Please visit Race42012′s new home, Rightosphere.com.

Such double speak comes from the mind of the woman who holds the Speaker’s chair (until at least January):

“But let me say this,” Pelosi continues, “The bill can be bipartisan, even though the votes might not be bipartisan, because they [Republicans] have made their imprint on this.”

Pelosi pointed to the fact that the final bill will, in all likelihood, not include a government-run public health insurance option, a provision vigorously opposed by congressional Republicans but supported by liberal House Democrats. Instead, Pelosi tells CNN Senior Political Correspondent Candy Crowley, Democrats have settled on insurance exchanges as a way to help contain health care costs. That compromise position, Pelosi suggested, reflects an acknowledgement of Republicans’ approach to health care reform.

So the absence of a provision the other party opposes constitutes a bi-partisan bill?  Hear that, Republicans. If you get back into power, any bill that doesn’t include a Constitutional ban on abortion or some other idea the other party doesn’t support is now bi-partisan.

In reality, the lack of a public option has nothing to do with taking the concerns of Republicans into consideration. Rather its moderates that caucus with the Democrats like Blanche Lincoln, Mark Pryor, Ben Nelson, and Joe Lieberman who needed the public option to go away. Had Democrats been able to pass a bill with the public option, they would have. This whole bill is intra-partisan, not bi-partisan.

It’s not really fair to say, of course, since I haven’t read the book, but who needs to be fair in what is intended to be just a bit of snark?

Debra Saunders does a delightfully nasty review of Barbara Boxer’s collected works — two novels that, to judge from the excerpts (and reviews on Amazon that support Saunders) must be among the worst, if not the worst ever written.

If you didn’t know that Senator Boxer (one doesn’t dare leave out her title) is a novelist, you could be forgiven, since A Time to Run, her first opus, currently ranks #865,896 at Amazon.

As Kirkus Reviews notes, it is “short on subtlety” — every conservative is bad, every liberal is good. And apparently it goes downhill from there.

The protagonist — who happens to be a liberal Senator from California — is Ellen Fischer. Sen. Fischer is chosen to lead the fight against the evil conservative nominated for Homeland Security because:

(Warning: Do Not Read This Quote If You Have Recently Eaten)

“You’re an inspirational leader who can think on her feet, and you’ve always had support from the party and so many of the American people — which, of course, has been justly earned. You’ve proven yourself to be honest, tough and energetic, with the courage of your convictions.”

Think that’s bad? It gets worse:

“You’ve personally raised the integrity bar. People are asking themselves, if they can’t trust you, then who can they trust?”

Any other nominees for worst political novel?

Las Vegas Review-Journal/Mason-Dixon Nevada Senatorial Survey

Republican Primary

• Sue Lowden 47% [26%] {25%} (23%) [14%]
• Danny Tarkanian 29% [28%] {24%} (21%) [33%]
• Sharron Angle 8% [13%] {13%} (9%) [5%]

Senatorial Election

• Sue Lowden 52% [50%] {51%} (49%) [45%]
• Harry Reid 39% [40%] {41%} (39%) [40%]

• Danny Tarkanian 51% [49%] {48%} (48%) [49%]
• Harry Reid 40% [41%] {42%} (43%) [38%]

• Sharron Angle 44% [45%]
• Harry Reid 42% [40%]

If a candidate running under the banner of the Tea Party were to enter Nevada’s U.S. Senate race, do you think you would likely vote for Harry Reid, the Democrat, the Republican candidate that wins the primary or the Tea Party candidate?

• Harry Reid 36%
• GOP nominee 32%
• Tea Party candidate 18%

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Sue Lowden: 36% [32%] {33%} (31%) / 17% [17%] {13%} (15%) {+19%}
• Danny Tarkanian: 30% [33%] {32%} (30%) / 17% [16%] {12%} (11%) {+13%}
• Sharron Angle 19% [21%] / 9% [11%] {+10%}
• Barack Obama 39% [34%] {44%} (46%) / 46% [46%] {43%} (43%) {-7%}
• Harry Reid: 33% [33%] {38%} (38%) [37%] / 51% [52%] {49%} (50%) [50%] {-18%}

Survey of 625 Nevada voters (including a subsample of 300 Republican primary voters) was conducted February 22-24, 2010. The margin of error is +/- 4 percentage points; +/- 6 percentage points among GOP primary voters. Party ID breakdown: 43% Democrat; 37% Republican; 20% Independent. Results from the poll conducted January 5-7, 2010 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted November 30 – December 2, 2009 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted October 6-8, 2009 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted August 17-18 are in square brackets.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Rasmussen Survey on Barack Obama and Leadership

How would you rate Barack Obama as a leader?

