No Runny Eggs

The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend, shock and awe you, but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think.

Archive for posts by steveegg.

July 15, 2010

What a return on Porkulus investment

by @ 16:01. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

For once, DPW chair Mike Tate uttered a grain of truth in a press release touting the power of Porkulus. Since the DPW will likely revise and extend the comments before too long, I decided to grab the admission that Porkulus “supported 63 jobs here in this state” (do click for the full-sized pic).

The mo’ is with Johnson

Rasmussen Reports has upped their polling tempo ahead of the election, and the news is very good for Ron Johnson. In a poll taken July 13 of 750 likely voters, he has pulled ahead of Russ Feingold for the first time, 47%-46%. That compares favorably to a Rasmussen late-June poll that had Feingold up 46%-45%, and a Public Policy late-June poll that had Feingold up 45%-43%. The Slimeroad Slime Machine still isn’t working, as Johnson’s favorables climbed to 51% favorable (up 19 points from June)/30% unfavorable (up 5 points from June)/+11 “Passion” Index (up 2 points from June).

The toplines are, once again, more favorable to the Democrats than the national picture. Once again, President Obama’s Wisconsin approval ratings (49% approve/51% disapprove/-14 Approval Index) are better than the national numbers (48% approve/52% disapprove/-17 Approval Index). Various other questions, from Gulf drilling to PlaceboCare, from illegal immigration to the Tea Party Movement, reveal a slightly more leftward tilt (or more properly, a lesser rightward tilt) in Wisconsin than nationally. Feingold also improved his favorables to 53% favorable (up 1 point from June)/43% unfavorable (down 2 points from June)/+5 “Passion” Index (up 5 points from June).

The news isn’t nearly as good for Dave Westlake. A couple weeks after getting to within 6 points of Feingold, Westlake now trails 51%-37%. Despite being in the race for well over a year, he is still so unknown 31% of those surveyed could not form an opinion on him, and only 13% had a strong opinion. While his overall favorability improved to 36% favorable (up 2 points from June)/31% unfavorable (unchanged from June), his “Passion” Index dropped another point to -5.

Revisions/extensions (1:39 pm 7/15/2010) – Just for grins, I decided to see if I could see whether the polls back in 1998 indicated that Mark Neumann was as close as his 2-point loss. CNN came through, and the closest Neumann was that year was a late-October Market Shares/WTMJ-TV poll that had him down 3 points. Two other contemporary polls had Feingold up 7 points, and polls earlier showed larger leads for Feingold.

That means this race is the closest for Feingold since he pulled off the upset in 1992.

Thursday Hot Read – Patrick McIlheran’s “The Great Train Robbery”

by @ 10:04. Filed under Choo-choos, Politics - Wisconsin.

Not only did I “borrow” the concept from Charlie Sykes, but today I also am “borrowing” the source material. While Charlie focused on the killing of Badger Coach (as 71,000 of the 120,000 who take Badger Coach would, at least theoretically, go from the unsubsidized Badger buses to the heavily-subisidized choo-choo), I’ll focus on another part of the piece:

But even when the train stops in downtown Madison (or Milwaukee), passengers will have to get to or from it. That’s why that dream trip involves a train to the train. The $220 million cost of Madison’s planned light rail system is not included in the high-speed train’s cost. Nor is the $100 million cost of the downtown trolley that Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett wants to ferry people from the train station.

And even with that kind of extra money, the fact is that most trips either start or end somewhere other than near the train. Clients incorrigibly move their offices out to the University Research Park, seven miles west of Monona Terrace. Or you move to Franklin.

All this crimps the speed advantage of a train when you add the time it takes to wait for the light rail, to ride it, to transfer to the big train, to wait for the big train to leave.

Interestingly, buses have the advantage here. Meier, whose nostalgia appears limited to having found and bought a 1957 GMC model his company once used, notes that Badger used to have a depot in downtown Madison. Not anymore: It was scarcely used, so the company closed the depot and took customers where they wanted to go.

“That’s one of our advantages as a bus,” says Meier. With tires instead of tracks, “if a stop isn’t very popular, we can stop going there” and instead go directly where people prefer. “We can adjust.”

P-Mac inexplicably forgot about the several-hundred-million-dollar local-bus-service-speed KRM disaster, for which a transfer is also required. Including KRM still doesn’t make it any easier for the train crowd to get to Franklin, or the North Shore, or Waukesha, or…(insert itinerary that doesn’t include the Lower East Side here).

There’s actually one more thing that I should touch on:

The money is part of $8 billion being passed out by the Obama administration in grants to spur new high-speed passenger trains nationwide. Wrapped into the much larger Obama stimulus package, the money is a product of Washington’s lowered inhibitions when it comes to getting value for the taxpayer dollar.

Wisconsin’s grant specifically was part of a scheme to tie Midwest cities to Chicago. Backers speak of trains displacing short-haul flights — so instead of us changing planes in Chicago, we’ll change trains there, or we’ll just do business there and forget about traveling on to St. Louis or Singapore.

That brings up another thing – there is no direct rail service between either Madison or Milwaukee and either of Chicago’s airports, nor would there be direct rail service between Madison and either downtown Chicago or Mitchell International. It would be a rather lengthy train trip with a transfer (or two to CTA’s El for the Chicago airports) if one wanted to get to either Chicago or a real airport from Madison. The funny thing is, even Amtrak provides direct bus service between Madison and downtown Chicago, while private bus companies provide direct service between Madison and all the major points of interest in Milwaukee and Chicago.

July 14, 2010

NRE Poll – Should the NFL expand its regular season?

by @ 10:00. Filed under NRE Polls, Sports.

