What’s the matter with Kansas?

posted at 10:01 am on August 27, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

Republicans have reason to hope for a wave election in 2014, with Barack Obama’s approval ratings sinking to a six-year floor and Democrats defending several red-state Senate seats. That wave hasn’t washed ashore in Kansas, which one would normally expect to be reliably Republican in the current environment. Republicans even have incumbents running for both the gubernatorial and Senate seats, which should make it an easy hold. According to a new Survey USA poll, though, it looks like both Republican incumbents are in trouble:

Despite primary wins 3 weeks ago for both top-ticket incumbent Kansas Republicans – Governor Sam Brownback and U.S. Senator Pat Roberts – and despite Kansas being a reliably Red State, both Brownback and Roberts face tough re-election fights for the 11/04/14 general election, according to the latest exclusive KSN-TV poll, conducted by SurveyUSA.

In the contest for Governor, the Republican ticket of Brownback and Jeff Colyer continue to trail the Democratic ticket of Paul Davis and Jill Docking, consistent with 2 previous KSN polls conducted before the 08/05/14 primary. Today, it’s Davis 48%, Brownback 40%. Brownback holds 70% of the Republican base, compared to Davis, who holds 91% of the Democratic base. Independents break 4:3 Democratic, a troubling sign in a state such as Kansas, where Republicans often count on right-leaning independents to cushion their victory margins. More troubling, moderates break 7:2 against the incumbent, an unusually large margin in any state, in any contested race. Democrat Davis leads in all 3 regions of the state: by 10 points in greater Wichita, by 8 points in greater Kansas City KS, and by 4 points in Greater Topeka. Among men, where Red State Republican incumbents often lead by 10, 15 or 20 points, Brownback trails by 1. Brownback trails in every age group. SurveyUSA’s most recent KSN poll, on 07/22/14, also showed Davis 8 atop Brownback. A 06/23/14 KSN poll showed Davis 6 atop Brownback.

Voters split on which issue is most important in the Governor’s contest: those who say “tax rates” are most important break by 26 points for Brownback. Those who say “education” is most important break by 43 points for Davis.

This doesn’t look like an outlier, either. The RCP poll average for this summer has Brownback down by almost 3 points, within the MOE, but that’s before the Survey USA poll gets added to the mix. Three of the four polls in the current average have Davis up by five or more points; the only reason that the RCP average is as close as it is comes from an outlier CBS/NYT/YouGov poll that put Brownback up 12, 52/40. Davis wins every age demo, every income demo, and has a ten-point lead among independents. An incumbent stuck at 40% in a three-way race is only a little bit less disastrous than being at 40% in a two-way race.

It’s only looking better in the Senate race because no one gets to 40% in a four-way race:

In the contest for United States Senator, Independent Greg Orman continues to make life difficult for both 3-term Republican Roberts and his Democratic challenger. Today, it’s Roberts 37%, Democrat Chad Taylor 32%, Orman at 20%, and Libertarian Randall Batson at 4%. These results are largely consistent with SurveyUSA’s most recent KSN poll, conducted before the 08/05/14 primary, which also showed Roberts 5 points atop Taylor. In its 3 looks at the 11/04/14 general election, SurveyUSA had Orman at 7% on 06/14/14, at 14% on 07/22/14, and at 20% today. Orman siphons votes across the board. He gets 20% of conservatives, 24% of moderates and 17% of liberals. Roberts holds just 62% of the Republican base. Taylor holds 74% of the Democratic base. 38% of independents, a plurality, vote for Orman, who, among Independents beats both Roberts and Taylor. Some comfort for Roberts: he leads in all 3 regions of the state, though he has less than 40% support in every Kansas corner. Roberts breaks 40% among those with a high-school education, but fails to break 40% among the more educated. Roberts fails to break 40% among any income group.

The independent vote is handicapping Roberts in a big way. It’s difficult to see how Milton Wolf would have done appreciably worse in this case, and he might have held the Republican base together better. Roberts does lead the RCP average by eight points, and was up 43/39 in the PPP poll taken at mid-month, but that’s not a big advantage this far from the election for an incumbent.  Bear in mind that the D/R/I in this poll is 32/46/18, so even with a 14-point advantage in the sample, neither Republican does particularly well.

The GOP may have a big night at the polls, but Kansas may turn into an unpleasant surprise — and it might cost them a Senate seat to Democrats they can’t afford to lose, if Orman continues to drag away Republicans from Roberts.

 


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Also in case anyone in the gop campaign bus is reading-heres a clue, we are not reliably red, get off yourass and get a ground game going here I see nothing encouraging anyone to vote for republicans in the entire state-get on the ball now!

canditaylor68 on August 27, 2014 at 12:03 PM

As a Kansas who lives in Wichita, is a huge defender of the Koch brothers, and will never again vote democrat. That said, I am talking to everyone I know and am trying to convince them to abandon the republican party and vote libertarian.

So many in Kansas bought into the notion the republican would reduce government spending and shrink the size of government, but the GOP is as enamored with government power as any democrat.

And as much as the DNC really doesn’t want poverty and racism to end, because they’ll lose the ability to campaign on those issues, the GOP really doesn’t want to reign in government spending and shrink the size of government lest they lose that issue to campaign on.

Kevin Burnett on August 27, 2014 at 12:03 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-kansas-gov-brownbacks-reelection-race-is-case-study-in-republican-party-shift/2014/07/30/3192d86c-1420-11e4-8936-26932bcfd6ed_story.html

Read it and weep, dumdums.
everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 11:35 AM

Do you’re quoting the Washington Compost? Why don’t you add HuffiingtonPuffington Post and Mother Jones for the trifecta ? LOL

Brock Robamney on August 27, 2014 at 12:08 PM

This should be happening to Thad Cochran’s senate seat in Mississippi. A strong 3rd party candidate or possibly most of the McDaniel supporters sitting it out would do the job and send a message on how the GOP left Conservatives and why we should punish them and possibly leave them for good.

What exactly is going to happen overall if the GOP takes control of the senate? Is Obamacare going to be repealed? Is Obamacare going to be defunded? Is Eric Holder going to be impeached/removed? Will the IRS be held to account for targeting Conservatives? Will the military be stronger somehow? Will the border be sealed and all illegals deported? NOOOO! None of that! Mitch McConnell will be senate majority leader and the liberals in the Republican party will control yet another piece of the pie only to use it for liberal Republican things like the gang of 8′s bi-partisan amnesty bill. It really means nothing positive except for Democrats and the state-run media can report on how bad things are now that the GOP controls the house and senate stopping Obama from doing anything. When you don’t have a clear difference between parties in the leadership, why would you expect MUSH to deliver something good when they are so like minded with the true enemies of Capitalism?

