checked he was running in the Democratic primary against Mongiardo. Talking about a wild pitch. I think this ad is much wilder than anything Bunning ever threw.

Grayson's New Ad Is Good

Wed, 3 Mar 2010 17:35:00 -0500

Political television ads are the primary tool of communication that candidates running for state wide office have to connect with the voters of the state. That is why it is important to first raise enough money to be able to utilize the resource. But after the money is raised, it is even more important to use television effectively. Trey Grayson's latest ad is a great example of using that medium effectively early in a campaign.

I like two things about this ad. First it provides a basic statement of principles. It tells people why he is running for the U.S. Senate. Secondly, it provides an example of how he has applied the principles of smaller government in his currently elected role. I think the ad is a solid effort at defining who he is as a candidate.

My only question is why he didn't lead with this ad? I think this would have been a perfect opening move. Instead he decided to attack Rand Paul with his first two efforts. I know those ads put the Paul campaign on the defensive, but wouldn't the Grayson campaign been better served doing that later in the race? I just don't understand the political calculus in their decision making. Although they got off to a bit of a shaky start, they seem to be back on track with this latest effort.

Environmentalists Tired of Talking - Talk Some More

Tue, 2 Mar 2010 21:07:00 -0500

Environmentalists in Kentucky are tired of being ignored.

“We have petitioned, marched, sung, written, lobbied, testified and pleaded — all to no avail,” Berry said. “But today we declare that business as usual in Frankfort — long intolerable — has now become unacceptable.”

So what are they going to do about it?

The environmentalists, members of Kentuckians for the Commonwealth (KFTC), took turns reading a Declaration of Independence-type statement.
It called on the state’s political leaders to break their close ties with coal, remove legislators with ties to coal companies from leadership positions, and call for an end to “extreme and sometimes violent speech” directed at people who speak out against coal in the coalfields.

Wow! They are tired of talking to legislators so their solution is to talk some more. Freaking hilarious. I am sure the legislators are quaking in their boots over this powerful "declaration".

Why We Shouldn't Elect Judges

Tue, 2 Mar 2010 21:06:00 -0500

Everyone knows that Katie King is a below average judge. Hell she wasn't even remotely qualified to be a sitting judge when her daddy bought her the seat. Thus it doesn't come as a shock that she gets a poor rating among lawyers of the Louisville Bar Association. What is shocking is that three other judges got worse ratings than her.

The 20 judges, who were evaluated by lawyers, had an average score of 83 percent in generally doing well in their positions. But four scored below the mid-70s, putting them in the below-average range, said Jim Lunger of the Thoroughbred Research Group, which conducted the survey for the bar association.
Those judges were Katie King, at 69 percent; Annette Karem, 65 percent; William Ryan, 66 percent; and Paula Fitzgerald, 36 percent. Ryan and Fitzgerald both have senior status.

Wow. How piss poor of a judge do you have to be to score lower than Katie King? Apparently Paula Fitzgerald has no business being a judge yet she is considered a "senior" judge. This is the primary reason we shouldn't elect judges. The electorate has no reasonable means of knowing the legal qualifications or skills of each judicial candidate. Therefore you are bound to end up with a handful of pathetic judges like these.

We really need to have appointments for judgeships. Yeah we would probably end up with some cronyism, but in general the picks would be solid because the person appointing them won't want it to become a political issue in his or her next campaign.

Prisoner's Dilemma and Bunning's Stuborn Stance

Mon, 1 Mar 2010 21:29:00 -0500

When I took introduction to political science, I was introduced to the concept of the "prisoner's dilemma". The problem is outlined as such.

Two suspects are arrested by the police. The police have insufficient evidence for a conviction, and, having separated both prisoners, visit each of them to offer the same deal. If one testifies (defects from the other) for the prosecution against the other and the other remains silent (cooperates with the other), the betrayer goes free and the silent accomplice receives the full 10-year sentence. If both remain silent, both prisoners are sentenced to only six months in jail for a minor charge. If each betrays the other, each receives a five-year sentence. Each prisoner must choose to betray the other or to remain silent. Each one is assured that the other would not know about the betrayal before the end of the investigation. How should the prisoners act?

The whole point of the exercise is to introduce game theory. Here is a matrix of the possible decisions.

	Prisoner B Stays Silent	Prisoner B Betrays
Prisoner A Stays Silent	Each serves 6 months	Prisoner A: 10 years Prisoner B: goes free
Prisoner A Betrays	Prisoner A: goes free Prisoner B: 10 years	Each serves 5 years

The interesting aspect of the game is that each individual would be best served to stay silent. In that scenario they serve a combine 1 year in jail. The other three scenarios have them going to jail for a combined 10 years. The only problem is that the rational choice for each prisoner is to betray. Why? Because they are guaranteed to end up in better shape or equal to the other prisoner if they betray. In the other case they may end up much worse off than the other prisoner.

Ok, I see it is an interesting thought problem, but what does it have to do with Sen Bunning's latest antics?

Kentucky Sen. Jim Bunning on Monday again held up legislation that extends unemployment and health insurance benefits....
Bunning said he supports extending unemployment benefits and he tried unsuccessfully last week to negotiate an agreement with the Senate Democratic leadership.
“We cannot keep adding to the debt,” Bunning said in remarks on the Senate floor. The legislation is not paid for, contrary to a recent pay-as-you-go law that Congress passed and President Barack Obama signed into law.