As someone once said, all politics and no fun makes Egg a very dull boy. Since I merely want to be known as a dull boy, it’s time for a spiral. The Packers open up training camp in 17 days, so it’s time to start focusing on the NFL.

Unless you’ve been in a cave the last 2 years, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has been looking at expanding the NFL season. Originally, he wanted to get it done in time for 2011 and the scheduled start of the new collective bargaining agreement with the NFL Players’ Association, but the clock has slid both that plan and the odds of an on-time new CBA back.

Originally, the thought was to add a single game, possibly at neutral sites, and likely a few outside the US if they went to neutral sites. That has morphed into converting 2 of the 4-5 preseason games into 2 additional regular-season games.

In addition to the injury angle that the NFLPA and some others have noted, that would make a hash of the “perfect” schedule the NFL put together when they went to 32 teams. Right now, each team plays its 3 division rivals in a home-and-home series, the 4 teams from a different division of the same conference, the 4 teams from a division in the other conference, and the 2 teams they otherwise wouldn’t play that finished in the same place in their division the previous year (the “parity” conference games). In fact, those who know how to read the standings, break ties, and remember previous seasons’ schedules know who their team is playing, and for 14 of those games, where, the moment the final gun goes off in the last regular-season game, with only the dates to be filled in.

A single added game would throw the entirety of that picture out of balance. Adding 2 games would, if schedule harmony were to be preserved, necessitate the elimination of the “parity” conference games in favor of playing a third division in either conference. Adding 3 games, which could be accomplished either by adding a third division in a team’s conference or adding “parity” non-conference games, would certainly seem make for a too-long season.

Since most of you who read this place are football fans (or at least I hope you are), it’s time to toss it out to the readership. Unlike Chicago and locations with court-ordered one-man/many-vote situations, vote early and vote once, because the poll closes at noon July 31.

Should the NFL expand its regular-season schedule?

Up to 1 answer(s) was/were allowed

  • No (53%, 10 Vote(s))
  • Yes, to 19 games (26%, 5 Vote(s))
  • Yes, to 18 games (21%, 4 Vote(s))
  • Yes, to 17 games (0%, 0 Vote(s))

Total Voters: 19

Loading ... Loading ...

Jim Klauser hands Neumann his hat

by @ 9:24. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

In a fresh open letter to Mark Neumann regarding his false claims that spending went up faster in Milwaukee County under Scott Walker than it did at the state level under Jim Doyle, Jim Klauser literally hands Neumann his hat for lunch (letter courtesy Jay Weber):

July 14, 2010 – Mr. Mark Neumann

Dear Mark:

It has been more than five weeks since I wrote to you requesting that you return the contributions Shirley and I made to your campaign. I asked for the return since you had assured us that you would run a positive campaign focusing on the Doyle-Barrett record. You haven’t done that. Even in these last weeks you have expanded your negative attacks beyond your primary opponent to everyone else.

Your campaign treasurer, your son Matt, told me that you would return my contribution if I refuted your claims about your opponent’s record as County Executive. You echoed those comments as well. The numbers you cite for Milwaukee County include capital bonding of $251 million which is expended over a three year period and paid-off over 15-20 years. (This was done to obtain better interest rates) Your analysis of Jim Doyle’s spending did NOT include bonding (which is considerable under Doyle).

You should know, but apparently don’t, that much of what a county government does is mandated and partially funded by either the federal or state government. County government has no control over increases/decreases in such funding. A care management organization is funded at $256 million entirely with state-federal Medicaid dollars.

You fail to mention the substantial reduction in the number of county employees under Walker’s watch. In 2000 county employees on an FTE basis numbered 7,263; in 2010 the number is 5,256. This substantial reduction indicates increased efficiency in Milwaukee County government and a savings to taxpayers.

The bottom line is you aren’t comparing apples to apples; rather your analysis is somewhat akin to fruit salad. By the way you should know, but apparently choose to ignore, that the county executive vetoed increased spending every year; these vetoes were overridden by the county board with the result of increasing spending.

You have used these misrepresented figures to claim that the county budget has increased 26% since 2006 while the state budget has increased 19%. In reality, Milwaukee County’s budget has increased 9% below the rate of inflation of 9.6% which gives Milwaukee County residents a spending reduction in adjusted dollars.

Please return our contributions.

James R. Klauser

If one is inclined to attend one of Neumann’s town halls, I suggest you bring a condiment to help Mark with his hat-eating. Embarrassing moments are what happens when one depends on the likes of One Wisconsin Now to do fiscal research.

July 13, 2010

Speaking of SocSecurity, the preliminary June 2010 update

The Treasury released its June 2010 Monthly Treasury Statement, and things just keep on getting worse for Social Security. Do bear in mind these numbers are still preliminary because the Social Security Office of the Chief Actuary hasn’t finalized them yet, but let’s run with them.

Overall

I really should not do the combined numbers anymore because the two “trust funds” are separate entities, but since everybody else still does them, I’ll briefly touch on it. They took in a total of $56,808 million in taxes, received $59,072 million in “interest” (because this is one of the two times interest is credited to the entire holdings), and paid out $63,308 in expenses. That left a gross increase in assets of $52,572 million (45.37% of total revene) and a primary (cash) decease in assets of $6,500 million (-11.44% of tax revenue). The 12-month gross surplus was $90,183 million, while the 12-month primary deficit was $28,260 million.

DI “Trust Fund”

The Disability Insurance “Trust Fund” had $8,249 million in taxes, $4,706 million in interest, and $11,018 million of outgo. That netted a monthly overall surplus of $1,778 million (worst June since 1994) or 14.95% of total revenue (also the worst June since 1994), and a monthly primary deficit of $2,769 million (5th-worst month, outside the “double-payment” month of August 1990, since monthly recurds were kept starting in 1987) or -33.57% of tax revenue (9th-worst “not-screwy” month since monthly records were kept).