What’s the bright side of the Dems holding the senate? It’s ghoulish, but you’ll probably get to see Harry Reid croak on C-SPAN in the middle of a tirade against the Koch brothers on the senate floor.

CommieJuice on August 27, 2014 at 12:24 PM

We’ll see how polls go. The Senate result could just be voters supporting an Independent without being aware of the guy’s stand on the issues.

Mister Mets on August 27, 2014 at 12:25 PM

CommieJuice on August 27, 2014 at 12:24 PM

The clear answer down in Mississippi is a McDaniel write-in campaign.

Meople on August 27, 2014 at 12:31 PM

Brownback’s trouble is that the moderate GOPe views him as too conservative and his budget trimming ticked off teachers and every over-entitled state entity. As others have mentioned, the state education budget was trimmed to wailing and rending of garments by any and all school districts. That would have been forgotten, however the conservative state legislature pushed through a bill ending teacher tenure – oversimplification, but that’s the talking point. That’s when the carping really began against Brownback. His internal polling this week has him 2 points ahead, however.

I work for a community college and the majority of my colleagues and adjuncts would tell you how bad Brownback is for education. However, he sponsored technical education legislation/incentives for high school students that have poured millions into community college coffers(the state is paying tuition for tech ed courses). Funny that never is mentioned.

kansaskaye on August 27, 2014 at 12:34 PM

Wow your ignorance is astounding. If the GOP still gave a damn about lower taxes and smaller government, there wouldn’t BE a TEA Party in the first place. The fact that there is, SHOULD tell you all you need to know about the current ideological bent of the GOP.

Meople on August 27, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Exactly. The current Republican Party is less conservative than the DEMOCRATS were 30 years ago.

ConstantineXI on August 27, 2014 at 12:36 PM

I don’t understand why some people on our side have a problem with your reasoning. Voting for McConnell, or Roberts in Kansas, or any of the other RINOs is, at best, a short-term fix. Sure, it may — may — give the GOP control of the Senate, but at what cost? Will they actually do anything to stop Obama? I haven’t seen anything indicating that they would/will.

Aizen on August 27, 2014 at 11:03 AM

I just don’t get this scorched earth mindset. Yeah, the RINO’s are evil little twinks, but really? You long for the Dems to completely take control so you can teach Mitch the Moron a lesson? Unbelievable in my book, and I am as conservative as they come.

Thank you questionable logic conservatives!

Ded Pecker on August 27, 2014 at 12:25 PM

wsucoug on August 27, 2014 at 12:37 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-kansas-gov-brownbacks-reelection-race-is-case-study-in-republican-party-shift/2014/07/30/3192d86c-1420-11e4-8936-26932bcfd6ed_story.html

Read it and weep, dumdums.

everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 11:35 AM

.
Well, let’s see … it’s a little difficult typing through the tears . . . . . but anyway, from the article :
.

Gail Jamison, a lifelong Republican, voted for Sam Brownback for governor in 2010 believing he would restore school funding that had been greatly reduced by the recession.

Four years later, she has joined with more than 100 prominent Republicans in publicly throwing their support behind Brownback’s Democratic opponent — because, she said, Brownback pursued a hefty tax cut for the rich that deprived schools of needed resources.

“I am shocked by what’s happened,” said Jamison, president of the Board of Education in this Wichita suburb. “I find it personally a very extreme stance.”

Zachary A. Goldfarb @washingtonpost.com on July 30, 2014

.
Gail, … if you or any of your acquaintances are reading this, it truly seems like you’re a RINO . . . . . but I’ve been wrong before, and will stand corrected if somehow, someone representing you can communicate with this blog, and show otherwise.
.

His (Governor Sam Brownback’s) troubles also provide a case study of what can happen when single-party control — now the norm in most states — combines with the sharp rightward shift of the Republican Party.

Zachary A. Goldfarb @washingtonpost.com on July 30, 2014

.
More ’Barbra Streisand’ from the perpetual “tug-of-war” over the Overton Window.
.

Brownback said he has been a pragmatic conservative, nurturing the state’s wind-power industry — which has doubled in production during his term — and introducing a new approach to technical training in high schools.

Zachary A. Goldfarb @washingtonpost.com on July 30, 2014

.
Hmmm … that sounds awfully ‘moderate/RINOish’ to me.
.

Brownback’s policies have deepened a split within the Kansas GOP. Moderate Republicans complain that the governor has pushed excessively right-wing policies, while some conservatives blame the state’s problems on not cutting spending enough.

Zachary A. Goldfarb @washingtonpost.com on July 30, 2014

.
Yep … same old classic argument :

Liberal : It’s your fault, because of those “draconian” tax cuts !

Conservative : No, it’s your fault for spending too much money.

Liberal : “Draconian” tax cuts !

Conservative : Spending too much money !

Liberal : “Draconian” tax cuts !

Conservative : Spending too much money !

Liberal : “Draconian” tax cuts !

Conservative : Spending too much money !
.
( repeat until the end of time . . . . . )
.
.
Conclusion : … Zachary A. Goldfarb posts comments at Hotair.com under the user-name “everdiso.”

listens2glenn on August 27, 2014 at 12:42 PM

Leftist thugs, you’re needed here.

Schadenfreude on August 27, 2014 at 12:44 PM

Austerity government doesn’t work. Or at the least, people don’t want it.

libfreeordie on August 27, 2014 at 10:13 AM

Of course people don’t want it, dummy. Nobody wants their ice cream taken away. But at a certain point, there is no choice.

Republicans make cutbacks that are unpopular in order to preserve what little fiscal health is left. Dems just keep spending the OPM on vote-buying schemes, knowing that they can always blame Republicans when the OPM runs out.

Missy on August 27, 2014 at 12:45 PM

Yeah, europe took republicans’ austerity advice.

Now that they’re a proven disaster, they’re finally about to engage jn some real stimlus. Shame that they’ve wasted 6yrs and trillions of dollars in productivity, and threatened the future of their economies, by engaging in this conservative fiscal fantasy.

