Saturday, March 31, 2012

Kerrey Wants To Eliminate Medicare, Medicaid and Veterans Health Plans!!!!

We already know that Cosmic Bob Kerrey opposes repeal of Obamacare and that he supports the individual mandate that, hopefully, the U.S. Supreme Court will soon tell us is unconstitutional.  That belief puts him in major opposition to some 60%+ Nebraskans who oppose it. We're sure, by the same token it puts him in sync with his potential New York constituents.

But just how radical New York's third U.S. Senator, Bob Kerrey, would be was illustrated by what he told the local daily in an article on healthcare.

Kerrey said he wants 'universal healthcare', just like those wonderful plans offered in Canada and Great Britain where thousands wait months for their rationed healthcare needs.  Talk about New York liberal idea...

Of course, part of his plan then would be to end Medicare and Medicaid and Veterans care as we know it since they'd all be merged into one program fits all at tremendous government expense.  

We hope our Republican U.S. Senate candidates demagogue that Kerrey belief just as his buddy Ben Nelson demagogued Pete Ricketts six years ago for suggesting that tax reform should look at the Fair Tax, Flat Tax or any other reform--taking that statement and saying that Ricketts supported a 30% national sales tax (which he never did).

Stenberg Needs Your Money Today Too!

Since we've shown you Cosmic Bob's last minute appeal for your bucks, we felt it would only be fair that we share Don Stenberg's since some don't think we've been particularly fair to him in our assessment of his viability or electability.   Certainly, if either this or the previous post incite you to part with that puny donation, we hope it will go to Don.  

We suspect this will be Don's last appeal for last minute quarterly funds since the next report will be after the primary, and by then Don will only be asking for your contribution to payoff any campaign debts he may have incurred before losing the primary.....


Only Half a Day Left

Friends,
Only 12 more hours. At midnight, the first quarter of 2012 fundraising
 will end. This is a tremendously important milestone in our campaign
to ensure that a genuine conservative represents Nebraska and is
the last fundraising deadline before our May 15th primary.

That is why we need your financial support today.

With your help, we will win the primary in May and defeat liberal
Bob Kerrey in November.

Will you donate $20, $50, $100, or even $500 now? Any amount
will help our campaign continue to gain momentum. We have
already seen major gains this past month, with endorsements
from the Family Research Council and the Club for Growth.

Will you now join them in their endorsement of our campaign
and donate before our midnight deadline tonight?

I appreciate your continued support and I know that together, we
can win this race and turn Nebraska red.



Bob Kerrey: Send Me Money, Washington Fell Apart After I Left

All the politicians for federal office are sending their last minute appeals for our money as the the quarterly giving deadline for the next report nears.   Of course, since we're best friends with Cosmic Bob, he sent us an e-mail telling us that he needs as little as $5 from us so he can go back to Washington and restore it to those Helicon times when he previous reigned with guys like Ben Nelson and Bill Clinton.

Makes you yearn for the good old days.........NOT

Bob Kerrey for Nebraska

We've never seen Washington this dysfunctional. When I left the Senate, we were 
paying down our debt and our economy was robust. Today we find ourselves in a
horrible fiscal situation
.
Now our schools are falling behind. Our technology is being stolen. And the partisan
bickering is at a fever pitch.

We desperately need real leaders who are willing to step up and lead. We need to
get back to putting country before politics. That's why I'm running for Senate --
and why I'm asking for your help today.

We need to get our campaign off to a fast start, and that means filing a
strong public financial report after our first deadline -- now mere hours away.

Will you help us show that we have the strength to compete all the way through 
Election Day and win this election?

Click here to contribute $5 today, before our midnight deadline.

There's much more at stake in this race than which party controls the Senate.

Some people want to repeal the Wall Street reform bill. I disagree. Greed at
that level will inevitably cause people to do bad things. We can't go back to
those days.

