Mediaboss Marketing

St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson may have won her seat by besting a host of other candidates in the city's Democratic primary, but she did it by winning Republican voters.

That's one of the insights in an exit poll of 900 St. Louis voters conducted by the University of Missouri-St. Louis on election day. The 27-page report was released last month, but has not previously been reported on in the media.

The UMSL researchers found that Democratic voters "split almost evenly" between Krewson and City Treasurer Tishaura Jones. But Krewson made her way over the top, beating Jones by just 888 votes, because she attracted more independent voters and a majority of Republican ones. (Both are permitted to cast Democratic Party ballots in the St. Louis primary, so long as they eschew a Republican ballot that day.) "GOP voters, while a small part of the city electorate, helped tip the election to Krewson," the report concludes.

And overall, the poll notes, how you felt about Krewson vs. Jones was a question of how you felt about the status quo. If you liked Mayor Slay and thought things were pretty good, you likely voted for Krewson. Higher educated voters, and those less happy with the way things are, voted for Jones.

Interestingly, however, the report pushes back on the theory (offered by many Jones' supporters) that Jones could have won if only one of the black men in the race (Reed, French or Alderman Jeffrey Boyd) had dropped out.

The exit poll suggests that supporters of Jones and French had many similarities and that French dropping out may well have resulted in a move toward Jones, pushing her over the top.

But that would not have been the case, the exit poll suggests, if Reed had dropped out. "It appears that Krewson and Reed appealed to voters who valued experience and continuity, while Jones and French attracted voters who wanted a new direction in city government," the report notes. "Reed and Krewson did particularly well among older voters, Republicans, non-Metro users and voters who have not attended a protest. ... Thus, it is not clear that Jones would have prevailed if other candidates had dropped out or if ranked choice voting rules were used in the mayoral election."

The poll also suggests that Krewson may be on the right track, politically, by suggesting a tax hike to increase police pay. It's not just that Krewson voters were more likely to mention "crime" or "downtown development" as key issues, while Jones voters cited "race," "education" or "transportation." The poll also found that a staggering 71 percent of voters supported raising taxes for the police force and that Krewson voters in particular gave the idea 89 percent approval. Jones' voters also told pollsters they were on board with 59 percent supporting such an increase.

That's true even though the police, overall, didn't win high points in the poll. Voters were asked to provide their opinion of the police department. Of those who answered, the UMSL researchers note, just 49 percent said they had a favorable opinion. The percentage that had a favorable opinion of Black Lives Matter? Seventy-four percent.

We welcome tips and feedback. Email the author at sarah.fenske@riverfronttimes.com

Read the original here:
Krewson Victory Rested on Catholics, Republicans and Older Voters, Exit Poll Finds - Riverfront Times (blog)

Every hero needs a villain. A compelling story requires conflict, friction, an obstacle to be overcome.

Political campaigns are no different. Candidates, of course, often claim that they want to run "a purely positive campaign," but this rarely materializes. There are political advertisements that surprise and delight without a shred of the toxicity to which we have become accustomed. And even some ads that are labeled "negative" are useful and informative in their own way; candidates have different points of view, and those viewpoints are germane to an election. But for the most part, candidates have political consultants in their ears whispering pleas to come to the Dark Side. "Go negative. It works."

And negative has worked. Our current president is in the White House in large part because enough voters simply could not stomach the idea of Hillary Clinton as president that they were willing to roll the dice in a dangerous gamble. (According to the exit polls, among those voters with an unfavorable view of both candidates, Trump won handily.) Republicans took back the house in 2010 and held it in 2014 in part by running against a list of things: Obama, Obamacare, Nancy Pelosi (always Pelosi). In 2016, down-ballot Republicans also had the ability to run as a check-and-balance on the expected Clinton White House 2.0. We will repeal this, we will stop that, we will send a message to Washington, we will hold Hillary Clinton accountable.

Well Republicans are Washington now. Obama is golfing or windsurfing and working on a book. Nancy Pelosi is still in Congress, but hasn't been Speaker for almost seven years. Hillary Clinton pops up in the news every so often, giving interviews about her loss that most recently include trashing her own DNC.

But not a single one of these things is preventing Republicans from doing what they promised they'd do.

With a host of opponents defeated up and down the ballot, and now having assumed control of the levers of power, Republicans could be producing policy wins and delivering on promises. One year ago, House Speaker Paul Ryan rolled out his "Better Way" agenda, pledging to promote a positive vision of how conservatives could help the middle class and promote economic mobility. And though many of us in the "reform conservative" realm have always looked at the Trump presidency with a mix of horror and disappointment, there were moments when it seemed possible that Trumpland could have some "reform conservative" sympathies given the occasional rhetorical focus on jobs, economic mobility, and the working class.

And yethere we are, with months having gone by, and so little to show for it.

The health care "repeal and replace" effort sits in the Senate. Tax reform exists, sort of, as an outline miles away from being actual passed legislation.

