The republican majority in the United States Senate defeated the repeal of DADT in a vote of 40-57:
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 111th Congress - 2nd Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate
Vote Summary
Question: On Cloture on the Motion to Proceed (Upon Reconsideration, Motion to Invoke Cloture on the Motion to Proceed to S. 3454 )
Vote Number: 270 Vote Date: December 9, 2010, 03:33 PM
Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected
Measure Number: S. 3454 (National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011) Measure Title: An original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2011 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.
Vote Counts: YEAs 57
NAYs 40
Not Voting 3
YEAs ---57
McCaskill (D-MO)
Claire McCaskill's vote was not a surprise to most:
....Question: Hi, I just have a quick question, my name is Sarah...about the military. Two years ago when you were on Hardball with Chris -
Claire McCaskill: I know what you're going to say! Don't Ask, Don't Tell!
Question: Yeah. I want to know, two years later, especially with the support of Barack Obama in reevaluating Don't Ask, Don't Tell and recent document signed by 104 Generals and Admirals, if you have rethought your position on reevaluating Don't Ask, Don't Tell on the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Claire McCaskill: I think you will see action on Don't Ask, Don't Tell. And, I think that - I think we're to the point that people realize that that is a probably irrelevant consideration. And as I said to a general the other day, "I wish you guys were as worried about the problems you have in the military in terms of-" I've been very involved in looking at sexual assault issues that women have had in the military. And there has been an incredible problem of women being sexually assaulted in the military and us not dealing with it. Not with the right mental health provisions, not with the right criminal consequences provisions, and I think there is now, you know as time goes on, I think you are seeing adjustments, even within the military that I think, it has a very good chance of passing this time, if we, if he changes the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy and I'll be happy to support it. And my daughter, the one that talked me into voting, publicly endorsing Barack Obama, will be so glad that I've said that publicly. [audience laughter][applause] She bugs me constantly about it! Constantly! I will just be sitting at my desk, in the Senate, and I'll get a text message, in all capital letters, "WHAT ABOUT DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL?" Exclamation, exclamation, exclamation. So Maddie will be glad you asked the question. Yes...
That was two years ago.
The arc of homophobia is long and it bends toward frustration.
On December 18th SurveyUSA released a 600 sample poll of adults taken in Missouri from December 11th through the 13th showing the approval numbers for Senators Claire McCaskill (D) and Kit Bond (r). The margin of error is 4.1%.
The poll was sponsored by KCTV in Kansas City.
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Claire McCaskill is doing as United States Senator?
All 48% - approve
45% - disapprove
7% - not sure
Democrats [36% of sample]
70% - approve
24% - disapprove
7% - not sure
republicans [29% of sample]
32% - approve
61% - disapprove
7% - not sure
Independents [28% of sample]
38% - approve
56% - disapprove
6% - not sure
Keeping the months long trend and looking at the November numbers, Claire McCaskill's overall approval, when compared to President Obama, remain stable.
Senator McCaskill's disapproval numbers among Democrats remain high (at 24%), though slightly better when compared to the November numbers.
The percentage of self-identified liberals who are not happy when it comes to approving of the job Claire McCaskill is doing remains significant (yet stable), though there has been some improvement among Conservatives. There is slippage among Moderates. You think Claire might be pulling that Overton Window a little too far to the right for them, too?:
On November 25th SurveyUSA released a 600 sample poll of adults taken in Missouri from November 20th through the 22nd showing the approval numbers for Senators Claire McCaskill (D) and Kit Bond (r). The margin of error is 4.1%.
The poll was sponsored by KCTV in Kansas City.
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Claire McCaskill is doing as United States Senator?
All 48% - approve
48% - disapprove
4% - not sure
Democrats [30% of sample]
70% - approve
27% - disapprove
3% - not sure
republicans [31% of sample]
28% - approve
69% - disapprove
3% - not sure
Independents [232 of sample]
41% - approve
56% - disapprove
3% - not sure
Again, looking at September, Claire McCaskill's overall approval numbers, when compared to President Obama, are relatively stable.