The 12-month overall deficit was $18,725 million (worst since monthly records were kept) or -17.68% of total revenue (also worst since monthly records were kept). That meant that the “trust fund” lost 8.78% of its value over the past 12 months.

The 12-month primary deficit was $28,708 million (worst since monthly records were kept) or -29.93% of tax revenue (also worst since monthly records were kept). Put another way, tax revenues only covered just under 77% of the costs of the DI program.

OASI “Trust Fund”

The Old-Age and Survivors “Trust Fund” had $50,635 $48,559 million in taxes, $54,366 million in interest, and $52,290 million of outgo. That netted a monthly overall surplus of $54,366 million (worst June since 1994) or 49.20% of total revenue (worst June since 1999, prior to the latest realignment of the FICA/SECA taxes between the two “trust funds”), and a monthly primary deficit of $3,731 million (4th-worst month, outside the “double-payment” month of August 1990 and the transfer of revenues to the DI “Trust Fund” in November 1994, since monthly records were kept) or -7.68% of tax revenue (7th-worst “non-screwy” month since monthly records were kept).

The 12-month overall surplus was $108,910 million (worst since 9/1998-8/1999) or 15.93% of total revenue (worst since 5/1996-4/1997). Of note, the earlier dates were when less of the FICA/SECA tax was being directed to the OASI “Trust Fund” than currently.

The 12-month primary surplus was $375 million (worst outside the effects of the November 1994 transfer of revenues to the DI “Trust Fund”) or 0.07% of tax revenues (again the worst outside the effects of the November 1994 transfer of revenues to the DI “Trust Fund”). Of note, the two worse 12-month periods for the OASI saw a change of +$112 million (+0.04% of tax revenue) between 10/1994 and 9/1995 and -$825 million (-0.28% of tax revenue) between 11/1994 and 10/1995 due to that transfer to save the DI “Trust Fund”.

Tax revenues keep on sliding

The conditions of the “Trust Funds” are bad enough. However, that’s not the worst of the immediate news. Based on what the taxes taken in for the purposes of Social Security (FICA, SECA, and taxation of benefits) had been for the first 5 months of this year compared to the first 5 months of last year, Social Security tax revenues should have been around $58,540 million, or about 4.63% lower than the $61,383 million collected in June 2009. Instead, only $56,808 million came in to Social Security’s coffers in June 2010, a 7.45% drop from June 2009. That also was an overestimation of 2.96% on my part.

On the bright side, the outgo of $63,308 million was slightly less than my estimate of $63,984 million. I missed it by a mere 1.06%.

Revisions/extensions (6:36 pm 7/13/2010) – Corrected the characterization of the 12-month OASI primary change. It’s not until this month that it will go into the red. Also, added the “Economy Held Hostage” category that Shoebox started up earlier today.

R&E part 2 (8:18 pm 7/14/2010) – I somehow listed my spreadsheet estimate of taxes taken into the OASI fund instead of the Treasury figures. Sorry about that.

Tuesday Hot Read – Peter Ferrera’s “Are Overdue Reports Concealing ObamaCare Impact On Medicare?”

by @ 13:54. Filed under Social Security crater.

(H/T – Tom Blumer)

Last week, Peter Ferrera wondered in an Investor’s Business Daily op-ed where the already-late Social Security/Medicare Trustees’ Report is. As of a few minutes ago, it’s still not available.

Ferrera hits a multitude of topics, one of which I’ll focus on here:

The administration is trying to delay the report until mid-August, when it’s hoping the country will be on vacation and won’t notice. Or maybe the delay is because the White House is trying to bludgeon the chief actuaries for Medicare and Social Security into fudging the numbers.

Those chief actuaries are dedicated, career professionals who have worked their way up the bureaucracy over decades.

During the Reagan administration, the congressional Democrat majorities and the New York Times made clear to us that tampering with the work of the government’s career professionals, let alone the career number crunchers, would be grounds for impeachment.

I’m not certain the rule of law applies to this administration, where the Justice Department cites “payback time” as its reason for not prosecuting Black Panther Voting Rights Act violations.

Point of order – while the report is done by the career actuaries, they’re signed by the political masters, five of whom are hand-picked by Obama (the Secretaries of Treasury, Labor, and Health and Human Services, and two Public Trustees, whose positions were vacant as of last year). I’m not taking bets on which scenario is actually happening because an objective view of either program, especially Social Security, would show that things are a lot worse than they thought just last year.

Take one down, ship to the Congo…

by @ 10:31. Filed under Energy, Politics - National.

The re-issuance of the “temporary” moratorium on deepwater drilling has forced Diamond Offshore to send a second rig packing, this time to the Congo. Unlike the Ocean Endeavor, which likely will never be back in the Gulf of Mexico, the Ocean Confidence might be back after 3 years in the Congo for a year, but only if the ban on deepwater drilling is lifted.

WISN-AM’s Jay Weber said on his show this morning that he believes that ban will never be lifted while Teh Won is in office. The fact that the Ocean Confidence will be gone for a minimum of 3 years shows Diamond Offshore believes the same.

Give us freedom in our health care, says…

by @ 10:05. Filed under Health Care Reform, Politics - National.

(H/T – Breitbart via Michelle Moore)

…Great Britain.

It truly is amazing how as we descend to what the British have suffered through, they’re looking for ways to climb out of that hole.