This week was supposed to be Infrastructure Week a week when Republicans pushed for upgrades to American roads, bridges, and waterways - and yet President Trump kicked off Monday morning with a series of tweets going after his own Justice Department and further undermining his own legal case for his "travel ban". Members of Congress are being tied up constantly on Trump, Trump, Trump his tweets, the investigations, the chaos swirling around the whole administration.

We'll always have Gorsuch, I guess.

In practice, the Republicans' real enemy is themselves. There is no one else to blame. But how can one campaign for office in today's America without someone to blame? And so without a Hillary Clinton or a Barack Obama to set up as The Villain We Can Only Overcome With Your Vote, Republicans have apparently found a new target: the media. Each June, Gallup asks Americans how much trust they have in institutions, and as of last check, trust in television and print news was appallingly low. (Not as low as Congress, however.)

Of course, while asking for A Vote Against Nancy Pelosi is, arguably, an actual policy position deep down on the inside, A Vote Against The Media iswhat exactly? Voting as venting? But Republicans feel like they've never gone wrong bashing the media and don't feel like this time will be any different. They very well might be right.

The idea that someone, somewhere will campaign in a positive, uplifting way, on an agenda that can inspire Americans? I'm sadly done holding my breath. But if elections are supposed to be about sending people to Washington to govern in a certain way, how tragic that a moment of unprecedented Republican power, with so many foes vanquished, we find so little to say about governing at all. That Republican voters would be so disappointed with their own party's achievements as to need a new Villain of the Week to motivate them a villain with no control over any levers of government at all - is just tragic.

Or rather, today's politics not a story of heroes and villains at all, but like so many of the modern prestige television dramas, we simply have an anti-hero, whose worst enemy is only himself.

Kristen Soltis Anderson is a columnist for The Washington Examiner and author of "The Selfie Vote."

Originally posted here:
Republicans seek a new villain, while their true foe is in the mirror - Washington Examiner

Senate Republicans are moving into high gear on their effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act, making it likely that within the next few weeks theyll either pass something and keep the process hurtling forward, or abandon it altogether.

Judging from what theyre saying, it looks like the latter is the most likely scenario: They fail to pass their version of repeal, then say, Well, we tried, shake that albatross off their shoulders, and move on to the rest of their agenda. It would leave many in the party infuriated, but it might be the best of the bad options available to them.

The latest developments suggest Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) may be hoping to rip the Band-Aid off as quickly as possible and get this whole thing behind them. Heres a report from Politico:

After spending a month deliberating over a response to the Houses passage of a bill to repeal the law, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is accelerating the partys stagnant work as a jam-packed fall agenda confronts congressional leaders and President Donald Trump. Republican leaders want resolution to the tumultuous Obamacare repeal debate by the Fourth of July recess, Republican sources said, to ensure that the whole year isnt consumed by health care and that the GOP leaves room to consider tax reform.

Its a gut-check situation for Republicans, who are about to be confronted with tough choices that may result in millions fewer people with insurance coverage as a condition for cutting taxes and lowering some peoples premiums.

While its possible that McConnell is pushing this accelerated schedule because he thinks itll produce a bill that passes before anyone has a chance to realize whats happening, that seems like a long shot, particularly given how many Republicans are expressing doubts about whether they can get the 50 votes they need to pass it (the current GOP margin in the Senate is 52to 48):

Thats a whole lot of skepticism. One big problem theyre facing is that there are multiple factions and working groups among Senate Republicans, all potentially coming up with their own very different versions of the bill. Thats a result of McConnells decision not to run the bill through the ordinary committee process, since he didnt want there to be public hearings at which Democrats would have a chance to speak and question witnesses. In that vacuum, everyone wants to exercise their own influence. So apart from the 13-member group that McConnell appointed, theres also a group led by Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), and a group led by Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio).

But the intractable problems are likely to be substantive. Can senators from states that have benefited hugely from the ACAs Medicaid expansion such as West Virginia, where 28 percent of the state population is now enrolled in Medicaid, including 170,000 citizens who got it because of the expansion come to an agreement with senators such asTed Cruz (Tex.) and Mike Lee (Utah) who would like to see Medicaid undermined if not utterly destroyed? And can they all agree on something that can also get a majority in the House, where ultra-conservative Freedom Caucus members wield so much power?

So here are the potential outcomes:

The hurdles in front of that last outcome seem insurmountable, but anything is possible. But if it doesnt happen, that sets up still another possibility: Once the repeal effort is behind us, we might actually take some steps to improve the health-care system.

In this scenario, Republicans would no longer be able to dismiss any reform idea with, We cant think about that, because we have to repeal Obamacare. You might even get some innovative thinking.

For instance, the Nevada legislature passed a bill allowing anyone to buy in to Medicaid. If you cant get other insurance or you dont like whats available on the exchanges, you could just pay premiums and join the government program. Gov. Brian Sandoval (R) hasnt said whether hell sign the bill and there are details to be worked out, but once ACA repeal is off the table, you could see other states deciding that now they have to try some new things. States that have seen private insurers depart the individual market could turn to the same solution. Some Republican states might even accept the ACAs Medicaid expansion (perhaps with some tweaks so they can say theyre being tougher on the shiftless poor), because all that federal money is just waiting to pour into their states and insure their citizens.