Senator McCaskill's disapproval numbers among Democrats have increased (to 27%) when compared to September.
The percentage of self-identified liberals who are not happy when it comes to approving of the job Claire McCaskill doing is still significant:
On September 30th SurveyUSA released a 600 sample poll of adults taken in Missouri from September 27th through the 28th showing the approval numbers for Senators Claire McCaskill (D) and Kit Bond (r). The margin of error is 4.1%.
The poll was sponsored by KCTV in Kansas City.
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Claire McCaskill is doing as United States Senator?
All 50% - approve
43% - disapprove
7% - not sure
Democrats [37% of sample]
76% - approve
22% - disapprove
2% - not sure
republicans [25% of sample]
28% - approve
64% - disapprove
9% - not sure
Independents [29% of sample]
42% - approve
50% - disapprove
8% - not sure
Compared to August Claire McCaskill's overall approval numbers, when compared to President Obama and Kit Bond, are relatively stable.
Senator McCaskill's disapproval numbers among Democrats have increased when compared to August. The August disapproval numbers among "Independents" have decreased significantly, with the approval number from this group improving slightly.
The percentage of self-identified liberals who are "not sure" when it comes to approval of the job Claire McCaskill is doing has increased significantly:
It's a pleasure to see Claire given a nudge to the left that she pays attention to. Seems that Warren Buffett, the second wealthiest man in the world, told Senate Democrats over lunch last Thursday that rich folk need to pay more taxes. He especially took aim at Bush's cuts to the capital gains tax, which are set to expire next year. Because of those cuts, Buffett:
pays taxes at a lower rate than some of his company's employees.
It is an argument the investor has made before. Buffett said he paid a 16.5 percent tax rate on all his income because the tax rate on investment dividends and long-term capital gains is only 15 percent.
By contrast, a single employee at Buffet's firm, Berkshire Hathaway, who earns between $33,000 and $83,000 must pay a 25 percent federal income tax rate.
Claire saw the sense of his take on taxes:
"He said rich people are not paying enough taxes," said Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.). "It was interesting to see someone who is such an aggressive capitalist, who believes so much in our capitalist system, saying we've got the scales way too heavily toward people who are very, very wealthy."
Ben Nelson (DINO, NE), on the other hand, pooh-poohed the raise-taxes-on-the-wealthy idea, noting that tax is a four letter word. Aside from his difficulty in counting to four, Nelson reminds us, with his reaction to Buffett's advice, that we could be worse off than McCaskill.
But much as I want Claire paying attention to Buffett on taxes, I have to hope she occasionally spaced out last Thursday, because Buffett is sometimes on the other side from Democrats on policy issues. He has been known to criticize (though he said nothing about it on Thursday) the cap and trade legislation as a "regressive" tax, and he did call the Employee Free Choice Act a "mistake". Let's hope Claire's attention was wandering when he touched on card check.
On August 31st SurveyUSA released a 600 sample poll of adults taken in Missouri from August 26th through the 27th showing the approval numbers for Senators Claire McCaskill (D) and Kit Bond (r). The margin of error is 4.1%.
The poll was sponsored by KCTV in Kansas City.
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Claire McCaskill is doing as United States Senator?
All 52% - approve
43% - disapprove
5% - not sure
Democrats [41% of sample]
77% - approve
17% - disapprove
6% - not sure
republicans [30% of sample]
31% - approve
67% - disapprove
2% - not sure
Independents [23% of sample]
38% - approve
62% - disapprove
1% - not sure
Compared to July Claire McCaskill's overall approval numbers have improved.
Senator McCaskill's approval numbers among Democrats and republicans have improved when compared to July. The August disapproval numbers among "Independents" have increased, with the approval number in this group holding steady.
Claire McCaskill's approval numbers among self identified liberals has improved.
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Claire McCaskill is doing as United States Senator?