July 12, 2010

Drinking Right – July 2010 Edition

by @ 18:57. Tags:
Filed under Miscellaneous.

I could have used the Emergency Blogging System for this, but I decided the personal touch was more appropriate. Tomorrow is the second Tuesday of July, and that means one thing in Milwaukee – it’s time for another edition of Drinking Right. Be like me and come on down to Papa’s Social Club at 7718 W. Burleigh in Milwaukee at 7 pm to hang with some of the best bloggers in the Milwaukee area, and special guest Pacur president Ron Johnson.

July 6, 2010

Kennedy grabbing a Snickers, not going anywhere for a while

by @ 16:34. Filed under Lawgivers-In-Black, Politics - National.

(H/Ts – Ed Morrissey and Sister Toldjah)

The Daily News reports that Justice Anthony Kennedy, the most-powerful Lawgiver-In-Black as the Supreme Court’s swing vote, told friends and family he’s sticking around for at least another 3 years. Ever-so-conveniently, that places his potential retirement past the end of President Obama’s first term.

Ed notes there may well be a bit of vengenace on the part of Kennedy against Obama:

Obama certainly reveled in his prime-time, televised, cheap-shot attack at jurists who couldn’t fire back. Samuel Alito took fire from the media for having just mouthed a rebuttal. The only revenge any of them can take is to make sure that they stay in place until Obama leaves office. The “at least” part of the report almost certainly means that retirement at 80 may be just as possible as retirement at 76. After all, John Paul Stevens didn’t decide to retire until he was almost 90 years old.

When you lose the moderates,….

July 5, 2010

Monday Hot Read – Tom Blumer’s “The Most Depressing Numbers in Friday’s Employment Data”

by @ 6:27. Filed under Economy, Politics - National.

Tom Blumer explains why the June civilian labor force number justifies total depression:

The SA (seasonally-adjusted) number for June is bad enough. In fact, June’s seasonally adjusted workforce shrinkage is the largest for any June since 1963.

But the NSA (non-seasonally-adjusted) number representing what really happened is even worse. In a normal June, the workforce increases significantly, because lots of people occupied with other things during the rest of the year typically test the waters in the seasonal and summer-job market. But whereas an average of about 1.75 million did so during the past seven Junes, including almost 1.6 million last year during the recession, only 901,000 did so in June of 2010. You have to go all the way back to 1954 to find a worse June on the ground in the private sector than the June we just experienced. On a population-adjusted basis, June’s figure is the worst performance in the 63 years BLS has been tracking the data.

The only way anybody, especially Teh Won, can claim that we’re headed in the “right direction” with those numbers is if that person’s goal is to make everybody dependent on government.

July 4, 2010

This is what it’s all about

by @ 6:00. Filed under History.

I originally ran this on Independence Day, 2007 and again on Independence Day, 2009. It’s time to dig out the Declaration of Independence again.

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.


Something else that I highlighted 3 years ago – Rick Moran’s 3-day liveblog of the Continental Congress. Do make sure you read the following:

July 3, 2010

Proud to be a misfit

by @ 19:54. Filed under Miscellaneous.

Those of you who know me know I am (usually, at least) a humble person. In the wake of being left off Matt Lewis’ Top 25 Conservatives on Twitter, Dan Collins, who tweets as vermontaigne and who has a pretty good blog called Piece of Work in Progress, put together this:

Yep; I’m on that one. I’m sure you’ll agree that is very appropriate, even though the company is still a bit above my caliber.

Thank you

by @ 19:21. Filed under The Blog.

I had planned on taking the weekend off, but it seems the gang at Hot Air had other plans when one of them (I could tell you who, but then I’d have to kill you…just kidding) put the latest episode of the collapse of Social Security into the Hot Air Headlines. It seems something north of 2,000 of you followed the link and jumped in the mixing bowl known as No Runny Eggs. It is, honestly, humbling to know that many people have at least some sense of what’s coming down the pike.

I hope you do stick around at least a while and enjoy the hospitality Shoebox and I offer up. We may not necessarily post a lot, and certainly not as much as Ed and AP, but especially when Shoe posts, it’s worth the read.

July 2, 2010

The Social Security Crater – Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Edition

by @ 22:09. Filed under Social Security crater.

Last week, I took a look at the ble…er, lack of future of the Disability Insurance (DI) portion of Social Security. Depending on the assumption of outgo used, that fund will likely run out of money between June 2015 and September 2016.

Since the Social Security Trustees are late with their already-delayed annual report, I decided to take a look at the much-larger Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) portion of Social Security. The Cliff’s Notes version, for those of you who don’t want to wade through the details on a holiday weekend, is that once again, the Trustees were overly optimistic last year. The OASI “Trust” Fund will begin running annual primary (cash) deficits this month, will likely begin running overall (including interest) deficits sometime between 2014 and 2020, and will likely be exhausted sometime between 2026 and 2033, with the latter two breakpoints depending on which rate-of-cost-growth one selects.

Like the look at the DI Fund, I assumed that tax revenues and outgo would do for the rest of 2010 what they did for the first 5 months (tax revenues decreased by 4.1%, outgo increased by 4.0%), that the interest rate would be 5% (a bit higher than the current weighted average of 4.880% and significantly higher than the 2.875% new bonds/certificates of indebtedness earn), and that tax revenues would increase by 5.3% starting in 2011 (ahead of the 1996-2006 average of 5.234% for the total FICA/SECA tax). Outside of a couple of “recovery” years, that 5.3% increase in tax revenues is also higher than anticipated in the 2009 Annual Report.