• Excellent 23% (28%) {33%}
• Good 17% (17%) {18%}
• Fair 19% [16%] (22%) {22%}
• Poor 41% [37%] (32%) {27%}

Is Barack Obama’s leadership style too confrontational, too cooperative, or is it about right?

• Too confrontational 32% [30%] (24%) {13%}
• Too cooperative 21% [21%] (26%) {32%}
• About right 35% [41%] (40%) {48%}

Survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted February 25-26, 2010. The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points. Results from the poll conducted January 30-31, 2010 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted August 7-8, 2009 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted June 3-4, 2009 are in curly brackets.

Inside the numbers:

Seventy-five percent (75%) of Democrats give the president good or excellent marks for leadership, while 68% of Republicans give him poor marks. Among unaffiliated voters, 29% say good or excellent, while 43% say poor.

Most Democrats (58%) say the president’s style is about right, and very few in his party think he’s too confrontational. Fifty percent (50%) of Republicans say he’s too confrontational, and very few think he’s too cooperative. Those not affiliated with either major party are more divided in their opinion. Thirty-four percent (34%) say he’s too confrontational; 34% say his style is about right, and 16% say too cooperative.

SurveyUSA Kansas 1st Congressional District GOP Primary

• Jim Barnett 23%
• Tim Huelskamp 16%
• Rob Wasinger 8%
• Sue Boldra 5%
• Tracey Mann 4%
• Monte Shadwick 4%
• Marck Cobb 2%
• Other 15%
• Undecided 23%

Survey of 490 likely GOP primary voters was conducted February 19-22, 2010. The margin of error is +/ – 4.5 percentage points. Party ID breakdown: 91% Republican; 9% Independent. Political ideology breakdown: 68% Conservative; 23% Moderate; 5% Liberal.

SurveyUSA Kansas 4th Congressional District GOP Primary

• Wink Hartman 36%
• Dick Kelsey 11%
• Jean Schodorf 10%
• Mike Pompeo 10%
• Jim Anderson 6%
• Steve Brunk 5%
• Other 7%
• Undecided 15%

Survey of 423 likely GOP primary voters was conducted February 22-24, 2010. The margin of error is +/ – 4.9 percentage points. Party ID breakdown: 89% Republican; 11% Independent. Political ideology breakdown: 66% Conservative; 25% Moderate; 5% Liberal.

We’ll have to see if the new low persists, but today, the President’s Rasmussen approval inched down to 43% (with 55% disapproving). In other news, his Presidential Approval Index registered at 21% today, tied for his worst on record.

I by no means consider myself anywhere near an expert on polling, but Rasmussen has appeared to act as a leading indicator for trends in Obama’s approval. The President has managed to hover around 50% in Gallup (coming in at 49/45 today), which we might expect, with the difference in polling methods between Rasmussen and Gallup. If Obama sinks down to around 40% with Rasmussen, we should see him dip to the mid-40s, probably his breakeven point for 2012, in Gallup. Time will tell.

His daughter let the cat out of the bag…

Last week his elder daughter, Ayla, admitted the family had discussed at breakfast a presidential run. A former finalist on American Idol told Fox News.

