Archives for January 2014

The presidential caucus system established by the Idaho Republican Party in 2012 to give the state more say in the selection of a presidential candidate was killed by the Republican State Central Committee, the Idaho State Journal reports.

Josh Putnam: “Idaho Republicans are now without a specific means of allocating delegates in 2016. The presumption — the intent — is that Republicans in the Gem state will simply revert to their later primary election. That may be the eventual course of action, but as a part of the transition to caucuses in 2012, the Idaho state legislature permanently removed the presidential primary line from the May primary ballot.”

“I don’t know. I wish I could go back and turn back the clock and take another try.”

— Mitt Romney, in an interview on Fox News, when asked if he felt he would have won the 2012 presidential election if President Obama had not lied about Americans being able to keep their health insurance.

Actor Steven Seagal told KNXV-TV that he is considering a run for Arizona governor.

“According to Seagal, the number one problem facing the U.S. is its open borders. He also came to the defense of Sheriff Arpaio, as well the prospect of extending amnesty to undocumented immigrants living in the U.S.”

National Review: “The question for Republicans in 2014 is whether they want to have a Duck Dynasty election or an Obamacare election.”

Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX) “might be the closest thing in this election year to a middle finger running for the U.S. Senate by itself,” the Washington Post reports.

“This man is running for the Senate in a state with 26 million people. By conventional measures, he is not doing it well. One recent poll had him down by 44 points… But Stockman seems to be betting — again — on his talents for nation-scale insult comedy, for grabbing free publicity with over-the-top attacks on the hard right’s enemies.”

Ron Brownstein: “It’s too early to confidently predict which party will hold the U.S. Senate after the November election. But it’s a safe bet the next Senate will more closely reflect the nation’s entrenched red-blue presidential divide. And that’s a recipe for even more polarization and gridlock.”

“This year’s races will likely provide more evidence of voters’ growing inclination to support Senate candidates from the same party as that of their presidential choice. This has made it much tougher than a generation ago for either party to elect senators from states that typically back the other side in presidential elections.”

“The tightening correlation between presidential and Senate voting represents a back-to-the-future trend in national politics. Through the first half of the 20th century, party-line voting was common. After Franklin Roosevelt’s first two victories in 1932 and 1936, for instance, Democrats held 89 percent of the Senate seats in the 40 states that supported him both times.”