Its no surprise that its been a disaster in kansas as well.

It doesn’t work. Period. You cannot cut your way to productivity.

everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM

Seems here would be someone I could vote for…

astonerii on August 27, 2014 at 12:54 PM

“The Tea Party is to blame!!”

-KingGoldKarlRoveHaleyBarberTerryAnnonline

portlandon on August 27, 2014 at 12:55 PM

It doesn’t work. Period. You cannot cut your way to productivity.

everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM

When you run out of money, there is no choice. What don’t you get about that?

The European Ponzi scheme is coming to an end. The left’s eternal denial can’t and won’t change the reality. It is just a question of time.

Missy on August 27, 2014 at 12:56 PM

The Moderately Moderate “I’m Severely Conservative” GOP Hierarchy are having problems?

Who could have seen this coming?

portlandon on August 27, 2014 at 12:58 PM

Brownback might lose.

But Kansas hasn’t had a Dem Senator since before WWII. Not likely that they’ll end up with one after a Republican wave year, but I suppose you never know.

Try as I might, I don’t seem to be able to get particularly worried at the moment.

Missy on August 27, 2014 at 12:59 PM

everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM

Yeah, how’s Communism worked out thus far…historically?

You cannot cut TAX your way to productivity.

everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM

FIFY

Meople on August 27, 2014 at 1:00 PM

It doesn’t work. Period. You cannot cut your way to productivity.

everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM

You cannot deficit spend yourself to prosperity. You cannot welfare state yourself to prosperity. The government does not produce wealth. It expends wealth. To varying degrees of waste and loss. But it does not create wealth of any kind.

astonerii on August 27, 2014 at 1:01 PM

I just don’t get this scorched earth mindset. Yeah, the RINO’s are evil little twinks, but really? You long for the Dems to completely take control so you can teach Mitch the Moron a lesson? Unbelievable in my book, and I am as conservative as they come.

wsucoug on August 27, 2014 at 12:37 PM

Well, the leftist media will always find some way to shift the blame towards conservatives, Republicans, or just anyone who isn’t Obama and/or the currently-in-power Democrats.

Therefore, if you give control of the Senate to McConnell, who is utterly useless when it comes to enacting conservative ideas, you’re left with the same low-information perception as in the last two years ever since the GOP took control of the House: the mainstream media will continue to lay the blame at the feet of Congress, but only the Republicans.

Never mind Dingy Harry acting like an authoritarian with regard to his handling of the Senate, that only counts if the Senate leader is a Republican and there’s a Republican president.

I guess what some conservatives are saying is this: they’d rather have leftist, fascist Democrats take over and be forced to take responsibility once and for all instead of blaming “obstructionists,” whereas the major alternative is handing car keys to the RINOs in the GOP which is basically Democrat-lite.

The former is a “kill two birds with one stone” approach, as it also punishes the establishment and lets them know that conservative grassroots voters are fed up with being railroaded, steamrolled, taken for granted, etc.

Aizen on August 27, 2014 at 1:18 PM

I was really hoping for Mississippi to be where Republicans learned a lesson.

Cindy Munford on August 27, 2014 at 1:28 PM

I was really hoping for Mississippi to be where Republicans learned a lesson.

/sarc

Cindy Munford on August 27, 2014 at 1:28 PM

Fixed, LOL

UnstChem on August 27, 2014 at 1:32 PM

You think maybe you guys would start to realize that the historically low approval rating for this republican congress is probably more relevant than the typical ratings of the guy not running in an election.

everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 11:19 AM

Congress’ historically low approval rating is because everyone hates Harry Reid and conservatives don’t like that the House hasn’t blocked Obama’s communism, Dumb Dumb.

corkie on August 27, 2014 at 1:38 PM

Piss off the TEA party base, and this is what you get.

GOPe candidates can go to hell.

captnjoe on August 27, 2014 at 1:39 PM

Aizen on August 27, 2014 at 1:18 PM

If your vote is freely given, it is worth exactly what it costs. Do not expect anything in return for the vote. That is what it is about.

For my vote to have value, then it has to come with strings. Just like the cash in my wallet. The cash in my wallet has no value to me if I just simply allow anyone and everyone to come on over, reach on in and take what ever they want.

Since the party has come to consider our votes as already owned, they do not offer anything in return for those votes. Instead, they go off chasing ephemeral votes such as the hispanics and the welfare votes.

astonerii on August 27, 2014 at 1:39 PM

Yeah, europe took republicans’ austerity advice.

everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM

Fiscal conservative have never advocated austerity in isolation. A socialist country that does nothing other than cut some spending is still going to fail. You can’t build a house out of straw and then blame the fall on the fact that a steel door was used.

corkie on August 27, 2014 at 1:41 PM

Piss off the TEA party base, and this is what you get.

GOPe candidates can go to hell.

captnjoe on August 27, 2014 at 1:39 PM

I do not think these guys are on the wrong side of the Tea party. Can you provide me evidence? That was my first thought as well, so I went to look for positions and they seem pretty good. I thought maybe they expanded Obamacare. Nope. Medicaid? Nope. Immigration? No evidence against brownback.

astonerii on August 27, 2014 at 1:43 PM

Yeah, europe took republicans’ austerity advice.

everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM

Actually, it did not. Spending went up every single quarter. Next.

astonerii on August 27, 2014 at 1:44 PM

It doesn’t work. Period. You cannot cut your way to productivity.

everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM

You don’t know anything about economics. These countries have flawed fiscal and regulatory systems that take them to the edge of bankruptcy. Emergency spending cuts don’t fix all the problems with their systems. It’s like using a tiny water hose to put out a huge house fire. Don’t try claiming that the water is causing the problem.

corkie on August 27, 2014 at 1:45 PM

So, if taxes are a major important issue in Kansas the thing to do is vote for the moron that will raise them?

I thought Kansas wasn’t chock full of stupid liberals….guess I was wrong.

Diluculo on August 27, 2014 at 1:46 PM

Yeah, europe took republicans’ austerity advice.

everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM

The illiterate simpletons don’t understand this -both on the right and the left- but the US has done MORE austerity than Europe. And it’s working just fine – not better because of all the rigidities Democrats and Bush Republicans have introduced.