H/T: Aron Goldman

_____________________________________________

Kristofer Lorelli is the Senior Editor of Race42012 and can be contacted at kristofer.lorelli@rightOsphere.com, on Facebook and Twitter/Kris_Lorelli

Domestic

• Scalia on secession
• Startup Republic: Small Vermont secessionist group stands up to big “empire”
• Bill to Grant Native Hawaiians Sovereignty Passes House
• Race-based gov’t: the aloha land grab
• The Urge To Secede: A Rebellion In Progress
• Hawaii-Nation.org
• Hawaiians deserve to vote, not just Congress
• Speakers recall South’s secession at annual event
• Seditionist and Sovereignty Movements in the USA

-

International

• Obama government won’t endorse British Falkland claims
• Make Haiti a province of Canada
• In Yemen’s South, Growing Protest Movement Could Cause More Instability
• Muslims in ethnic-Serb Bosnia wary of ‘secession‘ vote
• South Sudan offers oil to ease secession pains for Khartoum
• Could Greece be expelled from the eurozone?
• Quebec lessons for Scot independence
• Scotland Drafts Vote on Independence for After UK Election
• Irish unity is inevitable
• Bermuda should push for a presence in the UK and European parliaments
• ‘Stop foreign language campaign posters’
• MLA Demands Separation of J&K
• Tibet, a Myth?

_____________________________________________

Kristofer Lorelli is the Senior Editor of Race42012 and can be contacted at kristofer.lorelli@rightOsphere.com, on Facebook and Twitter/Kris_Lorelli

The New Hampshire Union Leader named my little sister to the New Hampshire Top 40 Under 40. She is only 20 years old. You can see the article and her picture here (you’ll have to click through the other winners to find her, unfortunately- her name is Katie Rose). Her website can be seen here. I encourage people to visit and listen to her song samples. Then, of course, buy her CDs. Her first published CD is full of covers from other singers, including Garth Brooks, the Eagles, Jimmy Buffett and Jewel. Her second is all of her own music, including one she sang last year at a Breast Cancer walk and she will sing this year at Breast Cancer walks all over New Hampshire.

JD Hayworth is not a grassroots conservative.  He is a corrupt, DC insider who contributed to the destruction of the Republican party during the last decade.

_____________________________________________

Kristofer Lorelli is the Senior Editor of Race42012 and can be contacted at kristofer.lorelli@rightOsphere.com, on Facebook and Twitter/Kris_Lorelli

Disavow yourself of that notion right now:

Gov. Charlie Crist, a Republican U.S. Senate candidate, told The Palm Beach Post editorial board on Friday that, unlike many Republicans in Washington, he didn’t think President Obama should scrap his health care reform proposal.

But when pressed to elaborate on the parts of Obama’s plan that liked, Crist was at a loss:

“I don’t think a whole lot. Watching the discussion yesterday (Thursday) you get a chance to sort of see more of it be ferreted out. You know, I’m the kind of guy … I’m pragmatic. The stimulus is a great example. We needed the money.

Asked again if there were any parts he liked he said:

“Not at present. No.”

Not one good idea?

“There may be. There may be. You know, I’m pretty focused on Florida right now.

Crist is so obviously trying to have it both ways and tip-toe around the issue as to avoid offending anyone. He’s against scrapping the plan, yet he cannot think of a single thing he likes about it.

How very Independent of him…

According to Huffington Post:

Fannie Mae needs another $15 billion in federal assistance, bringing its total to more than $75 billion. And worse, the mortgage finance company warned its losses will continue this year.

The rescue of Fannie Mae and sister company Freddie Mac is turning out to be one of the most expensive aftereffects of the financial meltdown. The new request means the total bill for the duo will top $126 billion.

And the pain isn’t over. Fannie warned Friday that it will need even more money from the Treasury, as unemployment remains high and millions of Americans lose their homes through foreclosure.

Fannie Mae reported Friday that it lost $74.4 billion, or $13.11 a share, last year, including $2.5 billion in dividends paid to the government. That compares with a loss of $59.8 billion, or $24 a share, a year earlier.

Fannie Mae, which was seized by federal regulators in September 2008, has racked up losses totaling $136.8 billion over the past three year.

Late last year, the Obama administration pledged to cover unlimited losses through 2012 for Freddie and Fannie, lifting an earlier cap of $400 billion.

Earlier in the week, Freddie reported a loss of almost $26 billion for last year. The company didn’t request any more money, but expect to do so later this year.

Fannie and Freddie play a vital role in the mortgage market by purchasing mortgages from lenders and selling them to investors. Together the pair own or guarantee almost 31 million home loans worth about $5.5 trillion. That’s about half of all mortgages.