Some people want to engage in a military conflict with Iran. I think it would
be a disaster that would make Afghanistan and Iraq -- where we spent $3
trillion and lost 6,000 American lives -- look like a cakewalk.

Some people want to target tax cuts to the very richest Americans. I think
it's in all of our best interests for median family income to go up, and the
solution is better trade policies, better investment policies, and better tax
policies.

But with so many attacks coming at our campaign already, we need to get a
fast start. Will you step up and help now, before tonight's midnight deadline?

It's just hours until the deadline. Click here to contribute $5 today.

At the end of the day, I'm not afraid to do what's right. I'm ready to do 
everything I possibly can to change Washington. But I need your help
to get there.

Thanks so much for your support.

Bob

Friday, March 30, 2012

Senators Should Defeat LB 806


LB 806 would allow what amounts to a form of slot-machine gambling in horse tracks across Nebraska.   Folks would be able to bet on video replays of historic horse races without identification of the particular race or the horses' names.  
The purpose of the bill as stated:

"FOR AN ACT relating to horseracing; to amend sections 2-1203.01 and
2 2-1215, Reissue Revised Statutes of Nebraska; to
3 authorize the State Racing Commission to license and
4 regulate wagering on historic horseraces; to provide for
5 a tax on wagers; to create a fund; to provide a penalty;
6 and to repeal the original sections."

Supposedly, the bill is aimed at saving the horse racing industry in Nebraska.  What the bill will do is simply make horse tracks mini-casinos where folks can go pull the lever on nothing more than a slot machine.  In fact, it appears to us that no money will actually go to the horse racing industry as the bill says funds will be distributed thusly:

(2) All receipts in the Historic Horseracing Distribution
2 Fund in excess of the amounts sufficient to cover the costs of
3 administration shall be distributed as follows:
4 (a) One-third of all receipts shall be credited to the
5 Probation Program Cash Fund to be used by the Community Corrections
6 Division of the Nebraska Commission on Law Enforcement and Criminal
7 Justice for reentry programming;
8 (b) One-third of all receipts shall be credited to the
9 Violence Prevention Cash Fund to be used by the Office of Violence
10 Prevention for a grant process for violence prevention programming;
11 and
12 (c) One-third of all receipts shall be credited to the
13 Compulsive Gamblers Assistance Fund.


It should also be noted that the "Fiscal Note" on this bill says the state will lose $180,000 a year in taxes it now collects from charitable gambling.  

Beyond that, you can expect a successful suit by Attorney General Jon Bruning who will say the bill is unconstitutional--which we believe is truly the case.
 
 In the long run, it will just be one more step in the process of establishing casino gambling in Nebraska.   The next thing you know, keno parlors will have to have it or something similar to save them.   And, of course, the Indian reservations will get everything these guys get.

If Nebraskans truly want to limit gambling, they should encourage their senators to say
'No' to passing LB 806.    If they don't we can only hope that the governor will veto the bill.

Here are the folks who voted for the bill.   Contact them and tell them to change their minds.

Sen. Brad Ashford # 20 bashford@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2622
Sen. Danielle Conrad #46 Dconrad@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2720
Sen. Tanya Cook #13 Tcook@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2727
Sen. Abbie Cornett #45 acornett@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2615
Sen. Brenda Council #11 Bcouncil@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2612
Sen. Annette Dubas #34 adubas@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2630
Sen. Mike Gloor #35 Mgloor@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2617
Sen. Ken Haar #21 khaar@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2673
Sen. Galen Hadley #37 Ghadley@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2726
Sen. Burke Harr #8 bharr@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2722
Sen Gwen Howard #9 ghoward@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2723
Sen. Bob Krist #10 Bkrist@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2718
Sen. Chris Langemeier #23 clangemeier@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2719
Sen. Leroy Louden #49 llouden@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2725
Sen. Amanda McGill #26 amcgill@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2610
Sen. Heath Mello #5 Hmello@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2710
Sen. Jeremy Nordquist # 7 Jnordquist@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2721
Sen. Rich Pahls #31 rpahls@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2327
Sen. Kate Sullivan #41 Ksullivan@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2631
Sen. Norm Wallman #30 nwallman@leg.ne.gov 402-471-2620

John Kerry Tells Us No Swiftboating for buddy Barack

In addition to our 'Please give just $3 to my husband's campaign' e-mail from the first lady today, we got one from John Kerry who apparently is still smarting eight years later from his failed presidential campaign and being 'swiftboated'.    Of course, to insure that doesn't happen to his buddy Barack he also wants us to send $3--and he didn't even offer us a seat at dinner with the pres.