Europe, with less austerity (and more red tape), is doing worse.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 1:49 PM

People (and I use that term really loosely) like everdiso remind me of a frog in a full kitchen sink with the garbage disposal running. The water swirling into the disposal, taking the frog down ever so slowly in circles while the frog panics, flailing it’s feet wildly, demanding higher taxes and higher spending to make that water rise again.

Then there’s that satisfying crunch and rending sound after the stupid, brainless liberal frog pops through the drain into the disposal where it meets the culmination of it’s retarded liberal philosophy.

Then it’s off to the septic tank where it belongs.

Diluculo on August 27, 2014 at 1:51 PM

As a Kansas who lives in Wichita, is a huge defender of the Koch brothers, and will never again vote democrat. That said, I am talking to everyone I know and am trying to convince them to abandon the republican party and vote libertarian.

A libertarian vote is the same as a Democrat vote. You may as well vote for a Democrat.

cajunpatriot on August 27, 2014 at 1:53 PM

A libertarian vote is the same as a Democrat vote. You may as well vote for a Democrat.

cajunpatriot on August 27, 2014 at 1:53 PM

You can’t count?

astonerii on August 27, 2014 at 2:05 PM

Gov walker now down 2 to Mary Burke. Told ya.

mypalfish on August 27, 2014 at 2:07 PM

Gov walker now down 2 to Mary Burke. Told ya.

mypalfish on August 27, 2014 at 2:07 PM

Not real concerned with him. He is looking for the white house and is a pro amnesty kind of guy. We can live without him in the 2016 cycle.

astonerii on August 27, 2014 at 2:12 PM

Kansas, which one would normally expect to be reliably Republican in the current environment

Hm, maybe, given the caveat. But I can’t forget who gave us Katherine Sebelius.

IrishEyes on August 27, 2014 at 2:15 PM

It doesn’t work. Period. You cannot cut your way to productivity.

everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM

.
Government … is … NOT … supposed … to … “PRODUCE.”

That’s the private-sector’s responsibility.

Whenever government attempts to be ‘more productive’, it ALWAYS adds up to more “bondage” and less “freedom” for the private citizens.

Government is supposed to be nearly ‘invisible.’

listens2glenn on August 27, 2014 at 2:30 PM

As a Kansas who lives in Wichita, is a huge defender of the Koch brothers, and will never again vote democrat. That said, I am talking to everyone I know and am trying to convince them to abandon the republican party and vote libertarian.

So many in Kansas bought into the notion the republican would reduce government spending and shrink the size of government, but the GOP is as enamored with government power as any democrat.

And as much as the DNC really doesn’t want poverty and racism to end, because they’ll lose the ability to campaign on those issues, the GOP really doesn’t want to reign in government spending and shrink the size of government lest they lose that issue to campaign on.

Kevin Burnett on August 27, 2014 at 12:03 PM

That is your right, however, you are helping the Democrat party and I’d much rather have a Republican in office than a Dem who is hell bent in destroying our country. Republicans are not.

Redford on August 27, 2014 at 2:30 PM

Republicans are not.

Redford on August 27, 2014 at 2:30 PM

I beg to differ. I see them as certain in wanting to destroy our nation. Hence why they are not working on rule of law and restraining spending.

astonerii on August 27, 2014 at 2:37 PM

astonerii on August 27, 2014 at 1:39 PM

He^^^gets it. Too bad most others don’t. Pubs. don’t give a crap about earning your vote. They already have it and always will have it until you stop giving it away. Only then will they give a damn about conservatives. It doesn’t take a Muslim rocket scientist to figure it out.

they lie on August 27, 2014 at 2:37 PM

I beg to differ. I see them as certain in wanting to destroy our nation. Hence why they are not working on rule of law and restraining spending.

astonerii on August 27, 2014 at 2:37 PM

You’re economically illiterate and dumb as rocks: the US have done more austerity than Europe since the GOP took over the House, with the CAPB as a % of p. GDP falling from -6.9% in 2010 to -1.4% this year. More? Maybe if they had control of the Senate and White House too. But know-nothings like you have no understanding on how the legislative process works so it’s not worth going there.

Of course, if you’ve never studied economics and have no clue on how to properly measure the fiscal stance of the government, you’re reduced to hurl clichés and platitudes.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 2:53 PM

As a native Kansas son I have to say the GOP & Roberts deserve to lose the Senate race if they can’t get the lazy old fool out of the damnable DC beltway and represent Kansas. Actions (and inactions) have consequences and they have only themselves to blame; if only we could hold a vote to get rid of both parties.

russedav on August 27, 2014 at 2:56 PM

joana on August 27, 2014 at 2:53 PM

joana, you must concede that the House has cut less real spending than they promised before November 2010. They’ve caved to media pressures.

corkie on August 27, 2014 at 3:16 PM

Yeah, europe took republicans’ austerity advice.

everditso on August 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM

The illiterate simpletons don’t understand this -both on the right and the left- but the US has done MORE austerity than Europe. And it’s working just fine – not better because of all the rigidities Democrats and Bush Republicans have introduced.

Europe, with less austerity (and more red tape), is doing worse.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 1:49 PM

The Euros also have a different definition of “austerity” than we do. To them it means raising taxes.

slickwillie2001 on August 27, 2014 at 3:21 PM

It doesn’t work. Period. You cannot cut your way to productivity.

everditso on August 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM

How is P.M. Harper’s austerity program going up there? Canada seems to be in better financial shape than both the USA and Europe.

slickwillie2001 on August 27, 2014 at 3:22 PM

When Pat Roberts joined congress in 1981, federal outlays were $678 B. In 2013, they were $3,454 B. Hasn’t Pat Roberts done enough damage?

besser tot als rot on August 27, 2014 at 3:23 PM

Why should anyone vote Republican anymore? They haven’t shown they’re any better than the Democrats. Besides, at least the Dems promise free stuff and their thinly-veiled Marxist messaging appeals to the holy rollers in the Bible belt. Of course Jesus would steal from the rich and give to the poor.