“Through this prolonged stress in the housing market, we are helping homeowners across the country, supporting affordable housing, and providing financing to keep the residential markets functioning,” the company’s chief executive, Mike Williams, said in a statement.

The two companies, however, loosened their lending standards for borrowers during the real estate boom and are reeling from the consequences. At the end of last year, nearly 5.4 percent of Fannie Mae’s borrowers had missed at least one payment – dramatically higher than historic levels.

During the most recent quarter, Washington-based Fannie suffered $11.9 billion in credit losses and a $5 billion write-down for low income tax credit investments.

That led to a fourth-quarter loss of $16.3 billion, or $2.87 a share, including $1.2 billion in dividends paid to the Treasury Department. It compares with a loss of $25.2 billion, or $4.47 a share, in the year-ago period.

What a joke. These are the people who ran our economy into the ground. On those grounds alone we should not help them. Beyond that, though, why should the government help them? Why are they so special? Government bailouts and favors to certain private (or, in this case, formerly private) businesses and industries is exactly what’s wrong with our government. Let Fannie Mae fail, let our economy absorb the hit…and let us come back stronger than ever, as the weak businesses go under and the strong ones stay intact.

Six Democrats and one Republican were exonerated on earmark charges from the House Ethics Committee:

The House ethics committee ruled Friday that seven lawmakers who steered hundreds of millions of dollars in largely no-bid contracts to clients of a lobbying firm had not violated any rules or laws by also collecting large campaign donations from those contractors.

Thanks to Huffington Post for the link- this is something everyone should know. The Washington Post article goes further:

Ethics watchdogs issued sharp denunciations, citing portions of the report that showed that the private companies thought their donations helped them win earmarks. The lawmakers — Reps. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.), Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), Peter J. Visclosky (D-Ind.) and C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.) — claimed vindication.

“They found no cause. They basically said we were completely exonerated,” Moran, whose former top aide once worked at the lobbying firm under investigation, said in an interview explaining his office’s earmark process. “We screened everything. It didn’t make a difference how well we knew someone.”

The late John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), who until his death earlier this month chaired the defense appropriations subcommittee, was also cleared. The other six lawmakers served on Murtha’s panel. In fiscal 2008 alone, the seven lawmakers sponsored $112 million worth of earmarks for clients of the PMA Group while accepting more than $350,000 in contributions from the firm’s lobbyists and its clients, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a watchdog group.

It’s about time for a coup, I think. Not a violent one, not an armed one. Just a coup where unprofessional politicians win office. One where the American people recognize how pathetically corrupt and immoral the system has become with the current batch of Democrats and Republicans. Many of these people don’t even pretend to be honest, and vote in ways that astonish those of us held accountable by markets, the law, honesty and general fear of retribution by our fellow man should these other limits fail.

For those who are interested, here is the list of Ethics Committee Members:

People who know about this corruption probably think the American people deserve better than this kind of “representation.” I must disagree. We don’t. Not until we drain the swamp. It’s our fault these people have the power and influence they do. Let’s get people into office who actually follow the Constitution, understand and respect its limits, hold their own accountable for corruption and breaking the Constitution. Too, these should be people who know economics and ethics, and who will push for a Constitutional amendment on term limits.

The ten Representatives on the ethics Committee- who released this report unanimously saying all accused Representatives were not guilty of ethics violations- the six living members who were found not guilty, Speaker Pelosi and Rep. Charlie Rangel would be a good place to start draining. After all, they are all up for re-election this fall, and the anti-incumbency could not be stronger. Throwing these powerful and influential Members out, along with Senators Reid (D-NV), Specter (R-PA), Shelby (R-AL) and Vitter (R-LA) might just scare those who survive the voter’s wrath this year that they better straighten up, or come 2012 and 2014 there will be a political reckoning.

There has been an 8.8 magnitude earthquake in Chile. 78 people are known to be dead. According to a meteorologist on MSNBC or CNN- I watched both this morning, so I don’t remember which station it was- it hit at 3:30 a.m. their time (1:30 Eastern), which is bad because almost everyone was indoors, where buildings are more likely to fall and kill inhabitants.

Obviously, there’s not much we can do. Pray and hope. For Americans who have friends and family in Chile, call the U.S. Bureau of Consular Affairs at 1-888-407-4747.

