Last Call For The State Of The States

Business Insider has ranked all 50 states based on their 2013-2014 economies, using cold hard stats:

Previously, Business Insider examined ranked every state by how quickly the economies were growing. This time around, we calculated which states had the best economies outright.

We ranked each state on seven economic measures: the July unemployment rate; the change in non-farm payroll jobs from June to July 2014; the 2013 GDP per capita; the 2012 per capita consumption; the 2013 average annual wage; the 2013 exports per capita; and the 2012 government expenditures.

So which state is where?  The top 10 are actually surprising:

10) Wyoming
9) Vermont
8) Delaware
7) Connecticut
6) Massachusetts
5) Washington
4) Alaska
3) New York
2) Texas
1) North Dakota

Several blue states, but 3 of the top 4 are red states with energy industry booms.  Fracking has been really good for the bottom lines of several state budgets, not so good for the people who live there.  It put Wyoming the the top 10 and knocked California to 11.

Meanwhile the bottom 10 will surprise precisely nobody:

41) Hawaii
42) Idaho
43) Nevada
44) Kentucky
45) West Virginia
46) South Carolina
47) Maine
48) Arkansas
49) New Mexico
50) Mississippi

States with dwindling natural resources and little to no investment in infrastructure?  Check across the board.  Nevada has bet the state's economy on that Tesla gigafactory in an effort to get out of the basement, but the rest of this pack have several problems.Hawaii has the highest cost of living of any state, Kentucky and West Virginia's coal industries are dying, as is Maine's fishing.  Idaho, Arkanas and Mississippi have all made brutal education cuts and GOP Gov. Susana Martinez has run New Mexico's budget into the ground.

How long will North Dakota's boom last?

We'll see.

Nobama Country Is Killing Grimes

The NY Times crew is being awfully nice about it, but they see a near-lock for Mitch McConnell to win at this stage of the campaign, and the reason why is Kentucky's pure hatred of Obama.

Mr. Clinton won eastern Kentucky coal country, defined here to include both Democratic and Republican-leaning areas, by 11 points. He lost the rest of the state. Since then, the Democrats have fared worse and worse in coal country. The Democrat Daniel Mongiardo, who nearly won a Senate contest in 2004, won coal country by eight points in 2004. Mr. McConnell then carried coal country by five points in 2008, and Rand Paul by 13 points in 2010.

The inexorable decline of Democratic standing in coal country has been driven by the collapse of the national Democratic Party in this region, where environmental regulations on coal-fired power plants are deeply unpopular, as are Democratic positions on cultural issues. Like in West Virginia, Kentucky coal country first swung to the Republicans in 2000, and the G.O.P. presidential nominee made additional gains in every successive election. Mr. Obama suffered cataclysmic losses between 2008 and 2012 because of the so-called War on Coal.

Knott County, the most Democratic county in the heart of coal country, was perhaps the most Democratic county of the 20th century. It never gave less than 64 percent of its vote for the Democratic presidential candidate. Mr. Clinton won by a margin of 73 to 18 percent. Barack Obama won just 24 percent of the vote here in 2012. 

As a result, the traditional and narrow Democratic route to victory in Kentucky might not exist anymore, at least for a candidate seeking federal office. Ms. Grimes would need to fare better in the rest of Kentucky than any federal candidate since 1976.

"War on Coal" is to Kentucky what "optics" are to DC, a not-so-subtle code switch that has everything to do with Barack Obama's race and how Kentucky Democrats feel about him.  Here's a hint:  people around here despise the man.  Democrats would rather chew off their own arms than deal with him.  I bet in 2016 they'll pull the lever for Hillary, EPA support and all.

But keep telling yourself it's President Obama's position on the EPA that cost him 40 points in the most Democratic county in the country and is in turn costing Alison Grimes this race in 2014.

Let Slip The Polls Of War

The latest WaPo poll on foreign policy shows that the recent beheadings of two US journalists by Islamic State terrorists has galvanized the country towards taking military action in both Iraq and Syria.