Ideology
Conservative [38% of sample]
32% - approve
65% - disapprove
2% - not sure
Moderate [36% of sample]
64% - approve
30% - disapprove
6% - not sure
Liberal [15% of sample]
69% - approve
29% - disapprove
2% - not sure
Senators Mitch McConnell (r), John McCain (r), and Kit Bond (r) came to Kansas City on Monday for a closed (to the public) health care forum. They obviously weren't too interested in fielding questions from teabaggers.
The coverage in today's Kansas City Star was revealing. The dead trees headline in the Kansas City Edition, page B1:
HEALTH REFORM BLASTED IN KC: At Children's Mercy, three GOP senators say say compromise with Democrats hasn't been found
....The Republicans said they also were miffed at Democrats for not doing enough to include them in ongoing negotiations.
"So far, there's been no bipartisanship involved in reforming health care in America," McCain complained....
[emphasis added]
Okay, just hold on a minute there. Senator Claire McCaskill (D) stated in Jefferson City (and at three other town halls I attended):
....[18:40] And the other thing you can do there, which might be interesting, 'cause you're here and you obviously care very deeply, you might watch the live video, not live, it's taped video, of all the the mark up sessions in the [Senate] bill. Fifty-two hours of mark up sessions on the bill. Thirteen Democrats, ten Republicans. There were a lot of amendments, hundreds and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds that were written up. There were about two hundred that were considered. Of the two hundred amendments that were considered and adopted on this bill in this fifty-two hours a hundred and sixty-seven of them were sponsored by the Republican members of the committee and thirty-one of them were sponsored by the Democratic members of the committee. So, there was [applause], there were really a bipartisan [crowd shouting], the interesting thing [voice, shouting: "What happened to the other thirty (inaudible)?"] there really was a bi, and you can watch it. You can go on and watch it. You don't have to read something that somebody else has written. You can go on and watch it live. You can see the Republican members offering the amendments. You can see the discussion. You can understand, maybe the, the thinking behind some of the amendments and why they were offering them. And it might be a way that you could see, face to face, what really happened in fifty-two hours of consideration on this bill, instead of some of the misinformation that's gotten out there [19:57]....
"...Of the two hundred amendments that were considered and adopted on this bill in this fifty-two hours a hundred and sixty-seven of them were sponsored by the Republican members of the committee and thirty-one of them were sponsored by the Democratic members of the committee...."
Someone other than a stenographer might try to reconcile those competing statements.
TARKIO, Mo. -- A national survey of wind energy says Missouri added the third-highest amount of wind farm capacity in the nation during the second quarter of the year.
The American Wind Energy Association said Tuesday that the completion of the Farmers City wind farm near Tarkio in northwest Missouri added 146 megawatts of wind energy capacity. That brings the state's total capacity to 306 megawatts.
The 90 percent increase in capacity was the largest jump among [sic] any state the nation, the association said.
And here's how to put that news to good use. Repower America has a phone line set up where you can leave a message for Senator McCaskill. Just call 1-877-9REPOWER (737-6937). The automated voice will ask you for your zip code, offer some generic advice on properly identifying yourself in your message, and then let say what you have to say to her. Every day, the messages for that day are delivered to Claire.
We need to keep the pressure on Claire because she's a weak link as far as keeping ACES (clean energy legislation) from being watered down. In late June, she tweeted: "I hope we can fix cap and trade so it doesn't unfairly punish businesses and families in coal dependent states like Missouri."
Listen, the flat earthers will shout their fears at her, and they've got the money for a megaphone the size of Kansas. That's another fact you might see fit to mention to our junior senator, namely that the opposition is funded by big oil. Mark Twain said, "Tell me where a man gets his corn pone, and I'll tell you what his 'pinions is." Well, the opposition is getting its corn pone from Saudi Arabia. The rest of us think we ought to get it from Missouri wind mills.
On July 31st SurveyUSA released a 600 sample poll of adults taken in Missouri from July 17th through the 19th showing the approval numbers for Senators Claire McCaskill (D) and Kit Bond (r). The margin of error is 4.1%.
The poll was sponsored by KCTV in Kansas City.
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Claire McCaskill is doing as United States Senator?