Because there will be a “bubble” of retirees over the next 20 years, I could not simply use either the rate of cost increase between the first 5 months of 2009 and the first 5 months of 2010 (like I did for the “base” DI scenario) or the average rate of cost increase between 1996 and 2006 (like I did for revenues). Instead, I calculated the annual increase of outgo using the percentages from the 2009 Annual Report, using a 2-year average for 2019 and 2020 and a 5-year average after 2020 because annual numbers were not available. Since the “low-cost” estimate is unrealistically optimistic (it claimed that even the DI “Trust” Fund would never run out of money), I used the “intermediate” and “high-cost” estimates for that, and ran the numbers twice.

As a review, the 2009 Annual Report claimed that, under the “intermediate” scenario, the OASI “Trust” Fund would run a yearly primary surplus until 2020 and a yearly overall surplus until 2024. Also, it would not be exhausted until 2041. Under the “high-cost” scenario, the yearly primary surpluses would last until 2014, yearly overall surpluses would last until sometime after 2018 (a specific year was not given), and the fund itself would last until 2031.

Fast-forward to this year. Unless something drastically changes between May and July, the 12-month primary deficit in the OASI fund will begin in the August 2009-July 2010 period (that’s this month, and 4 years before the high-cost estimate from last year), with the FY2010 primary deficit of $9.781 billion and a calendar-year 2010 primary deficit of $20.779 billion.

Assuming future cost growth at the “intermediate” rates, the yearly primary balance never quite gets out of the red in the intermediate term, coming no closer than $10.592 billion between March 2011 and April 2012. The yearly overall balance would flip to the negative side in 2020, and the fund itself would run out in 2033.

Before those of you who think that there really is a pot of gold at the end of every rainbow and that unicorn farts smell like Skittles start hammering me for being pessimistic, remember that I used a high estimate of tax revenue increase. Proof of that is the results of taking the estimates further out to 2085, which is as far as the Trustees go. Because, unlike the “intermediate” model from the Trustees, revenues increase faster than costs, this model projects the OASI “Trust” Fund goes back into the black in 2058. That is rather unlikely because under the “intermediate” model, the closest the OASI operation comes to running a yearly primary surplus after fund exhaustion is sometime between 2050 (when the primary balance is -2.98% of taxable payroll) and 2060 (balance of -3.06% of payroll), and likely near 2055 (balance of -2.96% of payroll).

Now, let’s take what the Trustees assumed to be the “intermediate” case for tax revenue increases from 2011 onwards and plug that back into the spreadsheet. Since they assumed roughly a 6% increase in 2012 and 2013, the OASI “Trust” Fund does get closer to the black on a yearly cash basis, getting as close as a $7.720 billion primary deficit between February 2012 and January 2013. However, they also assume a lower increase in tax revenues the other years, which means the fund goes into a yearly overall deficit in 2019, and runs out of money in 2030, never to go into the black again for more than one month in twelve (specifically, April).

It gets worse if future cost growth is at the “high-cost” rate. That is more likely given the first 5 months of 2010 have been more costly than even the 2009 high-cost estimate projected. Assuming either the flat 5.3% tax-revenue growth the “base” scenario does or the variable tax-revenue growth assumed by the Trustees in the 2009 “high-cost” estimate, the yearly overall balance would flip to the negative side in 2016, the last monthly overall positive balances in the intermediate term (long-term using the Trustees’ tax-revenue numbers) would be in April 2022 (on the strength of taxes) and June 2022 (on the strength of interest), and the fund would be exhausted in 2026.

Revisions/extensions (7:25 pm 7/3/2010) – The power of a HotAir-lanche is truly awesome. At last check, somewhere over 2,000 of you popped in here off the Headline Ed/Allahpundit put up. I can’t thank you enough for dropping in this little corner of the ‘Tubes, and Shoebox and I hope you stick around a while.

June 30, 2010

And then there were three for Lt. Gov.

by @ 16:01. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

I know, I’m a day late to this. Ben Collins dropped out of the Republican race for lieutenant governor yesterday:

When I came back from Afghanistan and entered this campaign for lieutenant governor, it was clear to me how important new leadership in Madison was for the future of our state. As I have traveled across Wisconsin and visited with thousands of families and business owners, my initial view about the need for new leadership has been confirmed.

But as this hard-fought, six-person race for lieutenant governor has developed, I have begun to question whether my passion and ideas for Wisconsin’s future are best used in the lieutenant governor’s race or in the race for governor itself. Where can I most aggressively contribute to the pursuit for new leadership in Wisconsin? How can I best advance the goals of business owners trying to create new jobs? Who really is our best chance to turn Madison upside down and get our state back on track?

In answering each of these questions I arrive at the same conclusion: Scott Walker. As I’ve witnessed Scott campaign across our state, it has become quite difficult to contain my enthusiasm for his message and his vision. The practical, conservative approach Scott brings to government is what Madison has sorely lacked and what state government badly needs. I couldn’t have been more proud watching him earn our party’s near-unanimous endorsement, creating a center of gravity for the party in the process. He is a thoughtful, decent man with the temperament, experience and skills to be a truly transformative governor.

Therefore, I am suspending my campaign for lieutenant governor in order to focus my efforts to ensure Wisconsin’s future is secure in a conservative victory. It will also allow me to focus on my own business and my service with the Army National Guard, both of which remain high priorities.

To the thousands of people who have supported and encouraged me in this race for lieutenant governor, I am deeply grateful. To my opponents remaining in the race, I appreciate your deep concern for Wisconsin and wish each of you the very best on the campaign trail. To my wife and my family, I love and treasure your friendship and support.

To those who believe that the status quo in state government should continue, count me as the latest footsoldier in Scott Walker’s grassroots army to take Wisconsin back.