Americans overwhelmingly view Islamic State terrorists as a serious threat to vital U.S. interests and, in a significant shift, widely support airstrikes in Iraq and Syria, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. 

The nation’s increasingly hawkish mood will form part of the backdrop fora speech by President Obama on Wednesday, when he will outline his thinking on how to confront the threat from the Islamic State. Obama’s remarks will come a day after he confers with congressional leaders at the White House about the administration’s planning.

Those meetings with Congress are taking place today, and I'm sure that the results will be historic. Good, bad, and historic, actually.

His overall foreign policy ratings are his lowest yet in a Post-ABC News poll. A majority says the president is too cautious when it comes to international problems and specifically in dealing with Islamic State militants. His handling of Russian aggression in Ukraine receives somewhat better marks, but more than 4 in 10 still say he is too cautious.

The war drums are beating pretty loudly and the people are forgetting the last ten years in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Today, 71 percent of all Americans say they support airstrikes in Iraq — up from 54 percent three weeks ago and from 45 percent in June. Among those who say Obama has been too cautious, 82 percent support the strikes; among those who think his handling of international affairs has been about right, 66 percent support them.

Nearly as many Americans — 65 percent — say they support the potentially more controversial action of launching airstrikes in Syria, which Obama has not done. That is more than double the level of support a year ago for launching airstrikes to punish the Syrian regime for using chemical weapons. 

Support for arming Kurdish forces opposing the Sunni insurgents in Iraq also has risen over the past month, from 45 percent in August to 58 percent in the new survey. 

Republicans are most supportive of military action, but sizable majorities of Democrats and independents also support airstrikes in both Syria and Iraq.

So will this be Libya, where airstrikes and Libyan rebels were able to defeat Qaddafi, or will this be Iraq War III: This Time We're Serious?

We'll see what Wednesday's speech holds.

StupidiNews!

• A new Dutch report on the downing of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 over Eastern Ukraine concludes that the plane broke apart after being struck by several "high-energy objects."
• Baltimore Ravens RB Ray Rice has been cut from the team and suspended indefinitely by the NFL as a new video surfaced showing Rice knocking out his then fiancee in a casino elevator with a punch.
• Ferguson, Missouri officials say that the city's police department and municipal courts would be reformed in the wake of the shooting death of unarmed Michael Brown by officer Darren Wilson.
• President Obama is seeking a UN Security Council resolution to deal with the flow of foreign fighters into militant groups like Islamic State.
• Apple CEO Tim Cook is expected to announce the long rumored "iWatch" smartwatch today along with the next iPhone at the company's annual new product event.

Last Call For Nameless Helpers

Dick Cheney is not only not in a small cell, he's giving the House GOP election advice.

Former Vice President Dick Cheney will meet with House Republicans on Tuesday, according to a Politico report.

A source told Politico that Cheney will talk about the midterm elections and "highlight the importance of keeping a GOP House majority."

The Huffington Post and CNN confirmed that Cheney will address the House GOP.

To recap, President Obama, horrible albatross on his party.  Dick Cheney, trusted party statesman and adviser.

America, you've lost your way.

Stopped Clock Is Right Alert, Warpigs Edition

Well now I've seen everything: Ron Fournier is correct about something substantial, to the point where I agree with him.  And he actually thinks President Obama needs to be be cut some slack on ISIS as it's a complex issue that cannot be solved with bumper sticker jingoism.

We can't shake it. Like the flu—no, like posttraumatic stress disorder, memories of wiretapping, waterboarding, and a war of false pretense in Iraq cling to the nation's consciousness. Called again to confront a threat in the Middle East, Americans keep tripping over the baggage of George W. Bush. 

In 2003, we trusted. Not again. The president vowed retribution against terrorists who slaughtered Americans. The Defense secretary and secretary of State spoke of imminent threats. The intelligence community leaked word of Americans-turned-terrorists and sleeper cells. Those actions echo today, but Americans are of a different mind—not nearly as credulous, or as willing to fight. 

President Obama is a living reflection of this psychological context. Uncertain and contradictory, Obama is grasping for the right mix of hawk and dove to rally Americans, unite the world, and confront ISIS without locking the United States into another unholy mess. 