Of course, Johnny fails to tell us that part of the reason for political finances being what they are today is the McCain-Feingold law and, of course, he somehow fails to acknowledge the hundreds of millions of dollars of union money that go to support Democrat candidates.  In other words, if it doesn't work to my advantage, it isn't fair.   If it works to my advantage its just fair.

Anyway, the loser's e-mail:

Robert --

When I was the Democratic nominee for president in one of the closest and toughest elections in history, a group of billionaires did something unprecedented:

They wrote million-dollar checks to fund lies about my service on what were called "Swift Boats" in Vietnam -- and in so doing, they turned the boats my crewmates and I served on into a new political shorthand for the most vicious smears imaginable: "swiftboating."

I wish like hell that the term was retired from the American political lexicon, and returned to its real meaning.

But guess what: Bob Perry, the deep-pocketed funder of the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth," just gave $3 million to Mitt Romney's Super PAC.

One man. Three million dollars. And that's just the start.

I know all too clearly that these guys will do or say anything to win. They'll stop at nothing. But forewarned is forearmed. Their multi-million dollar smear tactics were new in 2004; in 2012 we know their playbook, and shame on us if we don't tear it into shreds. Join me and we will stop the "swiftboating" of President Obama.

Fight back by donating $3 or more today at this critical deadline moment.

It takes someone with no shame and a lot of money to get the public to believe a total lie.

Unfortunately that's what we're up against.

Let's be ready for it -- let's fight back.

Please donate $3 today:

https://donate.barackobama.com/Before-Saturday

Thanks,

John

Senator John Kerry
Massachusetts

Romney IS THE NOMINEE: The Fat Lady Is Singing

Stu Rothenberg tells us that Mitt is the guy, the soon to be not to be denied presidential nominee of the Grand Old Party.    That Romney has been solidifying his position has been pretty clear just from this week's endorsements.   And, Santorum, his only semi-viable competition is becoming only an minor irritant as the nomination process goes on.

Like it or not, Romney will be the nominee and hopefully the next President of the United States.

Here is what Rothenberg has to say:

"In GOP Presidential Race, Fat Lady Finally Sings" from "The Rothenberg Political Report"

"Finally, it’s over. The fight for the GOP nomination, that is.

It’s only March, but it seems as if the GOP race for president has been going on for an eternity. Now, however, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has won his party’s nomination and the right to take on President Barack Obama in the fall.

No, not everyone agrees that the race is over. Like when a baseball team leads the league by 20 games in August, there is still a statistical chance it could lose the race.

The 1964 Philadelphia Phillies had the National League pennant locked up until they lost it, and the 2011 Boston Red Sox were assured of at least the wild card until they weren’t. So, sure, the unthinkable happens.

Although Romney has not yet accumulated the necessary 1,144 delegates to the Republican National Convention in August in Tampa, Fla., the chances are evaporating — make that have evaporated — that he can be denied his party’s nomination.

Or, as the Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza wrote a few days ago, “the ‘walking dead’ phase of the Republican primary is upon us.”

RNC delegate counts by the Associated Press, NBC and CNN all show Romney not only leading second-place Rick Santorum comfortably — by 200 to 300 delegates, depending on the media organization — but also having more delegates than the former Pennsylvania Senator, former Speaker Newt Gingrich (Ga.) and Rep. Ron Paul (Texas) combined.