Basically, Bunning is saying that he is not going to allow Congress to keep spending taxpayer money without first paying for it. The Democrats immediately jumped on him as being against the working class of America.

The Republican senator’s objection to the funding bill has temporarily shut down multi-million dollar construction projects in several states and canceled highway reimbursements to states worth hundreds of millions of dollars, said Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.
“As American families are struggling in tough economic times, I am keenly disappointed that political games are putting a stop to important construction projects around the country,” LaHood said in a statement. “This means that construction workers will be sent home from job sites because federal inspectors must be furloughed.”

Sen Reid said Republicans were standing in the way of providing emergency help to people in need.
“They said ‘No’ to the families of their own states and all our states who count on us when they need action,” Reid said.

"Because of one senator's irresponsible actions, over 61,000 Michigan workers will begin losing their unemployment benefits on Monday," said Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich. "These workers and their families cannot afford to wait for help."

The evil Republicans just want the common man to suffer! Again, what does this have to do with the prisoner's dilemma? Because it is the same problem that the Democrats are exploiting to trash Bunning. Let's rework the problem to reflect the current situation. On one side we have person unemployed and on the other side we have the rest of society. We have the choice of responsible spending and irresponsible spending. Let's revisit the matrix. The X axis is society and the Y axis is the unemployed individual. The first result inside the matrix is the individuals results and the second is society's result in the game.

	Responsible Spending	Irresponsible Spending
Responsible Spending	40, 40	0, 50
Irresponsible Spending	50, 0	1, 1

If the government spends irresponsibly for the people out of work then those people are better off, but the society as a whole loses. Why? Because money spent on them is taken from the rest of society. The rest of society is poorer for the transfer of wealth. The Democrats argue that if we don't help the little guy then all we care about is the rich. The rich will get everything and the poor will be stuck with nothing. For Democrats the only two options are the lower left and upper right quadrants.

The only problem with the Democrat's argument is that they offer the same deal to every group in society. If everyone takes their deal we end up in the bottom right quadrant were everyone loses. For that is where the leviathan of government overwhelms the economy and shreds it into tatters.

The problem Republicans face in convincing people that they are better off with responsible spendingt. They are asking people to give up their bit of government pork for the greater good knowing in the long run they will be better off for it. In the example of the unemployed gentleman. While he may suffer initially from the lack of federal money. In the long term he will be better off without it. The economy will recover quicker without government intrusion and new jobs will be created. Allowing the unemployed gentleman to find gainful employment.

What makes it such a difficult sell is that the individual's rational best interest is to take the irresponsible spending. In affect getting a piece of the pie while it is still there. It is difficult to get past this rational with voters when Democrats continually play one group against another. The Democrats have been feasting off this dilemma for years to drive their agenda.

It has worked until recently. People are awakening to see the government nearing the cliffs and are beginning to resist. They are beginning to understand the risks of irresponsible spending and are forming Tea Parties across the country. The move to responsible spending has to start some where and Bunning is leading that charge in the senate. The only question is will people stick together for the common good or resort to their base rationales. We will find out by the general publics reaction to Bunning's stand in the senate.

Grayson Continues Applying Heat

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 07:34:00 -0500

Trey Grayson continues applying the heat to Rand Paul campaign. This time he strikes Paul on national security and military funding.

I have to give some credit to the Grayson team. They keep finding juicy sound bites Rand Paul has made over the last two years. Of course the Paul campaign responded to the attack.

Dr. Paul has clearly stated that the most important function of the federal government is national defense. Rand supports robust funding for our military. Under Dr. Paul’s vision, the percentage of our federal budget spent on national defense would increase.

While the percentage of budget would increase under Paul that doesn't mean funding wouldn't decrease as well. They even admit as much.

Dr. Paul believes there is room to cut waste from all budgets.

So what does he want to cut from the military I wonder?

One particular area Rand will target is the billions of dollars we waste on foreign aid.

Here is the one area where I vehemently disagree with Rand. I do not believe in isolating the U.S. from the rest of the world. Foreign aid is a pittance of our budget and actually does good in the world. First it keeps our relationships with many of the world's small countries on good terms which is good for trade. Secondly, it helps keep the world at peace through increased stability.

Personally, I would rather we tackle the parts of the budget that are strangling our economy such as runaway entitlements and an ever expanding bureaucracy before we isolate ourselves from the rest of the world.

One thing is for sure, Grayson has gained the upper hand by putting Paul on the defensive this week. At the same time, he is admitting that he is trailing in the polls. Joe Arnold says as much in his article.

By putting Paul on the defensive and introducing possible doubts in Paul's conservative bonafides, the week belongs to Grayson. Yet, the fact that Trey Grayson's first TV and radio ads talk as much about Rand Paul as they do Trey Grayson acknowledges that Paul is leading the GOP primary.

With the Democrats and Republicans ripping each other it is going to be an interesting couple of months.

Good Political Ad

Wed, 24 Feb 2010 21:46:00 -0500

I have been critical of the advertisements run by both Grayson and Paul so far in the primary season. That begs the question, what do I consider a good early campaign advertisement? Personally, I like a simple positive statement of principle. The winner this year is 6th Congressional District candidate Mike Templeman. Below is his initial advertise.

His ad has a simple and up beat message. All the while introducing himself to the electorate. He comes across as a candidate who any Republican would be happy to vote for on election day. It is the type of ad I would lead off with if I were running for office.