I think Marco is right on and gives one of the best short statements on what is wrong with ObamaCare and what we should be striving for in a health-care system:

From Other People’s Money.

A venture Capitalist (played by Danny DeVito) was to buy out and then liquidate the profitable assets of a Wire and Cable Company. The President of the Company (played by Gregory Peck) wants stockholders to oppose the takeover bid.

Gregory Pack v. Danny Devito debate creative destruction. Economics majors rejoice:

We’ve had Presidents of many personality types over the years.

Carter was a conflicted idealist. He ran as a man Americans could trust but he lacked the confidence to maintain that trust.

Reagan was an conciliatory optimist who focused on the big picture more than on the details. He ran as a man who could bring Americans around to an optimistic vision.

Clinton was a sympathetic accomodating but impulsive figure. He felt the pain of others, sought their approval and often jumped into situations without a clear plan.

Bush was a compassionate no-nonsense guy. He focused on action and didn’t appreciate nuance. He was often focused on the present to the exclusion of considering mistakes in the past or avoiding mistakes in the future.

Each President had their own advantages and disadvantages along with their personality type.

George Bush could choke on a pretzel and no big deal. Carter was attacked by a feral rabbit and his manhood was called into question.

With over a year in office we’ve have a better feel for the personality of the current President. While President Obama is inspiring and authoritative, he does show some personality weaknesses. President Obama’s personality is self-reverential and calculating to an interesting degree. What is interesting is that in natural circumstances he prefers to focus on his own feelings, thoughts and desires. He doesn’t weave stories to make a point like Clinton or Reagan.

Unlike Clinton or Reagan, Obama doesn’t do sympathy, even when that is what’s necessary. In times of disaster or suffering, Obama is authoritative and cold. He never rhetorically or emotionally descends to commiserate with Americans. I don’t believe the President could show sympathy or shift his inward focus without appearing insincere.

I believe Obama’s lack of sympathy, obsessively inward focus and difficulty connecting to those in pain is his Achilles’ heal. However as yet this weakness hasn’t been effectively attacked. John McCain certainly wasn’t the one to do it in 2008.

The question I think Republicans should consider is who can draw a contrast with Obama that draws out his personality weaknesses?

Who would upon standing next to Obama make his lack of sympathy and self-reverential nature more obvious and less tolerated?

I’m of a mind that an individual with a personality more like Bill Clinton’s would be President Obama’s toughest opponent in 2012.

EPIC-MRA Michigan Gubernatorial Survey

GOP Primary

• Pete Hoekstra 27% [25%]
• Mike Cox 21% [32%]
• Mike Bouchard 10% [16%]
• Rick Snyder 12% [3%]
• Tom George 1% [2%]
• Someone else (vol.) 3%
• Undecided 26% [22%]

Democratic Primary

• Andy Dillon 17% [8%]
• Dan Kildee 12% [6%]
• Virg Bernero 8% [6%]
• Alma Wheeler Smith 7%
• Someone else (vol.) 12%
• Undecided 45%

Gubernatorial Election

• Mike Cox 46%
• Dan Kildee 37%

• Mike Cox 43% [47%]
• Andy Dillon 36% [30%]

• Pete Hoekstra 41%
• Dan Kildee 37%

• Pete Hoekstra 41% [40%]
• Andy Dillon 37% [32%]

Job Approval

Barack Obama

• Approve 45% [41%] {48%} (48%) [57%]
• Disapprove 54% [58%] {51%} (48%) [42%]

Note: In the 2008 presidential election, Barack Obama received 57% percent of the vote in Michigan.

Jennifer Granholm

• Approve 33% [32%] {33%} (32%)
• Disapprove 66% [68%] {66%} (68%)

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Mike Bouchard 35% [33%] / 9% [10%] {+26%}
• Mike Cox 43% [41%] / 19% [20%] {+24%}
• Pete Hoekstra 29% [30%] / 11% [12%] {+18%}
• Rick Snyder 19% [7%] / 4% [2%] {+15%}
• Barack Obama 53% [50%] / 42% [44%] {+11%}
• Dan Kildee 10% [11%] / 6% [4%]{+4%}
• Andy Dillon 13% [14%] /9% [11%] {+4%}
• Tom George 6% [6%] / 2% [3%] {+4%}
• Virg Bernero 7% [7%] / 4% [4%] {+3%}
• Alma Wheeler Smith 4% / 4% {0%}
• Jennifer Granholm 41% [39%] / 56% [58%]{-15%}