Dr. ZhivBlago on August 27, 2014 at 3:23 PM

joana, you must concede that the House has cut less real spending than they promised before November 2010. They’ve caved to media pressures.

corkie on August 27, 2014 at 3:16 PM

No, I don’t have to concede because that’s utter nonsense. What the heck is “real spending”? As opposed to what, nominal spending? Fictional spending? How much did “the House” promise to cut before 2010 and how much did they, by whatever metric you use, actually cut? And how would they cut more or less while there’s other party, that is not only opposed to cutting but wants more spending, controlling the Senate and the White House?

joana on August 27, 2014 at 3:24 PM

Brownback is an ultra-conservative Obama. He is arrogant and appoints people to positions based on ideology and not experience. His tax cuts were too aggressive and the state is in terrible financial shape. He decimated programs for the disabled and that makes for poor news coverage. A lot of people (not me) are incensed over huge cuts to education. He is a jerk. I won’t vote for Davis, but I will vote libertarian. I don’t know any conservative Republican who I am friends with that will support him. He is toast.

bopbottle on August 27, 2014 at 3:24 PM

Keeping Reince Priebus and his ship of clueless (high-paid) campaign consultants will prove to be one of the biggest mistakes the GOP has ever made.

These are the same people who promised a big turnout for Romney and completely lied about the strength of their GOTV operations. They are also looking more and more like amateurs who completely underestimate the opposition every time.

When you can’t beat Barack Obama for a second term, it’s really time to find another line of work. That includes buffoon like Karl Rove and Crossroads who continue to push the same foolishness as 2012.

But it’ll work this time. Sure.

The GOP is so far out of their depth and out of synch with party members issues it is mind boggling. When you can’t get your own party members out to vote and can’t convince independents to so the same, it’s time to take a good, long look in the mirror.

At this point, I predict the GOP will not gain the senate.

Marcus Traianus on August 27, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Yeah, europe took republicans’ austerity advice.

everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM

Saying that up is down doesn’t actually make it so.

besser tot als rot on August 27, 2014 at 3:25 PM

The Euros also have a different definition of “austerity” than we do. To them it means raising taxes.

slickwillie2001 on August 27, 2014 at 3:21 PM

From an economics perspective, austerity is fiscal contraction, increases on the delta of (T-G). It doesn’t matter how.

But yes, a large part of the European “austerity” was based on tax raises. The US have done not only more austerity, but with a much larger contribution coming from the spending side.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 3:28 PM

Of course Jesus would steal from the rich and give to the poor.

Dr. ZhivBlago on August 27, 2014 at 3:23 PM

To hear the Democrats and other statists (like Huckabee) tell it, Jesus was a essentially a highwayman. Or, at least, that he would have wanted his followers to be.

besser tot als rot on August 27, 2014 at 3:28 PM

Yeah, europe took republicans’ austerity advice.

everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM

You lied. Again.

Name one european economy that has instituted anything that could credibly be called austerity.

My god, dummy, even Greece has increased spending.

You are a filthy disgusting leftist liar. And you’re proud of it.

runawayyyy on August 27, 2014 at 3:31 PM

No, I don’t have to concede because that’s utter nonsense. What the heck is “real spending”?

joana on August 27, 2014 at 3:24 PM

Real spending is very well defined economically. Look it up.

But know-nothings like you have no understanding on how the legislative process works so it’s not worth going there.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 2:53 PM

Like … a spending bill has to pass the House to become law, perhaps?

You’re economically illiterate and dumb as rocks: the US have done more austerity than Europe since the GOP took over the House,

joana on August 27, 2014 at 2:53 PM

Federal outlays were $3,457 B in 2010 and $3,454 B in 2013, which is 99.91% of the 2010 outlays. That’s not austerity. Not to mention the fact that you wouldn’t even get that de minims cut without the assumption that 2010′s “stimulus” should be counted as part of the baseline, which it shouldn’t.

besser tot als rot on August 27, 2014 at 3:39 PM

Yeah, europe took republicans’ austerity advice.

everdiso on August 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM

I know they talked about doing so in country’s like Greece, but to the best of my knowledge, they haven’t.

Please supply a link concerning those that have.

From what I’ve seen, these countries (including Argentina) merely get refinanced somehow and even deeper in debt.

Why would you stick up for international banking concerns pilfering the wealth of various nations? Is it a Cloward-Piven thing?

Dr. ZhivBlago on August 27, 2014 at 3:52 PM

You don’t suppose dependent Farm SUBSIDIES have anything to do with this sentiment, Do You?

FlaMurph on August 27, 2014 at 3:52 PM

“countries”…dangit

Dr. ZhivBlago on August 27, 2014 at 3:53 PM

I just don’t get this scorched earth mindset. Yeah, the RINO’s are evil little twinks, but really? You long for the Dems to completely take control so you can teach Mitch the Moron a lesson? Unbelievable in my book, and I am as conservative as they come.

wsucoug on August 27, 2014 at 12:37 PM

I know it’s difficult to believe that GOPe politicians are capable of learning electoral lessons, but sometimes they do learn.

Bush 41 broke his “no new taxes” pledge, signed gun control and went on to lose what should have been an easy reelection. Since that stupidity and reelection loss, few, if any, national Republicans have run on more taxes or gun control.

RJL on August 27, 2014 at 3:58 PM

You don’t suppose dependent Farm SUBSIDIES have anything to do with this sentiment, Do You?

FlaMurph on August 27, 2014 at 3:52 PM

I don’t think so. Pat Roberts hasn’t ever voted against money for farmers.

cptacek on August 27, 2014 at 4:00 PM

You’re economically illiterate and dumb as rocks: the US have done more austerity than Europe since the GOP took over the House, with the CAPB as a % of p. GDP falling from -6.9% in 2010 to -1.4% this year. More? Maybe if they had control of the Senate and White House too. But know-nothings like you have no understanding on how the legislative process works so it’s not worth going there.

Of course, if you’ve never studied economics and have no clue on how to properly measure the fiscal stance of the government, you’re reduced to hurl clichés and platitudes.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 2:53 PM

I understand how legislation gets passed.
Spending bills come from the house of Representatives. If the House of Representatives does not authorize the spending then there is no spending. PERIOD.

As for the CAPB. Adjusted… Interesting choice. Maybe you could use hard numbers.

astonerii on August 27, 2014 at 4:15 PM

besser tot als rot on August 27, 2014 at 3:39 PM

Look, nutty, you can’t learn economics listening to talk-shows or reading blogs (not Malkin blogs at least). Try to pick up a book for a change, start by Mankiw’s manual, then go from there.

“Real spending” is spending in real terms? After the deflator? As opposed to nominal spending? The customary term isn’t that one and my questions still stand. I can wait forever because I’ll never get an answer.

Like … a spending bill has to pass the House to become law, perhaps?