Ben, I hope this isn’t the last time we hear from you on the political front.

More Poll-a-copia, Dem pollster edition

by @ 15:53. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

In its late-June polls of the Senate and governor’s races, Public Policy Polling has essentially confirmed the extreme closeness of the Senate race and the fade of Tom Barrett in the governor’s race.

First, the Senate race. Russ Feingold led Ron Johnson 45% to 43%, and Dave Westlake 45% to 38%. Both of those are a percentage point higher than Rasmussen’s latest. Even that is not good news for Feingold, because Feingold’s favorables were evenly split 42% favorable/42% unfavorable (worse than Rasmussen’s 52% favorable/45% unfavorable).

Unlike Rasmussen, which puts its crosstabs behind a pay wall, Public Policy includes its crosstabs as part of its release, which reveals a near-even partisan split (34% “independent”, 33% Democrat, 32% Republican, which belies the 41% moderate/40% conservative/19% liberal ideology split). That allows a closer look at the numbers. Among independents, Feingold’s favorability rating is a rather unfavorable 39% favorable/46% unfavorable. Also among independents, Johnson carried them in the Johnson-Feingold matchup 46%-39%, while Feingold held them in the Feingold-Westlake matchup 39%-36%.

On the governor’s side, Scott Walker is up on Tom Barrett 45%-38%, while Mark Neumann is up 41%-36%. The latter represents a significant drop from the Rasmussen lead of 8 for Neumann.

The crosstabs reveal that, while a significant portion of the state still doesn’t have an opinion of the three candidates, only Walker has a positive overall favorability factor (36% favorable/28% unfavorable, and 32% favorable/28% favorable among independents). While Barrett has a negative overall favorability factor (28% favorable/30% unfavorable), he does have a positive favorability factor among independents (28% favorable/26% unfavorable). Neumann lags badly in that category, with negative overall favorability (18% favorable/35% unfavorable) and negative indepenent favorability (18% favorable/33% unfavorable) factors.

Both Walker and Neumann carry independents rather handily against Barrett. Walker carried them 43%-30%, while Neumann carried them 41%-29%.

We’re number 5 – tax-raising edition

by @ 14:55. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

Rick Newman at US News and World Report went through the ten states that have raised taxes the most per-capita since 2009. With $900,000,000 in new taxes since then, or $159 per person, Wisconsin ranks 5th.

It gets worse when one looks at the gross amount, because Delaware and Connecticut have a lower population than Wisconsin. On the other hand, Arizona, which ranked just behind Wisconsin on a per-capita basis, went in for an even $1,014,000,000 in new taxes.

Meanwhile, to within the nearest $1,000,000, Idaho, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Wyoming held the line. Nebraska, Missouri, Alaska, Alabama, Louisiana, West Virginia, Indiana, Ohio and North Dakota actually found a way to cut taxes.

June 28, 2010

“Interesting” how far the law can be stretched

by @ 17:50. Filed under Politics - National.

The Washington Post‘s Chris Cillizza reports that, in the aftermath of Sen. Robert Byrd’s death, Secretary of State Natalie Tennant announced the replacement appointed by governor Joe Manchin will serve until after the 2012 election. The statute in question (§3-10-3) reads (emphasis added):

Any vacancy occurring in the office of secretary of state, auditor, treasurer, attorney general, commissioner of agriculture, United States senator, judge of the supreme court of appeals or in any office created or made elective to be filled by the voters of the entire state, judge of a circuit court or judge of a family court is filled by the governor of the state by appointment. If the unexpired term of a judge of the supreme court of appeals, a judge of the circuit court or judge of a family court is for less than two years or if the unexpired term of any other office named in this section is for a period of less than two years and six months, the appointment to fill the vacancy is for the unexpired term. If the unexpired term of any office is for a longer period than above specified, the appointment is until a successor to the office has timely filed a certificate of candidacy, has been nominated at the primary election next following such timely filing and has thereafter been elected and qualified to fill the unexpired term. Proclamation of any election to fill an unexpired term is made by the governor of the state and, in the case of an office to be filled by the voters of the entire state, must be published prior to the election as a Class II-0 legal advertisement in compliance with the provisions of article three, chapter fifty-nine of this code and the publication area for the publication is each county of the state. If the election is to fill a vacancy in the office of judge of a circuit court or judge of a family court, the proclamation must be published prior to the election as a Class II-0 legal advertisement in compliance with the provisions of article three, chapter fifty-nine of this code and the publication area for such publication is each county in the judicial or family court circuit.

The certificate-of-candidacy period was between January 11 and January 30. Further, there was a court case in 1994 (H/T – Hotline via Allahpundit) that affirms the certificate-of-candidacy requirement.

I suppose I should mention that all involved in the current situation are Democrats seeking to keep the seat in their hands at a time when the voting populace seems ready, willing and able to remove them from power. As Smitty said, “The good news in all this is that, since the ruling falls in favor of the Democratic Party, we’re spared endless breast-beating about the crushing of voter expression, Republican Party thugger in general, and Rascal Rove vitriol in particular.” One could only imagine what the presstitutes would have said if it were Republicans that were desperate to keep their virtual supermajority in the Senate.

The latest evidence Obama is serving FDR’s 5th term

Ed Morrissey highlighted the latest bit of evidence that Obama is really the second coming of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. From his joint press conference with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev:

Those were the same hopes of another generation of Americans and Russians — the generation that stood together as allies in the Second World War —- the Great Patriotic War in which the Russian people suffered and sacrificed so much. We recently marked the 65th anniversary of our shared victory in that war, including that historic moment when American and Soviet troops came together in friendship at the Elbe River in Germany.