God bless him. It's a hellish task. Obama's lack of clarity so far has drawn criticism from the across the political spectrum, including from me (here and here). Two loyal readers remind me by email, and for different reasons, that Obama needs time to get this right.

Fournier then went on CNN's media analysis show, Reliable Sources, to point out to host Brian Stetler that the media appears to be pushing for the rush to war again, and maybe that's a bad idea.





Amazing.  Not only do I agree with Ron Fournier, but Katrina vanden Heuvel as well.  When these two are the voice of reason in the Village, things have gotten dire indeed on the war drums front.

The Rise And Fall Of Bob McDonnell

The Washington Post story of former Virginia GOP Gov. Bob McDonnell and his wife Maureen is a fascinating morality play on privilege and hubris, the both of them convicted last week on multiple felony counts relating to trading influence to nutritional supplement businessman Jonnie Williams in exchange for tens of thousands in cash and gifts.  His meteoric fall from 2016 hopeful to convicted felon represents everything wrong with today's GOP.

As McDonnell entered the last of his four years in office in 2013, things could not have been going better politically for the former state attorney general. Nationally, he had recently concluded a term as president of the Republican Governors Association, and he was increasingly being mentioned as contender for his party’s nomination for president in 2016. 

At home, polls showed McDonnell to be hugely popular as he prepared to steer his signature achievement through the state legislature: a bipartisan plan to improve the state’s crumbling transportation network. 

But unbeknown to McDonnell, the chain of events that would lead to last week’s guilty verdicts had already begun. 

Virginia State Police were quietly investigating allegations that Williams had paid $15,000 for catering at the 2011 wedding of one of the governor’s daughters. The governor had not disclosed the gift. 

The information came from the mansion’s former executive chef, Todd Schneider, who was fired in 2012 after he came under suspicion of stealing food. 

On Feb. 15, 2013, state police officers interviewed the first lady about Schneider, a session scheduled purportedly to help close out their investigation of the chef and send his case to a grand jury for charges. 

They asked Maureen McDonnell questions about the former mansion chef. But an officer also asked her about an unrelated topic: Williams, his wedding check and an additional $50,000 check made out to the first lady from a trust run by the businessman.

McDonnell lawyered up, and the rest is history.  The Washington Post broke the story last March and the whole dirty ball of twine began to unravel.  By April a grand jury had been convened, by July Jonnie Williams had agreed to turn state's evidence, and the rumors about McDonnell's resignation had begun.  By Christmas, the plea bargain of guilty for one count of lying to a bank in exchange for his resignation and disbarment as a lawyer was in the works.  Maureen McDonnell would have not been charged.

McDonnell rejected the deal insisting he wasn't guilty.

Last week a jury proved otherwise.  Enjoy prison, Bob.  Shoulda taken the deal.

StupidiNews!

• Serena Williams won in straight sets over Carolyn Wozniacki to claim her third straight US Open in Flushing Meadows this weekend, her sixth total US Open title and 18th grand slam win.
• A meteorite appears to have struck near the Nicaraguan capital of Managua Sunday, leaving a nearly 40-foot crater close to the city's international airport.
• With ten days before Scotland's vote on independence from the UK, a poll finds for the first time that the campaign to split the country off has the lead.
• Appliance maker Electrolux has agreed to buy GE's appliance division for $3.3 billion, putting it on par with rival Whirlpool and giving both companies about a 40% North American market share each.
• "Project Liberty", the first US commercial plant to turn corn waste into fuel, has just opened its doors in corn-rich Iowa, where it will process up to 750 tons of corn waste a day into ethanol.

Last Call For Wonks For Sale

Everything else is for sale in American politics to foreign countries with cash at the expense of US workers, why not think tanks and lobbyist firms?

More than a dozen prominent Washington research groups have received tens of millions of dollars from foreign governments in recent years while pushing United States government officials to adopt policies that often reflect the donors’ priorities, an investigation by The New York Times has found.