Nope. Bills don’t become law by merely passing the House. As I said, ignorant simpletons who have no clue about the legislative process.

Federal outlays were $3,457 B in 2010 and $3,454 B in 2013, which is 99.91% of the 2010 outlays. That’s not austerity. Not to mention the fact that you wouldn’t even get that de minims cut without the assumption that 2010′s “stimulus” should be counted as part of the baseline, which it shouldn’t.

Again, anyone who discusses fiscal stance/austerity by looking at metrics like nominal spending is a) an economic illiterate and/or b) someone with mental problems.

The most common metric used to measure fiscal stance, by most economists, from the left and the right, is the CAPB. That’s something 99% of the economists can agree with it, regardless of their ideology. Accouting entities like G, in real or nominal terms, don’t tell you anything about a government’s fiscal stance.

Again, read a book, learn something and only after that try to form an opinion.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 4:18 PM

I understand how legislation gets passed.
Spending bills come from the house of Representatives. If the House of Representatives does not authorize the spending then there is no spending. PERIOD.

Nope. Only for short-sighted fools like yourself. If there is no spending, then Democrats get super-majorities on both chambers and spending increases like it did between 08 and 10.

As for the CAPB. Adjusted… Interesting choice. Maybe you could use hard numbers.

astonerii on August 27, 2014 at 4:15 PM

Mmmm? The CAPB is a hard number. What is it in your view? A “soft” number? What is the difference? Can you provide some sort of explanation on this?

Please enlighten us. And tell me what is the manual where I can read your fantastic macroeconomic accounting definitions?

Or is this more from the “Talk-radio School of Economics”?

joana on August 27, 2014 at 4:22 PM

Wait, you mean after a primary season where the GOP establishment used every dirty trick and corporate crony dollars to dispatch real conservatives even when Republicans overwhelmingly voted to oust tired corrupt incumbents like Thad Cochran, they are having trouble in polls?

Never would have seen that coming.

2014 will be not be a wave election. It will be another disappointing failure for the GOP. A party that is out of touch, leaderless, and run by elitist old men.

You cannot continue to alienate your voters in the name of greedily clutching onto power and expect them to be loyal….at least not on the right.

The GOP is offering nothing. They are running on “not being the Democrats” or “not being Obama”. Im done with that kind of lazy gutlessness, and it looks like im not the only one.

Expect more bad news as the calendar turns…..the GOP is nothing but party hacks and status quo legacy Republicans. The same kind of people that lead the GOP to years of irrelevant minority status and did nothing but spectate as America was turned into its quasi- socialist current self.

Yay?

alecj on August 27, 2014 at 4:29 PM

GOP has it coming.Screw with your base and expect them to still love you.Ha! Rooster’s coming home to roost!

redware on August 27, 2014 at 4:57 PM

What does obama and joana have in common?

Schadenfreude on August 27, 2014 at 5:00 PM

What does obama and joana have in common?

Schadenfreude on August 27, 2014 at 5:01 PM

There is always at least one contrary result every election. It’s a big country.

But the long term record of independents and minor party candidates is that they lose much of their support as the actual election draws near. People don’t want to waste their vote – the addled malcontents who want to “send a message” are a small minority.

Brownback needs to remind Kansas what Democrat leadership looks like: Sebelius.

I see all sorts of dire predictions for the Kansas GOP. What I don’t see is people putting money on the table against Roberts or Brownback.

“Hot air,” indeed!

Adjoran on August 27, 2014 at 5:19 PM

The clear answer down in Mississippi is a McDaniel write-in campaign.

Meople on August 27, 2014 at 12:31 PM

MS does not allow write ins. Any ballots marked for McDaniel or anyone else will not be counted.

Waste of time.

cat_owner on August 27, 2014 at 5:22 PM

No, I don’t have to concede

joana on August 27, 2014 at 3:24 PM

Too bad. You should have.

What the heck is “real spending”?

As opposed “planned spending.” As opposed to “inflation adjusted spending.” Etc. Are you being stupid on purpose?

How much did “the House” promise to cut before 2010 and how much did they, by whatever metric you use, actually cut?

Are you seriously asking this?

we will roll back government spending to pre-stimulus, pre- bailout levels, saving us at least $100 billion in the first year alone and putting us on a path to balance the budget and pay down the debt.

The clear answer is $100 billion.

actually cut?

-$200 billion

FY2010 spending = $3.6 trillion
FY2011 spending = $3.8 trillion

And how would they cut more or less while there’s other party, that is not only opposed to cutting but wants more spending, controlling the Senate and the White House?

How did they plan to do it when they made the pledge in the first place? And the White House can’t spend anything not authorized by the House. The House could have played hard ball to get these cuts, but they didn’t. The caved to media pressure. That’s what I wrote. That’s what you need to admit.

corkie on August 27, 2014 at 6:13 PM

Like … a spending bill has to pass the House to become law, perhaps?

Nope. Bills don’t become law by merely passing the House. As I said, ignorant simpletons who have no clue about the legislative process.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 4:18 PM

Read that again, genius. I say that a bill has to pass the House to become law. And you say … nope, it doesn’t become a law just by passing the House? Your understanding of basic logic is horrifying. And you call others “ignorant simpletons?” Hilarious.

besser tot als rot on August 27, 2014 at 6:16 PM

If there is no spending, then Democrats get super-majorities on both chambers and spending increases like it did between 08 and 10.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 4:22 PM

Then why was the promise made? What good would it do to have another chamber? They didn’t win because of spending cuts, they won because of Iraq. They can still cut spending and let the chips fall where they may – this should be tried.

corkie on August 27, 2014 at 6:16 PM

joana,

It’s quite obvious that you’re a Republican congressional staffer (your IP address probably equates to the Hill) that’s tired of the criticism. While some criticism is unfair, some of it isn’t. You’d be much better off accepting some blame and trying to politely educate. You’re not smart enough to be calling us simpletons.

corkie on August 27, 2014 at 6:19 PM

I will not be voting for another Republican . I voted for the bastards in every election for 40 yrs. They can KMA. Forty yrs. of votes wasted on a country club chamber of commerce crony capitalist elitists. Until every single one is replaced, they will never change. Sometimes if you want to really rebuild something , you just have to tear the whole damn thing down, haul it off, and start from scratch with new material. We have reached that point with Pubs. They are useless as an opposition party.

they lie on August 27, 2014 at 6:35 PM

The most common metric used to measure fiscal stance, by most economists, from the left and the right, is the CAPB. That’s something 99% of the economists can agree with it, regardless of their ideology. Accouting entities like G, in real or nominal terms, don’t tell you anything about a government’s fiscal stance.