“A reporter who was there at that time, all those years ago, said: “If there is a fine, splendid world in the future, it will largely be because the United States and Russia get on well together. If it is in trouble, it will be because they don’t get on well. It’s as simple as that.”

Since Ed included the uncorrected comment in an e-mail I sent to him on this, I’ll repeat the Croats twice here as well – I think the Poles, Estonians, Latvians, Lituanians, Hungarians, Slavs, Croats, Bosnians, Romanians and Croats (among others) might have a second opinion on that.

It was the Yalta Conference, FDR’s last major decision, that abandoned Eastern Europe to the not-at-all-tenderness of Iosif Stalin.

Revisions/extensions (5:52 pm 6/28/2010) – How did I screw up the link to Ed? Sorry about that; it’s fixed now.

June 27, 2010

All you need to know about Terrence Wall’s sour grapes

Jim Klauser, who was Terrence Wall’s campaign co-chair, was quoted by the Wisconsin State Journal responding to allegations from the former Senate candidate that Ron Johnson bought his endorsement at last month’s Republican Party of Wisconsin convention:

“I looked into it and I found nothing to support it. Sadly, I think this is all a part of his imagination. I think he is conjuring it up and demeaning a reputable individual in the process.

The Johnson campaign produced documents showing a total of 6 rooms paid for by the campaign, which the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports was for Johnson, his wife, and 6 campaign staffers.

Specifically on the delay of the endorsement vote, one can blame the deadlock on the lieutenant governor’s 3-ballot ultimate non-endorsement. I was there Saturday, and the endorsement process for governor and lieutenant governor took 6 hours.

Just as a reminder, the votes weren’t even counted after Dick Leinenkugel’s surprise drop-out and endorsement of Johnson from the stage before the Wall campaign hit Johnson for taking the endorsement of “Doyle’s favorite Republican”.

One more thing – buying votes at a convention is not illegal. Wall was as busy as anybody else handing out (and selling) trinkets all weekend long. Quoting UW-Milwaukee professor of governmental affairs Mordecai Lee, “not exactly” a conservative, from the WSJ article:

At the end of the day, what he has accused Johnson of is not illegal, so I’m not sure what he hopes to accomplish. But I think he better stick to non-partisan elections, if he ever wants to run for office again.

I guess that, since Wall won’t be replacing Russ Feingold, he would rather keep his tenant in office.

June 24, 2010

So Obama is coming to town to talk economy

by @ 19:26. Filed under Economy, Politics - National.

The word from WisPolitics is that President Obama will be coming to a to-be-disclosed location in southeast Wisconsin on June 30 to talk about the economy. The lines are now open for suggestions on where he could hold that talk.

My choice – the being-torn-down former Delphi plant at Howell and Drexel in Oak Creek.

The Social Security Crater – Disability Insurance edition

by @ 18:08. Filed under Social Security crater.

I know; the Trustees report is due out in a few days, but there’s some things that won’t wait until then. This time, I’ll focus specifically on the Disability Insurance (DI) portion of the matter. If you don’t want to wade through the whole post, the Cliff’s Notes version is that the DI “Trust” Fund suffered its first negative April since the effects of the previous major Social Security overhaul took full effect in 1987, and that it appears even the high-cost estimate in last year’s Trustees report was optimistic, with the DI fund now looking to be exhausted by the end of 2015 instead of by the end of 2016 in the 2009 high-cost estimate and by the end of 2020 in the intermediate estimate.

Before I get to the heart of the matter, I first need to do two months’ worth of housekeeping. In April, when just about everybody with a tax bill settles up and those who make quarterly estimated payments do so in the greatest of numbers, the combined Old-Age and Survivors/Disability Insurance (OASDI) funds took in $76,672 million, including $138 million of interest, and had expenses of $58,948 million for a gross increase of $17,724 million (or 23.12% of gross income), and a primary (cash) increase of $17,586 million (or 22.98% of ex-interest/net receipts). That pushed the 12-month primary deficit to $18,732 million, and dropped the 12-month gross surplus to $99,599 million (the first sub-$100,000 million 12-month gross surplus since 10/1997-9/1998).

In absolute terms, it’s the worst primary April performance since 1999 (with a $17,506 million increase on $49,810 million of tax revenue) and the worst gross April performance since 1998 (with a $15,502 million increase on $46,804 million in gross revenue). In percentage terms, that’s the worst April since monthly records were made available in 1987.

May didn’t show any real improvement over recent months, with the combined funds posting a combined $5,087 million gross/$5,177 primary loss on $53,859 million in gross receipts ($90 million in interest) and $58,946 million in outgo. The 12-month primary deficit grew to $21,987 million, and the 12-month gross surplus shrunk to $96,268 million.

This is not the first time since 1987 that the DI Fund faced imminent exhaustion. Indeed, in 1994, it came within 2 years of running out of Treasury securities to draw upon. The fix back then was to transfer the majority of the November 1994 tax revenue from the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Fund and increase the portion of the FICA/SECA tax that went into the DI Fund. That fix, which worked back then because the OASI Fund was running in the black, won’t work this time because, outside the “taxation” months of January and April, the OASI Fund has been running a primary deficit since July 2009.

Specifically to April, even in April 1994, the DI Fund ran a monthly surplus of $492 million ($473 million net) on $3,722 million of receipts ($19 million of interest) and $3,230 million of outgo. Now, the DI Fund has run 13 months of consecutive monthly primary deficits (through May), with the only monthly overall surpluses coming as a result of the semi-annual crediting of interest in June and December. The latest 12-month overall deficit (6/2009-5/2010) was $17,167 million, over 8.3% of the end-of-May fund value of $194,355 million.

