There are many reasons to deny my above-pictured BFF, Ron Johnson, a second term as Wisconsin Senator. For example, he refuses to do his Constitutional duty to keep the Supreme Court functioning. He sent a treasonous letter to the leaders of Iran, advising them to ignore the current US President. He voted to allow domestic terrorists to continue to buy assault rifles. He believes that your Social Security is some kind of criminal "Ponzi scheme".
However, of all of the reasons to fire Ron Johnson on November 8, I personally believe that the most important is his refusal to do anything about global warming. In fact, Johnson frequently denies that human-caused global warming is even happening. The first step in solving a problem is to acknowledge its existence.
As a retired scientist, I find Johnson's utter disregard for science research and the scientific community deeply disturbing. Our political leaders should base policy on facts, rather than on the directives of their deep-pocketed political donors.
Johnson has fought action on global warming since the beginning of his political career. During a 2010 Senate campaign interview, he said, "I absolutely do not believe that the science of man-caused climate is proven, by any stretch of the imagination. Its far more likely that its just sunspot activity..." This statement earned him the early derision of the country and the nickname "Senator Sunspot".
Since that time, Johnson has wasted no opportunity to embarrass Wisconsin by his wrong assertions on global warming. During 2014 Senate hearings on the XL-pipeline, Johnson tried to lecture Columbia climate scientist, James Hansen, on the "facts", insisting that "The science (of global warming) is far from settled."
And Johnson's daffy ideas on global warming continue to this day. In an August 3 talk-radio interview, he was asked about regulations to limit carbon dioxide. Our senator went full-blown tin foil hat, saying "For some reason, liberals and progressives, socialists and communists, want to control everything. They want to control your life... There is an arrogance of power there, they're utopians. They think they can create heaven on earth. And where its failed in the past, those people like Stalin and Chavez and the Castros, the nut-cases in North Korea..."
Somehow, the unhinged Johnson equates limits on greenhouse gasses with dictatorships in Stalinist Russia and North Korea. Is this the guy we want representing us in the Senate?
Just last week, Johnson announced a different path, in which he simply wants to let global warming happen, damn the planet. In a radio interview, he said, “Climate has already changed, always will. I’m just not an alarmist. We will adapt. How many people are moving up toward the Antarctica, or the Arctic? Most people move down to Texas or Florida, where it’s a little bit warmer.” In a JS interview, he went further, saying "Mankind has flourished in warmer temperatures." Sounds like ol' RoJo would like to create hell on earth.
Johnson has certainly been putting his votes where his mouth is. Our Tea-Party Senator has received a meager 4% (out of 100%) lifetime voting score from the League of Conservation Voters. His performance led to a strong 2016 endorsement of his opponent, Russ Feingold, by the same pro-environment group.
In the Senate, Johnson has fought to keep taxpayer subsidies funneling cash to coal, oil, and gas producers. He co-sponsored resolutions condemning EPA rules to limit CO2 emissions from power plants. He signed onto a letter to the Obama administration to protest those rules.
During a debate over the XL-pipeline, the Senate voted on an amendment stating that "human activity is a significant contributor to climate change". Of course, RoJo voted nay, along with 48 of his Republican colleagues. Again, you can't remedy a problem that you do not believe exists.
Ron Johnson has unwaveringly supported Donald Trump, tying himself to the Orange Groper as "Don and Ron". Trump is certainly an environmental soulmate of Johnson. Trump believes that global warming was an invention of the Chinese, aimed at making the US less competitive. Trump would immediately abrogate the Paris Climate Agreement. He would drastically cut the EPA. The country certainly cannot afford a combined Johnson-Trump assault on the environment.
Ron Johnson clearly does not understand global warming and the science behind it. If he was only expressing his bizarre opinions on the radio, in a bar, or at family gatherings, he would be harmless. Unfortunately, Johnson has real power in the US Senate. He uses that power to obstruct and impede others who are trying to make constructive environmental change. We must end this. Johnson must be sent packing on November 8.
Paul C. Adair
In this presidential election, we have a choice between one of the most qualified candidates who ever ran for the office, and the absolutely most frightening. Republicans officials are in a quandary. They must choose between a President who might make a few decisions with which they disagree and one who represents an existential threat to our country. Unfortunately, many in the GOP are making the wrong decision- one that will haunt them for the rest of their political lives.
Congressman-for-life, Jim Sensenbrenner is one of those people. At a time when many in his party are rejecting their dangerous nominee, Sensenbrenner is doubling down on his support for Sniffy McGrabber. However, Jim never makes a case for why GOPers should vote for Donald Trump, but on why they should vote against Hillary Clinton. In fact, when talking about the election, Sensenbrenner rarely even mentions the name of his own party's candidate.
In an October 5 interview on the hate radio show of Limbaugh-wanna-be Jay Weber, Sensenbrenner tried to make his case to Wisconsin Republican voters. "There are a lot a people who don't particularly like Trump, but they sure don't like Hillary. If you don't like Hillary, you've gotta turn-out and you've gotta vote and you've gotta vote for Trump."
So Sensenbrenner supports the flimflam artist who set-up a phony school to steal money from the gullible. He supports the unscrupulous thief who stiffs small businesses and workers. He supports the crook who uses his sham charity like a personal bank account. He supports the sexual predator, bigot, and misogynist who preaches a doctrine of division and hate. He supports the dictator-in-waiting who would jail political opponents, ignore the Constitution, and restrict the press. He supports the traitor who idolizes, defends, and is aided by former-KGB agent Vladimir Putin.