While Romney has been unable to broaden his appeal to pile up increasingly large percentages of delegates, Santorum has also been unable to do so. Nobody ever seems to mention that.

Santorum continues to win rural voters, evangelicals and other highly religious voters and the most conservative voters. But that’s it. He is likely to win states with large percentages of those kinds of voters, but he can’t win states with fewer religious and fewer ideological voters.

Santorum certainly has victories ahead, but that won’t change the dynamic of the race.
The GOP calendar still includes Indiana, North Carolina, West Virginia, Arkansas, Kentucky, Texas, New Mexico, Montana and South Dakota — states just like those where Santorum has already run well and won.

But the calendar also includes Maryland, Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island, New Jersey and Utah — states where Romney will win.

And there are some states where the outcomes are less certain.

The steady drumbeat of announcements of support for Romney from party insiders (or acknowledgements from uncommitted current and former officeholders that he will be the party’s nominee) confirms what we are already seeing and hearing from members of the Republican National Committee who will be delegates — that they are falling in line behind Romney.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush endorsed him. South Carolina Sens. Lindsey Graham and Jim DeMint said the race is over and the time has come for the party to unite. Former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, an ex-RNC chairman, said Romney has all but locked up the nomination.

You don’t need to be a brain surgeon to understand what is happening.

The increased testiness of Santorum and Gingrich surely reflect their inability to derail Romney.

Santorum’s explosion at New York Times reporter Jeff Zeleny may resonate well with conservatives who see a liberal behind every newspaper headline, but it also reflects the frustration that Santorum is feeling as the calendar advances without him gaining ground on Romney.

Santorum and Gingrich complain about Romney’s financial advantage and aggressive campaign tactics. He is outspending them 2-1, 4-1 or even 10-1, they argue. They are right, of course, that Romney wouldn’t be doing as well with delegates if his campaign were broke and if he didn’t have a heavily funded super PAC to move voter sentiment.

But so what? We all knew money would be a requirement to win the nomination, and whining about it the way Gingrich and Santorum do is the strategy of losers who suddenly find the rules of the game they entered unfair.
You can bet Santorum and Gingrich would take advantage without a second’s hesitation if they had the financial advantage.

Candidates who are losing invariably find many scapegoats. They sound desperate. Candidates who are winning stay on message and exude confidence.

Acknowledging the obvious — that the race is over — takes away nothing from Santorum, who worked hard to become the alternative to Romney, performed well in the debates and made some smart tactical choices about where to fight.

Gingrich had his moments, too, though his campaign was largely a mirage and little more than a reflection of the candidate’s personality. While insisting that he would be the nominee, Gingrich wrote off key states and lacked the resources to become relevant.

Romney has not won the Republican nomination because he has been a perfect candidate or because he has learned how to appeal to primary voters who were initially suspicious of him. He won because he had a well-funded, national campaign that could destroy his opponents, respond to attacks at a moment’s notice and recover from mistakes.


For Romney, at least, the fat lady’s voice is mellifluous."

Thursday, March 29, 2012

The President and His Minions Bringing You Higher Energy Costs and More Dependency

We received the following from our friends at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce a day or so ago and think it is worth sharing, at least in part as we recognize that once again the president and his minions at E.P.A. are doing everything they can to curtail, not increase, domestic energy production.   When it comes to energy independence this president is simply a lying fraud!  Yep.   What he is doing is forcing up the cost of energy in all forms for all Americans while he makes our country increasingly dependent on unproven, unrealistic and expensive forms of energy production. 

EPA Launches New Attack on Coal
Administration’s “All of the Above” Energy Policy Looks Like “Some of the Above”

"The EPA is at it again.


Less than a week after a federal judge rebuked the EPA for exceeding their authority by unilaterally revoking a properly secured permit for a coal mining company in West Virginia, the EPA has side stepped Congress and implemented a rule that will kill jobs, spike energy costs, and threatens the electricity grid our country runs on.

