News that doesn't receive the necessary attention.

Sunday, December 13, 2015

Donald Trump rises to new high in Wall St. Journal NBC News national poll, Dec. 6-9, 2015. Two polls were combined. Extra questions were added 'following Trump's proposal' on Dec. 8-9 to 495 respondents. That sample has 4.4 error margin. Separately, 'additional interviews on some questions were conducted on an additional sample of past GOP primary voters in order to increase to 400' the GOP survey total 12/6-9. That sample has 4.9% error margin-WSJ

Trump 27
Cruz 22
Rubio 15
Carson 11
Bush 7
Fiorina 5
Huckabee 3
Christie 3
Kasich 2
Paul 2

Poll dates 12/6/12/9/15 400 Registered Republican primary voters, 4.9 error margin. Poll dates 12/8-12/9/15, 495 Registered Republican primary voters, 4.4 error margin.  Methodology not stated, nor how two polls were combined.

12/13/15, "Trump, Cruz Lead GOP Field; Support for Carson Plummets, Poll Finds," Wall St. Journal, Janet Hook

"New Journal/NBC News poll shows Trump has 27% support, taking over top position from Carson"

"Donald Trump has risen to a new high and Ben Carson’s support has plummeted among Republican primary voters after a tumultuous month of international and domestic terrorism, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll finds.

Mr. Trump leads the Republican field with 27% support, taking over the top position from Mr. Carson, who led in a late October Journal/NBC News survey.

Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas has vaulted into second place, amid signs that he has picked up former Carson supporters. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida placed third in the survey, but the poll also carried evidence that he stands to benefit most when the big field of GOP candidates is winnowed. 

Mr. Carson, the retired neurosurgeon, dropped to fourth place, with 11% support, down from 29% in late October. As terror attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, Calif., heightened attention to national security in the past month, Mr. Carson has stumbled on foreign policy questions, and critics have raised doubts about his mastery of international affairs....

Mr. Trump’s 27% support was his highest showing in Journal/NBC News polling this year and compares to 23% support in the prior survey, in late October. The results continue to defy the expectations of many political analysts and Trump rivals that the celebrity businessman’s candidacy would fade, or at least hit a ceiling, when its novelty wore off.

The poll suggests a new dynamic has arisen in the race, with Mr. Cruz becoming a formidable force. His spike in support-to 22% of GOP primary voters, up from 10% in late October-catapulted him to the poll’s No. 2 spot for the first time since the 2016 campaign began.

Mr. Cruz has been assiduously courting evangelical voters who had also been drawn to Mr. Carson, and the poll suggests his efforts are reaping benefits. Support for Mr. Cruz among “values voters”-those who most strongly support traditional marriage and oppose abortion rights-increased to 27%, from 14% in October. Meanwhile for Mr. Carson, support among those voters dropped to 14%, from 34% in October.

Similarly, Mr. Cruz’s support among voters who call themselves “very conservative’’ rose by 23 percentage points, while Mr. Carson’s support among that group dropped by 23 points....

The poll offered little ground for cheer for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, long ago considered the party’s front-runner, who like the rest of the field remained stuck with single-digit support....

The poll also tested what would happen if the field narrowed to only five candidates: Messrs. Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Carson and Bush.

The result did not shake up the field’s rank order, as each of the five gained some support in the shakeout. But the candidate who gained the most in a hypothetical five-person field was Mr. Rubio, whose vote share came in at 21%, up 6 percentage points from his support on the full, 10-candidate ballot....

The poll was conducted last Sunday through Wednesday, Dec. 6-9, both before and after Mr. Trump first made his controversial proposal last Monday to temporarily ban Muslims from entering the U.S. In results released late last week, the poll found that 57% of Americans opposed Mr. Trump’s proposal, while GOP voters were more divided over it, with 38% supporting it and 39% opposed."...

[Ed. note: Bloomberg poll found 2/3 of GOP approved, 12/9/15, "Bloomberg Politics Poll: Nearly Two -Thirds of Likely GOP Primary Voters Back Trump's Muslim Ban," Bloomberg, John McCormick]

(continuing): "Some Trump supporters said the proposal was emblematic of what they liked about him.

We’re in danger,” said Michelle Parker, 50, a registered nurse from Sheridan, Wyoming, who supports Mr. Trump. “We need people to stand up. And you know, Trump is standing up.

The survey of 1,000 adults has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points. Additional interviews on some questions were conducted on an additional sample of past GOP primary voters, in order to increase to 400 the number of Republican primary voters in the survey. Results from that sample have a margin of error of plus or minus 4.9 percentage points.

Some questions were added after Mr. Trump on Monday proposed barring Muslims from entry to the U.S. They were answered by 495 respondents on Dec. 8-9 and carry a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percentage points." 