Again, read a book, learn something and only after that try to form an opinion.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 4:18 PM

Then the GPO pledge should have utilized CAPB, but it didn’t. Anyone that manages a corporate or personal budget knows that actual dollar (yes, I wrote “actual dollar” – deal with it) amounts matter where the rubber is hitting the road. Sure, one’s ability to make adjustments to deficits, etc. can be characterized in all sorts of ways using all sorts of macroeconomic variables that the individual or entity wasn’t able to control. But the bottom line (yes, I wrote “bottom line”) is that performance despite macroeconomic conditions are what matter in the real world (outside the fantasy world of politicians and economists).

corkie on August 27, 2014 at 6:38 PM

The most common metric used to measure fiscal stance, by most economists, from the left and the right, is the CAPB. That’s something 99% of the economists can agree with it, regardless of their ideology. Accouting entities like G, in real or nominal terms, don’t tell you anything about a government’s fiscal stance.

Again, read a book, learn something and only after that try to form an opinion.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 4:18 PM

Krugman does anyway. The IMF on the other hand says that “the change in the CAPB-to-GDP ratio is an unreliable guide regarding the presence of fiscal consolidation.” Anyone can agree that more is more and less is less. If you want to say more is less, you have to obfuscate with a different metric. Outlays are real numbers. The CAPB incorporates an estimated effect of business cycle fluctuations. How is that more objective?

besser tot als rot on August 27, 2014 at 6:43 PM


What the heck is “real spending”?

As opposed “planned spending.” As opposed to “inflation adjusted spending.” Etc. Are you being stupid on purpose?

Just to try to explain to you how ignorant you are, real spending as in spending in real terms, is exactly “inflation adjusted spending”.

How did they plan to do it when they made the pledge in the first place? And the White House can’t spend anything not authorized by the House. The House could have played hard ball to get these cuts, but they didn’t. The caved to media pressure. That’s what I wrote. That’s what you need to admit.

corkie on August 27, 2014 at 6:13 PM

I think it’s because they make pledges to the normal voter (who understands that if they don’t even control the entire legislative branch, they’ll have to compromise) and not to low-info crazies who don’t understand how the legislative process works.

joana,

It’s quite obvious that you’re a Republican congressional staffer (your IP address probably equates to the Hill) that’s tired of the criticism. While some criticism is unfair, some of it isn’t. You’d be much better off accepting some blame and trying to politely educate. You’re not smart enough to be calling us simpletons.

corkie on August 27, 2014 at 6:19 PM

Obviously. Because congressional staffers would lose time in nonsense like this. Paranoia is one of the first symptoms of dementia. I think in your case the issue goes beyond ignorance and is one of mental health.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 9:28 PM

Krugman does anyway. The IMF on the other hand says that “the change in the CAPB-to-GDP ratio is an unreliable guide regarding the presence of fiscal consolidation.” Anyone can agree that more is more and less is less. If you want to say more is less, you have to obfuscate with a different metric. Outlays are real numbers. The CAPB incorporates an estimated effect of business cycle fluctuations. How is that more objective?

besser tot als rot on August 27, 2014 at 6:43 PM

Krugman does as does everyone else worth their salt, including the IMF in their Fiscal Reports.

Of course, you’re so dumb and illiterate that you claim the IMF says that because you read it on a paper that in the first freaking page has this warning written in bold:


This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the IMF.

Could your read it now, nutty?

This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the IMF.

I’ll leave it twice just in case you missed it again.

That’s a working paper from a couple of far-left “heterodox” economists proposing “narrative metrics” so that the data suddenly fits their point of view that austerity must produce recessions. If you wanna side with the paleo-Keynesians on methodology issues, be my guest, but that stuff isn’t convincing to most economists (hence why I said 99% and not 100%).

The CPAB isn’t a perfect metric but there isn’t a better one. And virtually every public accounting metric has some degree of estimation. How do you think the GDP is calculated? Well, you don’t think, you simply have no clue whatsoever.

And LOL at outlays. I’m not on undregrad school any more to debate this kind of stuff. I guess for you North Korea has a much more fiscally conservative policy than the US or Switzerland because their outlays are much smaller. And if you mean variation, government spending can increase with a contrationary fiscal policy and decrease with an expansionary fiscal policy. Happens all the time.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 9:38 PM

Then the GPO pledge should have utilized CAPB, but it didn’t.
corkie on August 27, 2014 at 6:38 PM

Gosh, you’re tiring. The House passed more than one budget that more than met their pledge. Guess what, it never made the Senate. How freaking hard is this to understand? I explained this to 12 years old just this past weekend and they understood perfectly. Why on earth can’t you?

joana on August 27, 2014 at 9:41 PM

When you hack an election like the RINOS did in Mississippi, people start not to care to car about voting for you.

You can’t go around courting the US Chamber of Commerce and ignoring the people who actually cast THE VOTES. But RINO’s don’t see it that way.

I would love to see either Boehner or McConnell get beat in November. It would have to be a Cantor Like moment for it to happen though. Nothing is going to change if they continue to lead the party.

So I am not excited about November, because Republicans aren’t going to do anything for the country, just for the US Chamber of Commerce.

Nat George on August 27, 2014 at 10:00 PM

That’s a working paper from a couple of far-left “heterodox” economists proposing “narrative metrics” so that the data suddenly fits their point of view that austerity must produce recessions. If you wanna side with the paleo-Keynesians on methodology issues, be my guest, but that stuff isn’t convincing to most economists (hence why I said 99% and not 100%).

See what happens when you base your entire argument on appeals to authority and consensus? You’re left looking like a fool arguing about arguments being dismissed because they are only in a “working paper.”

Q: What did the economist say to the climate scientist?

A: How do you get your models to be so accurate?!

And LOL at outlays. I’m not on undregrad school any more to debate this kind of stuff.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 9:38 PM

Hah! Talk of “I’m not on ungrad school any more” tells anyone all that they need to know about your ridiculous, nonsensical, ivory tower perspective. And, by the way, I’d be happy to compare credentials with you any time, bubba.

besser tot als rot on August 27, 2014 at 10:02 PM

besser tot als rot on August 27, 2014 at 10:02 PM

The IMF on the other hand says that

besser tot als rot on August 27, 2014 at 6:43 PM


This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the IMF.