Sensenbrenner came roaring to the Orange Con-man's defense in a October 7 column in the Journal-Sentinel. Earlier, the paper opined that Trump is not qualified to be President. Rather than defending Trump, Sensenbrenner could only attack his opponent. Jim brought-up all of the delusional so-called "scandals" from the far-right bubble. Of course, he brought-up Benghazi. He brought-up the Clinton Foundation. He brought-up the silly e-mails. But not a single word extolling the virtues of his man, Donald Trump.
Even on the day after the infamous "grab p***y" tape, Sensenbrenner was supporting the sexual predator that heads his party. Last Saturday, Sensenbrenner spoke at the GOP Frightfest in Elkhorn, Wisconsin. During his seven minute speech, ol' Jim could not bring himself to utter Trump's name a single time. He tried to make the election all about enacting the crazy Tea-Party agenda of Paul Ryan. He tried to make it about imposing far-right judges on America, saying "President Hillary Clinton will veto this (Ryan's Ayn Randian) plan. That is why we can't have President Hillary Clinton sitting in the White House. This election is not about individuals. It is about issues. It is about ideas. It is about the direction this country will take."
Sorry, Jim. This election is very much about individuals. It is about the person who will be Commander-in-Chief of America's military. It is about the person in charge of our nuclear arsenal. You want to entrust that responsibility to Donald J. Trump.
In a Monday statement, Sensenbrenner again tried to convince people to vote for Trump. Again he said nothing supporting the Donald, but merely criticized Hillary, saying "Now is not the time to make perfect the enemy of the good." He claimed that a Clinton presidency "would have a devastating and far-reaching impact on the future of our country." and that "Hillary Clinton is a bet America cannot afford to make."
Jim Sensenbrenner could not care less whether an insane and horrible person becomes our nation's leader. To him, it is all about entrenching an extreme Supreme Court that will continue to allow the wholesale purchase of politicians. It is about having a President that will rubber-stamp taking heath-care away from twenty million Americans. It is about having an unfettered path to privatizing Social Security and turning Medicare into a discount coupon scheme. It is about sending the country even deeper into debt by giving deep tax-cuts to the rich.
All in the name of gross partisan politics, Senenbrenner fully supports Donald Trump. With his enthusiastic and self-serving Trump support, Jim Sensenbrenner owns all that is Trump. He owns all of the hate, division, and fear stoked by Trump. He owns every outrageous racist, xenophobic, and sexist comment uttered by Trump. He owns every one of Trump's wacky conspiracy theories. He owns all of Trump's fascist tendencies. He owns it all.
Paul C. Adair
During the 2012 elections, my liberal aunt kept worrying. She thought that Romney was likely to win the presidential race. Several times, we had to talk her down from the ledge. We knew that Obama had this. Nate Silver told us so.
Political geeks of all stripes are frequent visitors to websites predicting the national political races. At least 13 well-known groups are making predictions on the presidential and Senate races. Many of these are associated with news media. For example, ABC, Associated Press, NBC, CNN, and the Washington Post all make predictions. Based on individual state polls, each predicts how many of the 270 electoral votes required to win that each candidate can count on. Here are the most recent calls from this morning (October 7, 2016):
Outlet Hillary EV's Trump EV's Toss-up EV % Likelihood of Hillary Win
ABC 272 197 69 ---
AP 272 197 69 ---
NBC 272 174 92 ---
CNN 271 197 70 ---
Wash Post 253 197 88 ---
There are other, independent pundits who also make prognostications on the races. Sabato's Crystal Ball (U. of Virginia), the Cook Political Report, and the Rothenburg and Gonzales Political Report are three of these groups. All three also predict the Senate, House, and gubernatorial races.
Sabato 316 215 7 ---
Cook 272 197 69 ---
R&G 279 191 68 ---
However, I prefer the groups that use statistical analysis to derive a percent likelihood of a given result. The New York Times, Huffington Post, and the Daily Kos all take this approach. Of the statistical groups, my personal favorites are the Princeton Election Consortium (Sam Wang), and FiveThirtyEight (Nate Silver).
FiveThirtyEight, for example, weights each poll contributing to its overall predictions by how recent the poll was conducted, historical ideological skew, and historical accuracy. Both FiveThirtyEight and Princeton offer a dazzling array of great graphs and charts. Using differing assumptions, both give several types of percent likelihoods. Best of all, neither tries to weasel-out of prediction by calling any state a toss-up.
Huff Post 263 180 95 83.5
Daily Kos 308 230 --- 86
NYT 322 192 24 82
538 326 212 --- 79.6
Princeton 323 215 --- 88
With all of the various and sundry poll-agglomerators, is was only natural that an agglomerator of poll-agglomerators would appear. The site 270 to Win is such an entity. The site gives current results and links for most of the groups mentioned above. It lists averages of all of the sites, covering both the presidential and Senate races.
After the 2012 election, stories abounded on how the election night loss shocked Romney and his staff. We remember the right-wing website that "unskewed" supposedly liberal polls and proclaimed that the Republican candidate would actually win. However, reliable poll-agglomerators like Wang and Silver had been predicting an Obama win for weeks. The Romney campaign should have paid more to the actual numbers than to their misplaced hopes.
There is a wealth of free, on-line election predictions available to the incurable political geek. With that information, there is no reason to be unsure of the state of the races or to be taken by surprise on election night.
Paul C. Adair
