Blogger Alerts

Entries in US Senate (9)

Monday
Feb092015

Personal Liberty Digest - Want to take your country back? Here’s where it starts

Posted on February 9, 2015February 6, 2015

Under the Founders’ Constitution, U.S. senators understood for whom they worked.

Article I, Section 3, of the Constitution required that “[t]he Senate or the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislatures thereof…” As such, senators posed a barrier against federal usurpation of states’ rights.

During the Philadelphia Convention in 1787, John Dickinson of Delaware argued “that the members of the second branch (the Senate) ought to be chosen by the individual legislatures.”

George Mason of Virginia agreed. He said: “Whatever power may be necessary for the national government, a certain portion must necessarily be left for the states. It is impossible for one power to pervade the extreme parts of the United States, so as to carry equal justice to them. The state legislatures, also, ought to have some means of defending themselves against the encroachments of the national government. In every other department, we have studiously endeavored to provide for its self-defense. Shall we leave the states alone unprovided with the means for this purpose?”

Depending upon their point of view, Founders either hailed or lamented the fact that, by simply refusing to appoint senators, the states could see the central government “destroyed” (William Richardson Davie) and “put an end to” (Samuel Johnston). Or as Alexander Hamilton (who actually wanted a U.S. system similar to British mercantilism) opined: “It is certainly true, that the State Legislatures, by forbearing the appointment of Senators, may destroy the National Government.”

When bills came before the Senate, senators were compelled to understand the will of their states on the matter and vote in the best interests of their states. Several times, senators either resigned because they disagreed with their states on legislation or were recalled and replaced if they refused to vote as their states directed. [...]

To Continue Reading Click Here ---> Repeal 17th Amendment

Thursday
Apr102014

RLCNH - Urgent Feedback Requested: New Hampshire US Senate Race

The Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire has developed a very short (2 questions) survey regarding our current race for US Senate.  If you would, please click here to fill out the online survey.  

The results are anonymous and I encourage your to share this e-mail with your network.  Alternative, you can share the following link on Facebook or through other social media https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/JX3XMGT

In liberty, 
Aaron Day, Chairman
Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire

Sunday
Nov102013

Newsmax - Scott Brown Urged to Run for Senate in New Hampshire

National Republicans are urging former Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown to run for the Senate in New Hampshire. Brown has not declared his candidacy, but all indications are he is seriously considering the idea of running against incumbent Democrat Jeanne Shaheen. "I don’t think Scott Brown is just fooling around," said Kansas Sen. Jerry Moran, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee.


Read the Full Story — Go Here Now

Saturday
Oct162010

NRSC - BREAKING: Firm Linked to Hodes Pays NH Fine for Push Polling 

http://politicalscoop.wmur.com/firm-linked-to-hodes-pays-nh-fine-for-push-polling

 

Firm linked to Hodes pays NH fine for push polling

WMUR Political Scoop

By James Pindell

October 15, 2010, 2:25 PM

An out of state firm which may have conducted polling for Democrat U.S. Senate candidate Paul Hodes’s campaign has agreed to pay $20,000 to New Hampshire in a settlement agreement over allegations they were involved in push polling.

 

The Attorney General’s office announced the settlement this afternoon that Mountain West Research Center of Pocatello, Idaho had agreed to pay a fine and cooperated with the investigation after those polled complained that the pollster didn’t disclose who was paying for the poll even though they were saying negative things about Republican Senate candidate Kelly Ayotte. After questions were raised the poll stopped.

 

When a reporter asked Mountain West who they were polling for they said Anzalone Liszt Research. Anzalone Liszt Research, at the time, listed Hodes as a client. The Hodes campaign didn’t deny that it was their poll and said they wouldn’t discuss it.

Thursday
Sep162010

Public Policy Polling Media Alert: Ayotte leads Hodes by 4

Kelly Ayotte will begin the general election in New Hampshire with a small lead over Paul Hodes, 47-43. Although she remains the favorite in the race it's clear that the divisive primary has her in a much weaker position than 5 months ago and that this contest may be more competitive than has generally been accepted.

When PPP first polled New Hampshire in April Ayotte had a 34/24 favorability rating. The number of voters with a positive opinion of her now is basically the same as it was then at 35%. But her negatives have nearly doubled from 24% to 47%. What were once good numbers with independents at 35/23 have now gone sour to 34/44. And while earlier in the year she had an unusual level of popularity across party lines at 20% that's now declined to 11%.

The competitiveness of her primary forced Ayotte to do things she might have been able to get away with skipping if she'd had an easier path to the nomination. For instance her Sarah Palin endorsement proved critical in surviving with a small victory last night, but 52% of general election voters say Palin's support is a turn off with only 18% of them saying it's a positive. Her having to move to the right in the primary has already hurt her overall image with New Hampshire voters and could prove to become even more of a liability in the general election.

The good news for Ayotte is that Hodes isn't particularly popular either. His favorability numbers are nearly identical to hers with 35% of voters seeing him positively to 46% with a negative opinion.

Looking at their head to head match up both candidates pretty much have their party base locked up and Ayotte's breaking the tie with a strong advantage among independents. Hodes is getting 85% of Democrats while Ayotte's getting 83% of Republicans. She's up 51-37 with those independents.

Although many Democrats were rooting for Ovide Lamontagne to win the nomination, perceiving him as the weaker general election candidate, this poll found there was little difference between him and Ayotte against Hodes. Lamontagne would have started out with a 47-44 lead. 36% of voters had a favorable opinion of him by the end of his campaign to 33% with an unfavorable one, giving him basically the same level of goodwill as Ayotte with much lower negatives. All in all it was probably a wash for the general election who emerged from this primary.

One final note: New Hampshire is one state where Democrats are having to cope with a considerable enthusiasm gap. Barack Obama won New Hampshire by 9 points but those planning to vote this fall report having split their voters evenly in 2008, an indication that Republican voters are planning to come back out at a much higher rate than Democrats. If the 2010 electorate matched who turned out in 2008 we find Hodes would lead Ayotte 48-43. If Hodes can get the Democratic base better motivated in these final seven weeks it's going to be a very close race.

 

This analysis is also available on our blog:

 

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/09/ayotte-holds-small-lead.html

 

A press release and full crosstabs are attached-