Yesterday, the Administration announced a new rule from the EPA that will restrict greenhouse gas emissions from power plants in a way that effectively places a ban on coal-fired power plants in the future and slowly regulates existing plants out of business.

As U.S. Chamber Executive Vice President for Government Affairs
Bruce Josten points out, the impact of this ruling will be felt far and wide:
EPA’s proposal is rife with legal and structural deficiencies that could ultimately allow the scope of the rule to expand well beyond the entities EPA seeks to regulate. Even worse, the agency has proposed this dubious new regulation while a legal cloud hangs over the fundamental question of whether it can regulate greenhouse gases at all.
Because coal is the source of nearly half of America’s electricity, this new regulation could lead to skyrocketing energy prices that will harm both families and businesses.
While the administration claims to be pursuing an “all of the above” energy policy, the EPA’s rule doesn’t allow options, it picks winners and losers.

In addition to regulating one of America’s primary energy sources out of business, the EPA is changing the course of America’s energy future through regulatory fiat and outside the scope of Congress and its constituents.
As Josten says:
Today’s announcement is another in a long string of actions this administration has taken that weaken our energy security and raise energy prices. Given recent court decisions finding that EPA overreached—including three in the last week—the Chamber will be evaluating all of its options to overturn this rule if it is ultimately issued.
We believe that America needs a common sense, comprehensive energy policy that can secure our energy future and that the American people have a say in."

LB 239 Fails Because of Senators Not Smart Enough or Bold Enough

Sadly, LB 239, Senator Janssen's voter identification bill, lost by a few votes yesterday. This was not a Republican litmus issue although we can't think of any reason why a right-thinking Republican wouldn't vote for it.

More than 30 states have adopted or are considering stronger laws to require citizens to present a photo ID when casting a ballot. A recent Rasmussen survey showed that more than 70% of Americans agree with such laws.  In  2011, a Nebraska Republican Party survey showed 68% of Nebraskans supported Voter ID.  But apparently, four Republican State Senators still didn't. 
The four Republicans who chose not to support the bill were State Senators Abbie Cornett, Kathy Campbell, John Harms and LeRoy Louden.   Cornett, Campbell and Harms are from larger communities and they should certainly understand the problems and potential problems.   Apparently, they don't and we hope that Nebraska voters remember these folks if and when they appear on local ballots in the future.

If you want to admonish these four, you can do so by contacting them at their e-mail addresses:
Sen. Kathy Campbell kcampbell@leg.ne.gov
Sen. Abbie Cornett acornett@leg.ne.gov
Sen. John Harms jharms@leg.ne.gov
Sen. LeRoy Louden llouden@leg.ne.gov

We want to thank those state senators who were smart enough to understand the problem and bold enough to vote for the bill.

Sen. Charlie Janssen
Sen. Ken Schilz
Sen. Greg Adams
Sen. Dave Bloomfield
Sen. Lydia Brasch
Sen. Tom Carlson
Sen. Mark Christensen
Sen. Colby Coash
Sen. Deb Fischer
Sen. Mike Flood
Sen. Tony Fulton
Sen. Mike Gloor
Sen. Galen Hadley
Sen. Tom Hansen
Sen. Lavonn Heidemann
Sen. Bob Krist
Sen. Paul Lambert
Sen. Chris Langemeier
Sen. Tyson Larson
Sen. Scott Lautenbaugh
Sen. Beau McCoy
Sen. John Nelson
Sen. Rich Pahls
Sen. Pete Pirsch
Sen. Scott Price
Sen. Paul Schumacher
Sen. Jim Smith
Sen. John Wightman

Freeman Throwing Pebbles at Congressman Terry

Seems Republican 2nd Congressional candidate Glenn Freeman is attacking incumbent Lee Terry for not attending a Sierra Club event, inferring Terry isn't accessible. Let's think for a minute--do you think the Sierra Club event with its anti-Keystone XL Pipeline agenda is a place that a pro-U.S.-energy/national security congressman should waste his time at?   What did Freeman tell those folks?   That he was against the pipeline????