The money is increasingly transforming the once-staid think-tank world into a muscular arm of foreign governments’ lobbying in Washington. And it has set off troubling questions about intellectual freedom: Some scholars say they have been pressured to reach conclusions friendly to the government financing the research.

Here's the billion dollar question:  if unlimited money influencing politics by US billionaires and corporations is "protected free speech", what's unlimited money by foreign billionaires and corporations in US politics called?

The think tanks do not disclose the terms of the agreements they have reached with foreign governments. And they have not registered with the United States government as representatives of the donor countries, an omission that appears, in some cases, to be a violation of federal law, according to several legal specialists who examined the agreements at the request of The Times.

As a result, policy makers who rely on think tanks are often unaware of the role of foreign governments in funding the research.

The smartest policy wonks in the country didn't know who they were shilling for.  Let that sink in.

The arrangements involve Washington’s most influential think tanks, including the Brookings Institution, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and the Atlantic Council. Each is a major recipient of overseas funds, producing policy papers, hosting forums and organizing private briefings for senior United States government officials that typically align with the foreign governments’ agendas.

Most of the money comes from countries in Europe, the Middle East and elsewhere in Asia, particularly the oil-producing nations of the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Norway, and takes many forms. The United Arab Emirates, a major supporter of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, quietly provided a donation of more than $1 million to help build the center’s gleaming new glass and steel headquarters not far from the White House. Qatar, the small but wealthy Middle East nation, agreed last year to make a $14.8 million, four-year donation to Brookings, which has helped fund a Brookings affiliate in Qatar and a project on United States relations with the Islamic world.

Do you not think that other countries haven't noticed that our politics and politicians are on sale to the highest bidder?  Why should they be left out?  Just because it's against the law?  The Supreme Court "fixed" that in Citizens United for US corporations.  I'm sure they'll "fix" it for foreign powers too.

The Kids Are Not Alright

A new Harvard University survey finds that under 25% of Millennial voters under 30 plan to definitely vote in November.  Less than one in four, folks.  Just how bad is it?  This bad.

The numbers show voter enthusiasm among young people is down even from 2010, when Republicans took back the House of Representatives. Enthusiasm for the 2014 midterms is especially low among Democratic millennials, with the survey showing that 44 percent of young people who voted for 2012 GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney “definitely” plan to vote this year, while only 35 percent of President Barack Obama’s voters are planning to come back to the ballot box in November.

That could spell disastrous news for Democrats, who have traditionally relied on youth voters to give them the advantage on Election Day.

The poll begs the question of whether the Obama turnout machine can really get young people motivated without a president at the top of the ticket. It also found that young women, another key Democratic constituency, are feeling uninspired to head to the polls. Just 19 percent of women said they were “definitely” going to cast a ballot, compared to 28 percent of men.

Part of the reason young people are not all that interested in voting, experts said, is they don’t believe politicians in Washington are addressing issues that matter to them. The poll found that young people are very concerned about issues like wealth disparity in the country and student debt.

Well, the best way to make sure politicians continue to not give a damn about those issues is to not vote.  Why should politicians in either party care about you if you're going to sit at home?  Let the adults who do vote determine the country's future if you abdicate your role in being part of the decision.

But when the Tea Party controls all of Congress, and only passes Tea Party laws, well maybe you'll care about voting then.

Maybe.

Another NBA Owner Ousted Over Racism

Say what you will about new NBA Commissioner Adam Silver: in the wake of former LA Clippers owner Donald Sterling's virulent racism, Silver isn't tolerating very much from the billionaire owners of NBA teams.  The latest example being made is of Atlanta Hawks owner Bruce Levenson, who is giving up his controlling interest in the team after a nasty 2012 e-mail surfaced.  The email reads in part:

Before we bought the hawks and for those couple years immediately after in an effort to make the arena look full (at the nba's urging) thousands and thousands of tickets were being giving away, predominantly in the black community, adding to the overwhelming black audience.