Images from Wall St. Journal


Following is Donald Trump's 12/7/15 press release about protecting America and its residents:

12/7/15, "Donald J. Trump Statement on Preventing Muslim Immigration," New York, NY

"Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on. According to Pew Research, among others, there is great hatred towards Americans by large segments of the Muslim population. Most recently, a poll from the Center for Security Policy released data showing "25% of those polled agreed that violence against Americans here in the United States is justified as a part of the global jihad" and 51% of those polled, "agreed that Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah." Shariah authorizes such atrocities as murder against non-believers who won't convert, beheadings and more unthinkable acts that pose great harm to Americans, especially women. 

Mr. Trump stated, "Without looking at the various polling data, it is obvious to anybody the hatred is beyond comprehension. Where this hatred comes from and why we will have to determine. Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life. If I win the election for President, we are going to Make America Great Again." - Donald J. Trump"


Added: "Again and again, the American people are forced to confront the fact that its ruling class is not on its side." Codevilla

Oct. 20, 2011, "The Lost Decade," Angelo Codevilla (years 2001-2011)

(scroll to subhead) "Public Safety"

"Solidity of the home front, i.e., mutual trust between the people and their government, has to be statecraft's paramount priority. But the assumption on which our ruling class based its approach to internal security against terrorism-namely, that it is impossible to distinguish ordinary Americans from terrorists—negates the basis for mutual trust. Ordinary Americans, on whom the government imposed ever more intrusive security measures and whom it scolded for being "Islamophobes," reasonably felt that government might regard them as "violent extremists." Our rulers also went out of their way to appease the most unfriendly parts of America's tiny Islamic population, including seeking advice on the proper attitude to take toward Muslims from the transparently anti-American Council On American Islamic Relations. But this simply gave such people more power to further their agendas, while foisting upon the American people a dispiriting political correctness. How could anyone have imagined that any people would not lose confidence in elites that seemed arguably more solicitous of enemies than of fellow citizens?
What would have happened if, instead, our ruling class had approached the problem of internal security by reminding itself that the American people had secured American society very adequately during World War II and the Cold War, against enemies far more potent and who blended into American society more easily than contemporary terrorists ever could? Honesty would also have required admitting that the hijackers of 9/11 were able to succeed partly because the U.S. government had trained a generation of Americans not to interfere with hijackings....Our rulers might have paid attention to Alexis de Tocqueville's observation that America was much less policed than Europe, but suffered from less crime because ordinary citizens took public safety into their own hands.

Only with difficulty can we imagine post-9/11 America...minus the TSA screeners (whose uselessness is demonstrated by every "red team" test penetration). But we don't have to imagine that the passengers of Flight 93 took matters into their own hands the moment they realized that government rules were costing them their lives, and that, ever since, aircraft passengers have policed their flights with absolute efficiency. Nor do we have to imagine that ordinary Americans naturally recoil from and protect themselves against persons who display the kind of foreignness and animosity that Islamists and their sympathizers cannot hide. The 2006 case of "the flying Imams" showed the Imams' threatening behavior caused ordinary Americans to remove them from a flight and hence from the possibility of doing harm. Unfortunately, it also showed that the U.S. government came close to making the Americans' immunological behavior liable to civil penalties. 

Again and again, the American people are forced to confront the fact that its ruling class is not on its side.

After 9/11 President George W. Bush told the American people to go shopping and behave normally. In short: forget that you will never again be free to live as before. Think about money. This advice followed naturally from the government's decision to persist in its ways instead of lifting terrorism's burden from America....It sought to satisfy the American people with the pretend-safety of "homeland security," with images of U.S. troops in combat, and perhaps above all with domestic prosperity fueled by record-low interest rates and massive deficit-spending.

This pretend-prosperity aimed not only to anesthetize criticism of endless war, but also to feed both political parties' many constituencies—the ruling class's standard procedure. Both parties joined in expanding federal guarantees for sub-prime mortgages, subsidies for education, alternative fuels, and countless activities dear to well-connected players. Both parties congratulated themselves for establishing new entitlements for prescription drugs and for medical care for children. When the "great recession" began in 2007 Democrats blamed Republicans' excessive spending on "the wars," while Republicans blamed it on Democrats' excessive spending on everything else. Both are correct, and both are responsible.

Hard Choices

Ten years after 9/11, America is not at peace, is poorer, less civil, and less hopeful. But the experts are in charge as never before.

In the American political marketplace of 2012, the American ruling class's stock is at a historic low....For us to understand how these mostly intelligent people could have made errors so big for so long requires understanding the principles they violated, and the moral as well as the intellectual dimensions of their errors. More difficult yet, both intellectually and morally, is the essential task of explaining the hard choices that will be required to deal with the troubles bequeathed us by this decade of defeat."


Ellis Island

photo from


No comments:


Blog Archive

About Me

My photo
I'm the daughter of an Eagle Scout (fan of the Brooklyn Dodgers and Mets) and a Beauty Queen.