This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the IMF.


This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the IMF.

And feel free to defend their view. But you haven’t done that. You’ve merely stated, falsely, that “the IMF says x” when that’s absolute false. Go to any IMF fiscal report and see what metrics they use.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 10:45 PM

I think it’s because they make pledges to the normal voter (who understands that if they don’t even control the entire legislative branch, they’ll have to compromise) and not to low-info crazies who don’t understand how the legislative process works.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 9:28 PM

They didn’t pledge to compromise. They pledged to do it because they claimed that they would have the power to do it. Guess what? They did have the power to do it. They didn’t use the power because, as you’ve mentioned, they were worried about losing in the next election.

You know I’m right about this.

I think it’s because they make pledges to the normal voter (who understands that if they don’t even control the entire legislative branch, they’ll have to compromise) and not to low-info crazies who don’t understand how the legislative process works.

Paranoia is one of the first symptoms of dementia. I think in your case the issue goes beyond ignorance and is one of mental health.

Paranoia? How am I being paranoid by calling you out? Congressional staffers like you are exactly the type of people that would comment on here after getting frustrated by conservatives that don’t appreciate all their efforts in compromising.

Keep playing games with economic definitions while ignoring obvious facts. I’ll repeat the parts that you ignored.

corkie on August 27, 2014 at 11:17 PM

joanna,

You should concede that the GOP didn’t keep it’s pledge to cut spending.

How much did “the House” promise to cut before 2010

joana on August 27, 2014 at 3:24 PM

$100 billion. Here’s the part of their pledge.

we will roll back government spending to pre-stimulus, pre- bailout levels, saving us at least $100 billion in the first year alone and putting us on a path to balance the budget and pay down the debt.

Notice that they don’t promise to compromise about it.

Notice that they didn’t base the pledge on CAPB.

and how much did they, by whatever metric you use, actually cut?

-$200 billion

That’s a NEGATIVE $200 billion.

FY2010 spending = $3.6 trillion
FY2011 spending = $3.8 trillion

And how would they cut more or less while there’s other party, that is not only opposed to cutting but wants more spending, controlling the Senate and the White House?

How did they plan to do it when they made the pledge in the first place? And the White House can’t spend anything not authorized by the House. The House could have played hard ball to get these cuts, but they didn’t. The caved to media pressure. That’s what I wrote. That’s what you need to admit.

corkie on August 27, 2014 at 11:21 PM

Gosh, you’re tiring. The House passed more than one budget that more than met their pledge. Guess what, it never made the Senate.

joana on August 27, 2014 at 9:41 PM

They didn’t promise to pass a budget that met their pledge. They promised to cut spending. They had the power to do it. They didn’t.

How freaking hard is that for you to understand?

I explained this to 12 years old just this past weekend and they understood perfectly.

The 12 year old was probably left wondering why the House simply didn’t keep the government shut down until a budget with $100 billion in cuts was finally passed by the Senate and signed by the President.

Admit that I understand the civics. Admit that you are simply too scared to fully use the power of the House because you think it will hurt the ability to win back the Senate – as if you would do anything differently if the GOP had control of the Senate.

I have no doubt that the 12 year old would be agreeing with me within 5 minutes.

corkie on August 27, 2014 at 11:28 PM

You’re economically illiterate and dumb as rocks: the US have done more austerity than Europe since the GOP took over the House,

joana on August 27, 2014 at 2:53 PM

*throws popcorn at the screen*

Who writes this drivel? LOL

Midas on August 28, 2014 at 11:57 AM

NOTHING is the matter with Kansas.

1. Brownback will win…BIG…especially after the ads exposing his left-wing rival are aired. And Brownback can point to actual accomplishments which have improved life for everybody in the state. Davis can only point to his support for Obama, government-run healthcare, and federal-government-run schools (not a winning strategy in Kansas).

2. Roberts is going to win also. Milton Wolfe was a TERRIBLE, UNELECTIBLE candidate who was a TPNO (Tea Party in Name Only) candidate with NO PUBLIC CREDENTIALS WHATSOEVER: not even a PTA meeting in his resume!!! And Wolfe didn’t vote and didn’t pay his taxes: what were his backers thinking????!!??? I support most Tea Party/Conservative candidates nationwide, but would NEVER support someone like Wolfe. I would like to see a younger conservative candidate, but in the meantime, we can’t do better than Roberts…and most Kansans…except a pocket of crazies in Lawrence…know this. The only thing the Wolfe candidacy did was to damage the “Republican” and “Conservative” brands.

The “Independent” senate candidate Orman has a completely vacuous “we can do better” message: kind of reminds you of the Obama “hope” message. And he has no plan and no actual record indicating that he knows how to make things “better” as a holder of a public office. His only TV commercial depicts a tug-of-war with no winner, and the message seems to be that “progress” is measured by the number of bills passed: a suspiciously Democrat message which will fool only a few in the short term. This fits in with the standard Kansas Democrat tactic of running as “no label” or “non partisan” candidates to hide their true allegiances.

So Roberts will also win, but not by the huge high-double-digit margin he is used to.

So NOTHING is wrong with Kansas, but plenty is wrong with the folks who are trying to foist empty suits and stealth Democrats upon us.

landlines on August 29, 2014 at 3:16 PM

How interesting. Sam Brownback and the legislature pass a bucket load of supply side tax reforms…and the state’s coffers go utterly dry. Huh. It’s almost as if this is what always happens when you give the GOP free reign over a state. Austerity government doesn’t work. Or at the least, people don’t want it.

libfreeordie on August 27, 2014 at 10:13 AM

You are obviously being duped by the left-wing Kansas City Star and their allies who are publishing phony statistics and misinformation.

The fact is that Brownback REPLENISHED the state’s coffers by actually cutting spending (which made the KC STAR et al go crazy) and instituting real tax reform. MATH REFRESHER: $380 Million (current balance) is bigger than the $500 balance which was in the state coffers when Brownback took office.

The people who “don’t want” fiscal responsibility in Kansas government (and actual reduction in state taxes for EVERYONE) are mostly Democrats who live outside our state…who have not gotten refund checks from Topeka.

landlines on August 29, 2014 at 3:31 PM

Comment pages: 1 2