Presidential Candidate Pandering and Hypocrisy

September 6, 2007


If we could assume for purposes of making a point here that if by some unusual action it would become unlawful to pander to constituents in Presidential elections, it would mean that there could currently be NO Presidential race! In simpler words: Read the rest of this entry »


Uselessness of Polls

August 30, 2007


There is rarely a day when we are not being told by the media about the latest poll results about any kind of issue, be it nationwide, statewide or local. And like the vast majority of people, we read them and waste no time Read the rest of this entry »

Election Result Analysis and Review

November 26, 2006


     The 2006 congressional elections are history….and, they made history! The Democrat Party gained control of the House of Representatives for the first time since 1994 and they also got control of the U.S. Senate by winning the necessary seats. While the final votes are still being counted, i.e., the absentee and provisional ballots, the final configuration of the number of House seats for the two major parties is not yet determined. It looks like that the Democrats will have in the end 233 members and the Republican will have 202, a swing of 31 in favor of the Democrats that puts them in charge of the House of Representatives! They needed to gain 15 seats to become the majority party and they won 31, a clear majority.  Source

     In the Senate, the Democrats and the Republicans each had 49 seats but with the two so called ‘Independent’ senators, the Democrats will control the Senate. Joe Lieberman of
Connecticut was a Democrat Senator before he was defeated in the primaries and he ran as an independent and won. The other independent is Bernie Sanders of Vermont, he was a congressman before this election and is considered a Socialist, i.e., to the ‘left’ of most Democrats.

     Without an accurate count of the total votes cast in all 435 House races (over 58 million votes were cast in the 33 Senatorial races), based on precedent, it can be safely assumed that about 70 million Americans voted for candidates running for a House seat. Accepting the premise that Democrats and Republicans voted for members of their respective parties, the 15 percent of Moderates amounted to approximately ten million voters. This is where it becomes interesting:

     Remember, the Democrats needed to take fifteen congressional districts away from the Republicans in order to gain control of the House of Representatives. A closer look at the thirty-one individual races where Democrats won seats formerly held by Republicans brings out an incredible fact: 18 of those 31 races were decided by a total combined vote count of under 130,000 votes in favor of Democrats! That is very close to say the least. Had they gone the other way, the Republicans would have maintained control of the House of Representatives. Again, assuming that these 130,000 votes were cast by Moderates and that about ten million swing voters cast ballots, this is only 1.3 percent of this group, definitely a very minor change in the overall picture.

     In the Senate, the race was even closer. The vote differential in Montana was 2,847 in favor of the Democrat candidate Tester over incumbent Burns and in
Virginia, the difference were 7,231 votes for Democrat Webb over the Republican incumbent Allen. Combined, a vote swing of 10,078 would have given the Republicans 51 seats in the Senate and therefore control of that chamber. Again, assuming that these votes were cast by Moderates, the percentile is even smaller than in the House races (10,078 out of approximately 8.75 million votes equals a tenth of one percent), a very miniscule difference!

     In the coming weeks and months all 2006 election results will be finalized and it will validate the overall outcome as we know it now with the possibility of only minor adjustments. But that does not matter! This year’s election was a close one and we think we demonstrated that above.

     One thing should therefore be understood and accepted by us all: This was not a landslide nor was it a blue wave (the color we attribute to Democrats) or whatever else the Democrats want to call it. Any time control of the U.S. Senate or the House of Representatives changes, it is historic.

     Common sense and logical thinking tells us that we should not accept things at face value when presented by the media. It will remain to be seen what the change in Congress will bring us and we might very well be in for interesting times in the next two years.
     This article and others on Back to Common Sense are designed to provoke further thought and investigation.   It is not the intent for the articles to be politically biased. Sources are referenced in each article to encourage readers to delve into the supporting material.  We welcome all readers to participate with their point of view either in support or contrary with additional information sources.

The People Have Spoken

November 26, 2006


     The day after the election, President Bush acknowledged that he and his party had taken a “thumpin”. The euphoric pronouncements by the pundits on TV and headlines and articles by the writers for most of the major media outlets hailed the results as ‘historic’, ‘the blue wave’, ‘of landslide proportion’ that gave them similar laudatory and glorified terms. The Democrats themselves announced that in this election, the American people have spoken and given them a clear mandate to govern.

     While the main election theme for the Democrats was “It’s time for a change” without any specifics, they now claim that the American people want an increase in the minimum wage, and end the Iraq war as soon as possible (troop withdrawals to start in four to six months), increasing taxes and allowing current tax law to lapse, i.e., allowing tax rates to go up and some even talk about healthcare for all Americans etc, etc. They believe they can achieve all this because President Bush is now in his last two ‘lame-duck’ years and therefore has to go along.

     We say, Not so fast, let’s give the election results a reality check and let’s start with some basic facts: Everybody should know that the American electorate is comprised of approx. 41-43 percent each of Democrats and Republicans. That leaves about 15% for the group called the ‘Moderates’. While in all elections, the Democrats and Republicans face essentially two choices: To vote or not to vote, they seldom if ever cross party lines to vote for a candidate of the opposite party. It is the moderates who, based on their ideology and flexibility in beliefs, can vote for either party, dependent on how they feel and lean in every election. That is why they are called the ‘swing voters’ and it is true, they swing the elections to either party if the issues are clearly defined.

     It is also a fact that the war in Iraq weighed very heavily on people’s mind, and it should when one considers the constant drumbeat of negative reporting by the media coupled with their, the media membership, overwhelming disdain for President Bush. The botched Immigration legislative attempts were also an issue and to some minor extent elements of corruption and scandal (the four week hype about a Republican house member’s e-mails and instant messages to a ‘page’ in the House of Representatives when he was no longer a ‘page’ was nauseating).  Nevertheless, the composite of these things contributed heavily to the general feeling that things were not going at all that well in

     It can be argued that the Republicans who voted this year were willing to ‘stay the course’ and that they voted Republican because the Democrats gave them really no positive reason to vote for them. It is equally certain that the Democrats voted for their Party because they strongly disliked, if not even hated, President Bush and ‘it was therefore time for a change’ to gain power again in Congress after a dozen years.

     That leaves the moderates, the group in the middle who mostly voted their feelings they apparently accepted the gloomy pictures the media had painted about the war, the President, the so called ‘do-nothing Republican congress’, the corrupt lawmakers who seemed to be Republicans and on and on.

     We believe that it has not given the Democrats a mandate to push for a substantial increase in the minimum wage; nor do we see an immediate withdrawal of troops out of
Iraq as the result of this election. Common sense should tell us that it might serve the Democrats well to be realistic and not overly optimistic when it comes to setting a new agenda as they begin to govern the Legislative branch of the
     United States. The American people have Not given them a blank check for their so called agenda when one considers the above tabulations about the closeness of this election!
     This article and others on Back to Common Sense are designed to provoke further thought and investigation.   It is not the intent for the articles to be politically biased. Sources are referenced in each article to encourage readers to delve into the supporting material.  We welcome all readers to participate with their point of view either in support or contrary with additional information sources.