That leads me to the bad news on the end of the DI “Trust” Fund. I decided to plug some numbers into the spreadsheet to see just how fast the fund would cease to exist. I assumed that tax revenues would, for the rest of 2010, continue to lag behind 2009’s by just under 5.2% (as they have for the first 5 months), then increase by 5.3% (actually a bit higher than the 1996-2006 annual average of 5.234% for the total FICA/SECA tax). I also assumed that outgo would increase by the 5.464% that it went up for the first 5 months in 2010 versus the first 5 months of 2009 (significantly lower than the 1996-2006 annual average of 7.613%), even though 2010’s increase is solely due to the increased number of those drawing from Social Security, and that the interest rate would be at 5% (a bit higher than the current weighted average of 4.880% and significantly higher than the 2.875% new bonds/certificates of indebtedness earn).

With a starting point of $194,355 million in the DI “Trust” Fund at the end of May 2010, and assumptions that are actually favorable to the longevity of the “Trust” Fund, here are the projected DI “Trust” Fund balances at the end of each calendar year:

December 2010 – $178,728 million (projected to be the first “interest” month with an monthly overall deficit, with June 2010 having the only monthly overall surplus of 2010)
December 2011 – $151,653 million (again with June 2011 having the only monthly overall surplus of 2011)
December 2012 – $118,899 million (with June 2012 having the only monthly overall surplus of 2012, and June 2012 also having the last monthly overall surplus in this scenario)
December 2013 – $83,281 million
December 2014 – $43,428 million
December 2015 – EXHAUSTED (November 2015 would see a DI fund balance of $4,839 million)

Even if I were to assume the 5.3% tax growth beginning in June 2010 instead of January 2011, it doesn’t get much better. The DI “Trust” Fund barely makes it into 2017 before it disappears.

As a reminder, under current law, at the point the DI fund is exhausted, benefits would have to be cut by the percentage the tax revenues don’t meet demand. No, it can’t even tap into the OASI “Trust” Fund to avoid average benefit cuts of over 25%.

Revisions/extensions (7:05 pm 7/2/2010) – Partly because the Social Security Administration missed their delayed deadline for the annual report, and partly because I had to adjust my outgo assumptions for the OASI “Trust” Fund estimates, I have re-run the numbers using the increases anticipated in the “Intermediate” and “High-Cost” scenarios in the 2009 Trustees Report.

Since the Intermediate scenario assumes that the cost of running the DI portion of Social Security rises slower than the 5.464% it went up in the first 5 months of 2010, the DI “Trust” Fund makes it to December 2016 before being exhausted. Further, unlike the “base” scenario outlined above, the DI operations would be able to pay out the entirety of the scheduled payments for a couple Aprils after fund exhaustion.

The bad news is the “High-Cost” scenario assumes the cost of running the DI portion of Social Security rises even faster than my assumption. Plugging that back into the spreadsheet yields fund exhaustion in July 2015.

Poll-a-copia: End of June edition

by @ 10:45. Filed under Politics - Wisconsin.

Rasmussen Reports released its monthly look-in at the Senate and governor’s races, both taken June 21. The news isn’t good for the Democrats, despite President Obama once again having a significantly higher approval rating in Wisconsin (49% approve/51% disapprove/Approval Index -13) than nationally (45% approve/55% disapprove/Approval Index -15), and the Democrat Party of Wisconsin convention happening between the May and June surveys.

First, Ron Johnson halved Russ Feingold’s insignificant May lead, and now trails 46% to 45%. Feingold’s smears and distortions aren’t exactly working, as Johnson’s favorables are now at 36% approve/30% disapprove/”Passion” Index +8, compared to 32% approve/25% disapprove/”Passion” Index +6, while Feingold’s favorables dipped to 52% favorable (down 1 point from May)/45% unfavorable (up 1 point from May)/”Passion” Index of 0 (down 6 points from May).

Meanwhile, Dave Westlake has made some hay, and is far closer than he’s ever been, trailing 47%-41%. The news isn’t all good for Westlake, because his unfavorables went up dramatically from 26% overall to 32% overall, with the “Passion” Index slipping from -3 to -4.

Over in the governor’s race, somebody had better put a notice on a milk carton for Tom Barrett. He has dropped to an 8-point deficit against both Scott Walker (49%-41%) and Mark Neumann (47%-39%). That 8-point lead by Neumann is his largest, with Walker’s 49% tying his highest percentage total (previously done in February, when he led Barrett 49%-40%) and Neumann’s 47% setting a new high.

One thing I wish Rasmussen did polling for was the primary election. The Walker campaign thoughtfully included some of the internals in a comparison between Walker and Neumann, and it shows a hard road for Neumann. Among the four categories of voters generally considered to be participants in the Republican primary, “Republicans” (note for the out-of-state crowd, there is no party registration, but one cannot vote in more than one party’s primary), independents, conservatives, and Tea Party, Walker is viewed significantly more favorably than Neumann. Among the Tea Party crowd, the Walker split is 86% favorable/8% unfavorable while the Neumann split is 71% favorable/19% unfavorable. Among conservatives, the Walker split is 79% favorable/14% unfavorable while the Neumann split is 64% favorable/22% unfavorable. Among independents, the Walker split is 58% favorable/24% unfavorable while the Neumann split is 51% favorable/30% unfavorable. Among Republicans, the Walker split is 86% favorable/11% unfavorable while the Neumann split is 70% favorable/20% unfavorable.

Unless Neumann is counting on a significant Democrat/liberal cross-over, or a major gaffe by Walker, I don’t see how he gets the nomination.

[No Runny Eggs is proudly powered by WordPress.]