Survey of 600 registered voters was conducted February 22-25, 2010. The margin of error is +/- 4 percentage points. For matchups in the Democratic and Republican primaries, 400 respondents, margin of error is +/- 4.9 percentage points. Results from the poll conducted January 24-26, 2010 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted October 11-15, 2009 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted in September 2009 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted in June 2009 are in square brackets.

The Saturn-V rocket was one of the most successful rockets ever designed. Developed for NASA’s manned lunar missions, eighteen of them were launched during the six year span from 1967 to 1973. There was never a loss of payload, a remarkable record for a rocket. True, Apollo-13 had problems, but those occurred AFTER the Saturn-V had done its job.

The Saturn-V was a three stage rocket. The first stage was huge. It was capable of delivering 7.6 million pounds of thrust. The first stage, mighty as it was, had no hope of putting the payload into orbit. Its job was strictly to get the rocket off the ground and traveling as fast as possible. At this point the first stage would drop off and the smaller second stage would take over to propel the rocket to even greater speeds. If the second stage failed, the rocket would fall back to earth and crash into the ocean.

The second stage was capable of over a million pounds of thrust, yet this too was incapable of achieving orbit for the payload. Its job was to get the rocket going as fast as possible, to drop off, and then let the third stage take over. If the third stage failed, the results would be the same as if the second stage had failed. The rocket would fail to achieve orbit and would fall to earth and crash into the ocean.

Only the third stage, with the help of the boosts from the first two stages, was capable of delivering the payload where the designers intended. Only it could place the payload in orbit. And deliver it did, through eighteen missions.

This handoff of the rocket to each succeeding stage is the key of any multistage rocket.  It is the job of each succeeding stage to take over at the point of maximum velocity achieved by the previous stages. Each stage builds upon the momentum created by those before it.

I got to thinking of the venerable Saturn-V when contemplating the different book tours the big three — Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, and Mitt Romney — have been up to recently. Just as a stage in a rocket, each one has developed momentum for their authors. The question is, how much of the momentum was wasted?

Mike had two books, “Do the Right Thing”, and “A Simple Christmas” published since the 2008 cycle ended for him. “Do the Right Thing” came out in 2008. It has largely been forgotten by most people. Even his many fans seldom call it to mind. Any momentum Mike might have derived from it has long since dissipated. “A Simple Christmas” is not a political book, and Mike didn’t really get that much of a bounce from it.

Sarah’s book, “Going Rogue”, was a huge deal. A large book tour and millions in sales gave her poll numbers quite a bounce. A lot of momentum was built up. Unfortunately there has been little to take its place. There has not been much of an opportunity for Sarah to build upon momentum derived from it — no second stage, in other words. A few scattered speeches and fundraisers here and there. There has been little else. As a result, all the polls show her numbers trending downward. One very recent poll showed a majority Americans on both sides of the aisle thinking she wasn’t up to the job. The momentum from her book is dissipating, and she is returning to earth.

Then there is Mitt’s book, “No apology”. His book tour is set to start the first week in March and end the last week of May. So the point of the most momentum derived from it will be about the middle to the end of May — which just happens to be around the time most of the 2010 bi-election campaigns are starting to get serious. Mitt should be able to smoothly transition from being book-salesman to GOP politician-salesman. This year is shaping up to be a banner year for Republicans. It should provide Mitt with even greater momentum by November. At that point, Mitt will be able to transition to his third stage, the ramping up of the 2012 campaign.

So instead of the momentum from his book tour dissipating as all the others have done before, Mitt will be able to use that momentum to take him to greater heights through the 2010 elections and on to the launch of 2012 campaign. No momentum is lost. Nothing is wasted.

You would almost think he planned it that way.