Im not saying Id trust Republicans anywhere to do the right thing when it comes to health care. But maybe this experience has taught them that theyd better come up with some solutions that actually help people. Anythings possible.

See the rest here:
Are Republicans ready to give up on repeal? Here's what might happen next. - Washington Post (blog)

Forbes

This Is Why Republicans Are So Afraid Of The Congressional Budget Office Forbes In theory, the Trump White House and congressional Republicans should be ecstatic that Congressional Budget Office exists right now. CBO's director -- Keith Hall -- is a Republican appointed in 2015 by then House Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price ... and more »

View post:
This Is Why Republicans Are So Afraid Of The Congressional Budget Office - Forbes

Assembly Republicans on Tuesday unveiled a sweeping spending plan for Wisconsin schools that authors say will put more money into classrooms than what Gov. Scott Walker has proposed in his two-year state budget.

But minutes before it was rolled out, Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, R-Juneau, rejected the proposal, saying the Senate Republicans are sticking with Walker's proposal to add $649 million in new funding.

Tuesday's tensions signal the two houses may not come to an agreement before Thursday, the day Fitzgerald set for the Legislature's Joint Finance Committee to resume writing a 2017-19 budget or else he'd consider asking Senate Republicans to craft their own.

"The Assembly package that was endorsed today is simply not the direction that this budget is headed," Fitzgerald said Tuesday.

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, fired back by saying he didn't understand why Fitzgerald would blast a proposal he hasn't seen and would just be a "rubber stamp" for Walker.

"There is absolutely no reason to make threats," Vos said about the idea of both houses crafting their budgets.

Meanwhile, finance committee co-chairman Rep. John Nygren, R-Marinette, said budget negotiations likely won't resume until the two caucuses find common ground on education spending.

Walker, speaking to reporters in Wisconsin Dells, said because the Assembly Republicans' plan reduces his new spending and doesn't reduce property taxes below 2014 levels, it "goes at odds with what our top two priorities are."

"So my hope is, in the end well get a budget thats closer to where were at," Walker said.

The Assembly Republicans' plan would lower property taxes about $10 on a median-priced home from today's levels and about $121 under 2010 levels. But it doesn't meet the 2014 level that Walker has required to gain his signature.

Nygren said the most important piece of the plan is giving school districts that spend less per student than the state average the ability to raise property taxes -- about $92.2 million worth of property tax increases.

Such districts would be allowed to raise $9,800 per student under the plan. Nygren said school districts' limits on what they can raise ranges from $9,100 to $15,000.

"This proposal is addressing a significant challenge, and that is equity in school funding," he told reporters.

He said it "levels the playing field" between districts that were spending at a low rate when state lawmakers imposed caps on how much districts could raise property taxes in 1993 and districts that were spending at a higher rate then.

Nygren also said fewer referendums would be sought under the Assembly Republicans' plan. He said 55 percent of low-spending districts went to referendum since 2011.

The plan also adds $30 million more for the state's general funding mechanism for schools than what Walker has proposed. By cutting the state's school levy tax credit, more money will be spent in classrooms than what Walker has proposed, Vos said.

Walker has been touring the state promoting $649 million in new funding and the Assembly Republicans' plan would decrease that amount by about $70 million.

Senate Republicans say any decrease would be tough for public school officials and advocates to support. Minutes after the plan was released Tuesday the Wisconsin Association of School Boards issued a statement citing concerns with the decrease but supported its overall goal.

The Assembly Republicans also proposed getting rid of Walker's requirement in his state budget proposal to tie the new funding to whether a district is requiring its staff to pay at least 12 percent toward health care costs.

The plan also would allow students to enroll in private voucher schools if they were put on waiting lists in the last school year because of enrollments caps, and adds state funding for the statewide program. A new position would be created to administer the state's three voucher programs under the plan, too.

The Department of Public Instruction also would be required to decrease the number of licenses teachers must get to be in classrooms -- a proposal State Superintendent Tony Evers has supported.

The plan's release comes as budget negotiations have deteriorated and a planned Tuesday meeting of the finance committee to settle portions of the budget was canceled.

Disagreement have already led to an impasse among both houses and with Walker over the state's next transportation budget, and Walker's proposal for the state to self-insure state workers has been rejected by leaders of his own party.

Vos said Tuesday that he hopes the Senate will back off from outright rejection.

"I'm willing to negotiate at any time, any place, anywhere, as long as people of good will get together and don't draw hard lines in the sandbefore theyve even heard the other persons ideas," Vos said. He said he isn't concerned about the state's July 1 deadline to get the budget complete. Current spending levels continue if a new state budget is not passed by that date.

"Im not going to check the brain at the door and give up the principles our caucus stands for (for that deadline)," Vos said.

Senate Republicans met Tuesday after Fitzgerald rejected the Assembly's plan.

State Journal reporter Mark Sommerhauser contributed to this report.

Read more:
Assembly Republicans unveil sweeping education proposal but impasse continues - Madison.com