My theory is that the black crowd scared away the whites and there are simply not enough affluent black fans to build a signficant season ticket base. Please dont get me wrong. There was nothing threatening going on in the arean back then. i never felt uncomfortable, but i think southern whites simply were not comfortable being in an arena or at a bar where they were in the minority. On fan sites i would read comments about how dangerous it is around philips yet in our 9 years, i don't know of a mugging or even a pick pocket incident. This was just racist garbage. When I hear some people saying the arena is in the wrong place I think it is code for there are too many blacks at the games.

I have been open with our executive team about these concerns. I have told them I want some white cheerleaders and while i don't care what the color of the artist is, i want the music to be music familiar to a 40 year old white guy if that's our season tixs demo. i have also balked when every fan picked out of crowd to shoot shots in some time out contest is black. I have even bitched that the kiss cam is too black.

Gradually things have changed. My unscientific guess is that our crowd is 40 pct black now, still four to five times all other teams. And my further guess is that 40 pct still feels like 70 pet to some whites at our games. Our bars are still overwhelmingly black.

This is obviously a sensitive topic, but sadly i think it is far and way the number one reason our season ticket base is so low.

Besides the fact Levenson badly needs to invest in an iPad email program that has spell check, he basically self-reported the email to Silver during the whole Sterling scandal.  With the Clippers now firmly in the hands of Microsoft co-founder Steve Ballmer, Silver's now free to deal with Levenson, who to his credit is stepping down immediately.  Not that he had a choice.

My guess is that somebody ratted Levenson's email out to Silver, and Silver let Levenson fall on his own sword after seeing that he didn't have a choice, and that he was smart enough to take Silver's way out, rather than emulating Sterling's futile attempt to fight while still losing.  That means Levenson is not completely stupid, unlike Sterling was.

We'll see how this gets cleaned up, and what other little nuggets of Levenson's "wisdom" surface.  But it's clear to me that the second this went public, Levenson really was going to find out what a "low season ticket base" actually meant.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Bruce.

The Real Immigration Villain Remains The GOP

It's important to remember the above post title when reading this:

President Obama will delay taking executive action on immigration until after the midterm elections, bowing to pressure from fellow Democrats who feared that acting now could doom his party’s chances this fall, White House officials said on Saturday.

The decision is a reversal of Mr. Obama’s vow to issue broad directives to overhaul the immigration system soon after summer’s end, and sparked swift anger from immigration advocates. The president made the promise on June 30, standing in the Rose Garden, where he angrily denounced Republican obstruction and said he would use the power of his office to protect immigrant families from the threat of deportation.

So, two things:  First, Republicans have successfully politicized immigration to the point where immigration activists are now ready to destroy President Obama, and second, Senate Democrats are going to find out that there's zero advantage to stabbing the President in the back here.

Cristina Jimenez, the managing director for United We Dream, an immigration advocacy group, accused Mr. Obama of “playing politics” with the lives of immigrant families and said “the president’s latest broken promise is another slap to the face of the Latino and immigrant community.”

If Jiminez was honest, she'd be going after John Boehner for refusing to hold a vote on the Senate immigration bill that already passed.  But it's easier to attack President Obama, because kicking him in the face will certainly bring about the immigration reform she wants, right?

Of course, reform isn't the issue.  Fundraising and attention are.  And attacking President Obama from the left is a tried and true method for getting both.  I don't blame her, she knows how this game works as much as Obama does.

And no, if Senate Democrats come up to President Obama and say "We will not support your executive action and we will side with the GOP to stop you" then his hands are tied.

On the other side, Republicans voted to immediately deport every single undocumented immigrant in the US.  But you're going to go after Obama.

And the GOP wins again.  Great job.

StupidiNews, Weekend Edition!

• A charter plane from Dubai carrying military contractors, some American, was allowed to complete its flight after being forced to land in Iran due to an out of date flight plan.
• NASA scientists are looking to the skies this weekend for a house-sized asteroid passing within 25,000 miles of Earth.
• Pentagon officials confirmed the death of al Shabaab terrorist leader Ahmed Abdi Godane in a US airstrike in Somalia earlier this week.
• The US economy added 142,000 jobs in August as the unemployment rate dropped to 6.1%, with Fed chair Janet Yellen noting continued "underutilization" of workers in the market.
• Chinese internet commerce giant Alibaba will seek to raise more than $24 billion in a record IPO offering at $66 a share, or a total company value of $163 billion.