Glenn continues to attack Terry for violating his three-term promise.    Apparently, Joe Jordan and his Nebraska Watchdog (GOP Primary Heating Up) think this is news--must be a slow day.

Glenn is beginning to sound a lot like Don Stenberg.   We might just ask where was Glenn's criticism when Terry broke his promise and when he was running for re-election to his fourth term?   Oh, he was drawing a paycheck from the federal government and the liberal out-of-step Obama-supporting U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel whom he was working for.

Freeman should be careful about the stone-throwing.   It may break his own windows.  Well, actually, Glenn is just throwing pebbles.  

P.S. To infer that the G.O.P. Second Congressional District Primary is 'heating up' is just creating news....

New Bruning Ad: In Their Graves



John Bruning has a new ad out and like all of them so far he tells us why he should elect him and what he stands for.    Yeah, we know, it's easy to be positive when you are in the lead.   But on the other hand, Bruning's chief detractor, Don Stenberg, should have learned by now that negative adds against Bruning aren't working...

Liberal Anti-Pipeline Money: Lots to Go Around

We can't help but be astounded about the efforts the radical environmentalists will go to accomplish their ends.   And apparently the dollars are unlimited.   Now we find out that liberal organizations like the Tides Foundation have enough money to fight the Keystone XL Pipeline to even send money to non-profits in states that the pipeline doesn't even cross.   Forget the fact that such states as Minnesota would in the long run benefit by reduced energy costs and energy security, a national issue. 

In this regard we thought you might be interested in this article describing how nearly half-a-million dollars have been sent to non-profits in Minnesota to advocate, fight and lobby against the pipeline....

Minnesota State News:  Minnesota Non-Profits Receive $440,000 to Fight Keystone XL PipelineWritten by Tom Steward on


keystone pipeline route"Three Minnesota environmental non-profit advocacy groups have received nearly half a million dollars in out-of-state foundation funding to oppose the Keystone oil pipeline project, according to a Freedom Foundation of Minnesota analysis. The California funding to state groups comes as a surprise, since Keystone’s proposed route does not include Minnesota.
The $5 billion pipeline proposal to extract and refine oil from Canada’s tar sands has become a lightning rod as soaring $4 a gallon gas focuses consumers’ attention on ways to increase petroleum supplies closer to home and ease prices at the pump. A new Gallup poll shows that Americans overwhelmingly support building the Keystone pipeline by a two to one margin.

Industry and other proponents point out that the 1,170 mile pipeline from Canada to the Gulf Coast in Texas would create an estimated 20,000 jobs and billions in related economic activity. Yet environmental activists have drawn a line in the tar sands over Keystone, culminating in the administration’s controversial decision in January to deny Keystone’s permit to cross the international border. Opponents claim the project will harm the tar sands environment and further exacerbate global warming.

The Tides Foundation, based in San Francisco, has distributed nine grants totaling $439,500 to three Minnesota non-profits through 2010, according to Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and grant disclosures listed online. No records were immediately available for 2011, when the campaign targeting the pipeline picked up momentum.

Five grants totaling $269,500 were allotted to the Indigenous Environmental Network (IEN) in Bemidji. The group’s “pipeline organizer” was recently in Cushing, Oklahoma leading a group of Native American protesters during President Obama’s appearance to announce his support for the southern leg of the pipeline. “Tar sands is devastating First Nations communities in Canada already, and now they want to bring that environmental health and social devastation to U.S. tribes,” said Marty Cobenais of the Indigenous Environmental Network (IEN) in the Oklahoman newspaper. IEN posted a critical comment of its treatment by Oklahoma authorities on its website.

Tides Foundation also disbursed three grants totaling $60,000 to the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA), a St. Paul nonprofit. On its website, MCEA highlights “being the first environmental organization to oppose the Keystone XL pipeline through litigation in state and district courts.”