Research 2000/Daily Kos Delaware Political Survey

Senatorial Election

• Mike Castle (R) 53% (51%)
• Chris Coons (D) 35% (39%)

Among Independents

• Mike Castle (R) 61% (57%)
• Chris Coons (D) 27% (31%)

Congressional Election

• John Carney (D) 45%
• Ferris Wharton (R) 35%

• John Carney (D) 46%
• Charlie Copeland (R) 29%

• John Carney (D) 50%
• Fred Cullis (R) 26%

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Mike Castle 65% (64%) / 32% (30%) {+33%}
• Jack Markell 54% (55%) / 30% (28%) {+24%}
• Barack Obama 59% (64%) / 36% (32%) {+23%}
• Chris Coons 52% (34%) / 25% (8%) {+27%}
• Tom Carper 52% (53%) / 33% (31%) {+19%}
• John Carney 47% (41%) / 22% (19%) {+25%}
• Ted Kaufman 40% (36%) / 27% (26%) {+13%}
• Ferris Wharton 48% / 38% {+10%}
• Charlie Copeland 21% / 23% {-2%}
• Fred Cullis 10% / 18% {-8%}

Survey of 600 likely voters was conducted February 22-24, 2010. The margin of error is +/- 4 percentage points. Party ID breakdown: 45% (47%) Democrat; 32% (31%) Republican; 23% (22%) Independent/Other. Results from the poll conducted October 12-14, 2009 are in parentheses.

Mason-Dixon/Las Vegas Review-Journal Nevada Gubernatorial Survey

If the 2010 Republican primary election for Governor were held today for whom would you vote if the candidates were:

• Brian Sandoval 37% [39%] (41%)
• Jim Gibbons 30% [18%] (20%)
• Michael Montandon 9% [6%]
• Undecided 24% [37%] (35%)

If the 2010 election for Governor were held today, for whom would you vote if the choice were between Rory Reid, the Democrat and Brian Sandoval, the Republican?

• Brian Sandoval 51% [49%] (50%)
• Rory Reid 29% [34%] (33%)
• Undecided 20% [17%] (17%)

If the 2010 election for Governor were held today, for whom would you vote if the choice were between Rory Reid, the Democrat and Jim Gibbons, the Republican?

• Rory Reid 42% [48%] (49%)
• Jim Gibbons 38% [34%] (37%)
• Undecided 20% [18%] (14%)

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Oscar Goodman 47% [46%] (49%) / 15% [13%] (9%) {+32%}
• Brian Sandoval 33% [39%] (38%) / 7% [6%] (7%) {+26%}
• Sue Lowden: 36% {32%} [33%] (31%) / 17% {17%} [13%] (15%) {+19%}
• Danny Tarkanian 30% {33%} [32%] (30%) / 17% {16%} [12%] (11%) {+13%}
• Sharron Angle 19% {21%} / 9% {11%} {+10%}
• Barack Obama 39% {34%} [44%] (46%) / 46% {46%} [43%] (43%) {-7%}
• Rory Reid 22% [23%] / 36% [28%] {-14%}
• Harry Reid: 33% {33%} [38%] (38%) [37%] / 51% {52%} [49%] (50%) [50%] {-18%}
• Jim Gibbons 17% [19%] (14%) / 51% [50%] (51%) {-34%}

Survey of 625 Nevada voters (including a subsample of 300 Republican primary voters) was conducted February 22-24, 2010. The margin of error is +/- 4 percentage points; +/- 6 percentage points among GOP primary voters. Party ID breakdown: 43% Democrat; 37% Republican; 20% Independent. Results from the poll conducted January 5-7, 2010 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted November 30 – December 2, 2009 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted October 6-8, 2009 are in parentheses.

Constituent Dynamics/KXAN Texas Gubernatorial Survey

• Rick Perry 44%
• Kay Bailey Hutchison 30%
• Debra Medina 14%
• Undecided 12%

Survey of 1,328 registered voters was conducted February 19-21, 2010.

Inside the numbers:

When it comes to support from men and women, Hutchison gets 34% of the women’s vote compared to 27% of the men’s. Perry finds more support from men with 45% of the vote there and 43% support from women. Debra Medina remains in the teens in both categories with 15% support from Republican men and 12% support from Republican women.

Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Political Survey

All in all, would you rather have bigger government that provides more services or smaller government that provides fewer services?