Last Call For Growth In The Death Business

Reuters lets us know that in addition to territory in Iraq and Syria, Islamic State is now getting a foothold in Egypt as well.

Islamic State, fighting to redraw the map of the Middle East, has been coaching Egypt's most dangerous militant group, complicating efforts to stabilize the biggest Arab nation.

Confirmation that Islamic Sate, currently the most successful of the region's jihadi groups, is extending its influence to Egypt will sound alarm bells in Cairo, where the authorities are already facing a security challenge from home-grown militants.

A senior commander from the Sinai-based Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis, which has killed hundreds of members of the Egyptian security forces over the last year, said Islamic State has provided instructions on how to operate more effectively.

"They teach us how to carry out operations. We communicate through the internet," the commander, who asked to remain anonymous, told Reuters.

"They don't give us weapons or fighters. But they teach us how to create secret cells, consisting of five people. Only one person has contact with other cells."

I'm not sure how much of the word of an anonymous Egyptian militant group commander we can trust, but you have to admit, Egypt is a pretty good breeding ground for the kind of conditions favorable to groups like Islamic State.  The government is neither stable, nor popular.  When combined with an outfit like IS, that captures and then governs areas in order to win over recruits and take resources, the recipe is for what would amount to an ugly third front in this conflict.

Hopefully this is just boasting.  I don't believe it is.

The Angus King Special In Kansas

Two years ago retiring Maine GOP Sen. Olympia Snowe was replaced by Independent former Gov. Angus King after Democrat Cynthia Dill was all but driven out of a race that she couldn't win by her own party.  The logic was that since Dill didn't have a chance, the Democratic party backed King.  It paid off, he won and joined Harry Reid's caucus.

This week it looks like the same play is happening in Kansas.  This time, however, the Democrat is dropping out of the race entirely.  Nate Silver crunches the numbers:

Kansas, however, had become an under-the-radar opportunity for Democrats. The Republican incumbent there, Pat Roberts, barely survived his primary and has extremely low approval ratings. Several recent polls had put the race in single digits between Roberts and his Democratic opponent, Chad Taylor, with the independent candidate Greg Orman getting about 20 percent of the vote. As of Wednesday, the FiveThirtyEight forecast gave Roberts an 80 percent chance of winning. That’s not bad, but it’s not any better than McConnell, who also has about an 80 percent chance of holding on in a race that has gotten far more attention.

Late Wednesday afternoon, however, Taylor announced his withdrawal from the race, setting up a contest between Orman and Roberts. (There is also a Libertarian candidate, Randall Baston, on the ballot.)

Why would Taylor leave the race right when polls showed it tightening?

Perhaps because he and Orman share a lot in common philosophically. Based on the ideological ratings we track (more background on those here), both Taylor and Orman rate as the equivalent of moderate Democrats. Orman, in fact, ran as a Democratic candidate for the Senate in 2008, although he withdrew from the race during the primary.

But Orman had raised more money than Taylor — about $625,000 in individual contributions to Taylor’s $120,000 as of July 13 — and probably had more momentum, having recently received endorsements from a bipartisan group of legislators.

There was also a recent survey, from Public Policy Polling (PPP), which showed Orman ahead of Roberts 43-33 in a potential two-way race. The same poll had shown Taylor trailing Roberts by 4 percentage points in the event Orman dropped out.

If the PPP survey is accurate, this is a huge problem for Republicans. Suddenly, they’re behind in a race against a former Democrat who might caucus with the Democratic Party should he make it to the Senate.

Republicans meanwhile are scrambling to try to keep Roberts in the race, and they figure they can do it if they force ballots to still have Chad Taylor's name on them, confusing voters.  Because that's how Republicans win, you know.

But, if Kansas is now in play, control of the Senate may hinge on which side Orman and Angus King in Maine side with as independents.   The answer may not automatically be "siding with the Democrats" in either case.

Either way, we'll keep an eye on Kansas.