Fresh Energy, a nonprofit that plays a key role in green energy advocacy at the state capitol, received a $110,000 grant from the Tides Foundation for tar sands efforts, as well. Fresh Energy regularly posts on-line comments opposing Keystone, including stories from its media arm, Midwest Energy News. Michael Noble, the group’s long time executive director, participated in an anti-Keystone rally in Minneapolis last September that was designed to put pressure on the Administration to oppose the pipeline.

National foundations have played a generous role in financing Minnesota non-profits that seek to influence Minnesota policy makers, media and public opinion. Their well-financed efforts were the subject of a recent FFM series of investigative reports titled Trust Fund Environmentalism. The series documented how the influx of $48 million of special interest “engaged philanthropy” funding to more than 40 Minnesota green advocacy groups since 2003 has helped pay the way for an effort to racially rewrite Minnesota environmental and energy policy. Fresh Energy was the biggest recipient of foundation grants, receiving some $9.4 million."

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

The Relevance of Stenberg: Will He Be Nebraska's Version of Gingrich?

We are beginning to wonder what the impact of Don Stenberg's 'slash and burn' campaign against Jon Bruning will be?   Not necessarily against Bruning but rather against Stenberg.

Until recently, Stenberg has been seen as a pillar of the Nebraska Republican Party.   He has run races in a generally positive, if inept, manner and he has always been the guy who stood on the podium with the ultimate nominee (in races he has lost) in support of the winner.   He's been the state's example of what a conservative stands for.

Yes, there are the constant complaints against Don.  That the only time you ever see him is when he is asking you for money.   That other than that you can't expect to hear from him once he is elected--until he's running again and wants more of your money.   And most candidates for other offices would agree that Don isn't particularly generous to their calls for financial help.

Yet, Stenberg has had a pretty good image with the party.   If he's not picked as the next Republican nominee to run for the senate---against Cosmic Bob, Don will go back to his treasurer's office (in Nebraska) unlike Kerrey (who will go back to New York City) until the next election whether that be for treasurer or governor or whatever.

But the real question here is how relevant will Stenberg be after this election?   After all the shots against Bruning, will Don be able to be his magnanimous former self and quickly endorse Bruning?   Will Bruning even want Don around him?   And once elected, does anyone think that Bruning will even answer Don's calls or lend any new found political financial largess to Stenberg's limited future?


Like Newt Gingrich, this is probably Don's last hurrah.   Both look like frumpy old men from another generation.  Both seem better at whining then at telling folks why they are the real conservative that voters should nominate.  We hope that Don hasn't burned so many bridges that he simply becomes irrelevant.

SORRY, BUT SOMEONE NEEDED TO SAY IT.....

Public Policy Polling: "Jon Bruning's chances of being Nebraska's next Senator are looking pretty darn good."

There has been a lot of commentary on the Public Policy Polling organization's latest poll and several other local blogs have covered.  Rather than give our interpretation of it we thought we'd just pass along what they had to say which pretty much puts the current U.S. Senate race in perspective:

Bruning strong favorite in NE-Senate

"PPP's newest Nebraska Senate poll finds that Democrats are in a much worse position with Bob Kerrey as their candidate than they would have been with Ben Nelson, and that Jon Bruning is now a strong favorite in both the primary and general elections.

Kerrey's campaign rollout has not been a success. In October his favorability rating in the state was a +5 spread at 39/34. Since then it's dropped 20 points on the margin to -15 at 36/51. Kerrey's stayed steady with Democrats but has seen large drops with independents (from 47/24 to 36/38) and with Republicans (from 23/47 to 16/74).

Kerrey trails the top 3 Republican contenders by double digits. He's down 17 to Jon Bruning at 54-37, 14 to Don Stenberg at 52-38, and 10 to Deb Fischer at 48-38. In PPP's last poll before he announced his retirement Ben Nelson trailed Bruning by only 4, Stenberg by 3, and actually led Fischer by 2. This does not appear to be one of those instances where a retirement left the party better off.