• Bigger government, more services 35%
• Smaller government, fewer services 58%

Among Democrats

• Bigger government, more services 61%
• Smaller government, fewer services 30%

Among Republicans

• Bigger government, more services 15%
• Smaller government, fewer services 81%

Among Independents

• Bigger government, more services 22%
• Smaller government, fewer services 70%

In general, do you think Barack Obama believes in bigger government that provides more services, or does he believe in smaller government that provides fewer services?

• Bigger government, more services 75%
• Smaller government, fewer services 12%

Among Democrats

• Bigger government, more services 65%
• Smaller government, fewer services 18%

Among Republicans

• Bigger government, more services 84%
• Smaller government, fewer services 9%

Among Independents

• Bigger government, more services 80%
• Smaller government, fewer services 10%

A year ago Congress passed and President Obama signed the $787 billion dollar federal stimulus bill into law. Recently President Obama stated that the stimulus program helped the country avoid dipping into an economic depression — do you agree or disagree that the stimulus helped the country avoid a depression?

• Agree 44%
• Disagree 51%

Among Democrats

• Agree 71%
• Disagree 26%

Among Republicans

• Agree 18%
• Disagree 78%

Among Independents

• Agree 44%
• Disagree 49%

So far, only about one-third of the money budgeted as part of the economic stimulus plan has been spent. Do you think the rest of the money should be spent as planned or should the rest of the stimulus program be canceled and the money used to reduce the budget deficit?

• Spent as planned 31%
• Canceled to reduce deficit 59%

Among Democrats

• Spent as planned 54%
• Canceled to reduce deficit 36%

Among Republicans

• Spent as planned 11%
• Canceled to reduce deficit 82%

Among Independents

• Spent as planned 23%
• Canceled to reduce deficit 64%

Would you say you are fed up with and tired of the health care reform debate or don’t you feel that way?

• Fed up with 67%
• Don’t feel that way 30%

Among Democrats

• Fed up with 50%
• Don’t feel that way 47%

Among Republicans

• Fed up with 82%
• Don’t feel that way 16%

Among Independents

• Fed up with 70%
• Don’t feel that way 26%

Would you say you are fed up with and tired of the growing federal budget deficit or don’t you feel that way?

• Fed up with 81%
• Don’t feel that way 16%

Among Democrats

• Fed up with 67%
• Don’t feel that way 29%

Among Republicans

• Fed up with 90%
• Don’t feel that way 7%

Among Independents

• Fed up with 91%
• Don’t feel that way 7%

Would you say you are fed up with and tired of government spending or don’t you feel that way?

• Fed up with 73%
• Don’t feel that way 23%

Among Democrats

• Fed up with 51%
• Don’t feel that way 43%

Among Republicans

• Fed up with 92%
• Don’t feel that way 6%

Among Independents

• Fed up with 79%
• Don’t feel that way 18%

Do you think government spending is being managed carefully or is government spending out of control?

• Managed carefully 14%
• Spending is out of control 78%

Among Democrats

• Managed carefully 28%
• Spending is out of control 61%

Among Republicans

• Managed carefully 2%
• Spending is out of control 95%

Among Independents

• Managed carefully 8%
• Spending is out of control 82%

Overall, would you say you generally trust the federal government, or not?

• Yes 37%
• No 59%

Among Democrats

• Yes 54%
• No 44%

Among Republicans

• Yes 24%
• No 70%

(more…)

Rasmussen Maryland Gubernatorial Survey

• Martin O’Malley (D) 49%
• Bob Ehrlich (R) 43%

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Bob Ehrlich 55% / 36% {+19%}
• Martin O’Malley 54% / 40% {+14%}

How would you rate the job Martin O’Malley has been doing as Governor?

• Strongly approve 18%
• Somewhat approve 35%
• Somewhat disapprove 19%
• Strongly disapprove 23%

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

• Strongly approve 38%
• Somewhat approve 21%
• Somewhat disapprove 8%
• Strongly disapprove 32%

Survey of 500 likely voters was conducted February 23, 2010. The margin of error is +/- 4.5 percentage points.

Inside the numbers:

Ehrlich and O’Malley run even among male voters, but female voters favor the Democrat by 12 points.

Among voters not affiliated with either major party, Ehrlich leads 52% to 36%.