There are two things a Democrat has to be able to do to win in Nebraska: peel off a lot of Republican votes and win independents by a wide margin. Zeroing in on the match up with Bruning, Kerrey is doing neither of those things. He's actually losing 18% of the Democratic vote to Bruning, more than the 12% of the Republican vote that he's winning over. And he trails 44-42 with independents as well.
 
Bruning is increasingly looking like an overwhelming favorite in the Republican primary. He's polling at 46% to 18% for Don Stenberg, 12% for Deb Fischer, and 4% or less for a trio of fringe candidates. Only 18% of voters are still undecided.

Compared to PPP's last poll of the primary Bruning's up 9 points from 37% to 46%. The other candidates are treading water. Stenberg's only seen a two point bump from 16% to 18%, and Fischer's support has dropped by a couple points from 14% to 12%.

There had been some thought that Bruning could struggle with voters on the right, but our numbers don't really back that up. He has a 25 point advantage with Tea Party voters at 48-23, and leads by 23 with those identifying themselves as 'very conservative' at 48-25.

Jon Bruning's chances of being Nebraska's next Senator are looking pretty darn good."

Q1
Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion
of Jon Bruning?
Favorable
........................................................ 39%
Unfavorable
.................................................... 35%
Not sure
.......................................................... 26%
Q2
Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion
of Deb Fischer?
Favorable
........................................................ 19%
Unfavorable
.................................................... 21%
Not sure .......................................................... 60%

Q3
Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion

of Bob Kerrey?

Favorable
........................................................ 36%

Unfavorable
.................................................... 51%

Not sure
.......................................................... 14%

Q4
Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion

of Don Stenberg?

Favorable
........................................................ 36%

Unfavorable
.................................................... 31%

Not sure .......................................................... 33%
Q5
If the candidates for US Senate this fall were

Republican Jon Bruning and Democrat Bob

Kerrey, who would you vote for?

Jon Bruning
..................................................... 54%

Bob Kerrey
...................................................... 37%

Undecided
....................................................... 9%

Q6
If the candidates for US Senate this fall were

Republican Deb Fischer and Democrat Bob

Kerrey, who would you vote for?

Deb Fischer
.................................................... 48%

Bob Kerrey
...................................................... 38%

Undecided....................................................... 14%
Q7
If the candidates for US Senate this fall were

Republican Don Stenberg and Democrat Bob

Kerrey, who would you vote for?

Don Stenberg
.................................................. 52%

Bob Kerrey
...................................................... 38%

Undecided
....................................................... 10%

Q8
Would you describe yourself as very liberal,

somewhat liberal, moderate, somewhat

conservative, or very conservative?

Very liberal
...................................................... 6%

Somewhat liberal
............................................ 13%

Moderate
......................................................... 31%

Somewhat conservative.................................. 29%

Q9
If you are a woman, press 1. If a man, press 2.

Woman
........................................................... 53%

Man
................................................................. 47%

Q10
If you are a Democrat, press 1. If a Republican,

press 2. If you are an independent or identify

with another party, press 3.

Democrat
........................................................ 34%

Republican
...................................................... 52%

Independent/Other
.......................................... 15%

Q11
If you are white, press 1. If other, press 2.

White
.............................................................. 94%

Other............................................................... 6%

Q12
If you are 18 to 29 years old, press 1. If 30 to

45, press 2. If 46 to 65, press 3. If you are

older than 65, press 4.

18 to 29
........................................................... 9%

30 to 45
........................................................... 28%

46 to 65
........................................................... 39%

Older than 65.................................................. 24%

March 22-25, 2012

survey of 1,028 Nebraska voters

3020 Highwoods Blvd.

Raleigh, NC 27604

information@publicpolicypolling.com / 888 621-
March 22-25, 2012
survey of 1,028 Nebraska voters
3020 Highwoods Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27604
information@publicpolicypolling.com / 888 621-6988