All 47% - approve
47% - disapprove
7% - not sure
Democrats [41% of sample]
69% - approve
26% - disapprove
5% - not sure
republicans [27% of sample]
24% - approve
68% - disapprove
7% - not sure
Independents [26% of sample]
39% - approve
55% - disapprove
7% - not sure
Compared to June Claire McCaskill's overall approval numbers have dropped.
Senator McCaskill's approval numbers among Democrats and Independents have dropped when compared to June. The July disapproval numbers from liberals are on the high side:
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Claire McCaskill is doing as United States Senator?
Ideology
Conservative [34% of sample]
32% - approve
62% - disapprove
6% - not sure
Moderate [36% of sample]
53% - approve
40% - disapprove
9% - not sure
Liberal [18% of sample]
62% - approve
36% - disapprove
2% - not sure
...They're pissed that Obama is president. They're pissed that McCain isn't. They're pissed that Jim Talent isn't their senator. They probably voted for George W. Bush twice (and probably his daddy twice). They'd probably be pissed if you pointed out that dubya is and was a monumental screw-up - it reminds them that they made that particular choice. They didn't vote for Claire. They'll never vote for Claire....
....No matter what anyone does they'll be pissed and stay pissed. And they ain't voting for any Democrats. Ever...
The numbers for Democrats and liberals are striking. More on that later.
The crowd got so stirred up when this gentleman urged them to stand up and get angry that I could scarcely hear him proclaim above the uproar:
I don't want Obama in my house telling me what I can and cannot do, what I can and cannot drink, what I can and cannot eat, what kind of car I can drive, what I can put in my car.
And don't forget, he'll want your guns! Probably shoot you with one of them.
Seriously, though, the gentleman pulled these fears out of a magician's hat, because Obama has no interest in what this citizen drinks or which kind of car he drives. But the fervor of the crowd--one man yelled "Heil Obama!"--told me they believed, in fact gloried in, facing these baseless charges.
I wondered why.
Perhaps their paranoia about Obama derives from an assumption that he is as willing to break the law as they are. They approve of leaders overextending their authority--IF those leaders are Republicans. So they assume that those on the left think the same way as themselves and will break the law when it suits them.
Setting aside all the Bush/Cheney offenses I could cite as examples, let me offer something current: the Republican sheriff of Maricopa County in Arizona. Polls show that Joe Arpaio is the most popular politician in the state. The July 20, 2009 issue of The New Yorker, pp. 44-45, has this account:
At the Monday evening town hall, Claire's staffer Michelle Sherod listened politely as the wingers sent their message about why they hate health care reform. They lined up at the mike and spoke cogently, sometimes wittily, one after another. As it turned out, they were there to complain about health care, not the energy bill. And did they ever complain. It was fascinating.
To give them as much benefit of the doubt as I can muster, I'd say they were ... passionate. Unfortunately, for many of them passion is indistinguishable from rudeness. Basically, every time Sherod opened her mouth, regardless of what she had to say or how tactfully she expressed it, several people in the crowd of--I don't know, 400?--shouted at her. (The organizers planned for 150 attendees, by the way, and had to move us to a larger area when the crowd overflowed the meeting room.)
In the clip below, with Carl Bearden of Americans for Prosperity (aka tea baggers) standing behind her, Sherod opens the meeting. That hissing you might be able to hear at the end of the clip was a noise we heard often--the more civil ones in the group trying to shush the rowdies.
The Monday evening town hall meeting between McCaskill staffers and tea party types who want to talk about what's wrong with the energy bill and with health care reform is the upshot of an incident at McCaskill's St. Louis office on the 17th. Protesters showed up that day to complain about Democratic efforts to overhaul health care.
The door to that office is kept locked, but her staff will come out into the foyer and talk to protesters. That day, though, they had only two people working, as opposed to the usual six, and the phones were ringing constantly, so they didn't respond quickly. The protesters began yelling and banging on the windows--to the point that the tenant of a business on the second floor got angry enough to flip them the bird. (They thought it was a McCaskill staffer, but that got sorted out.)
The two staffers called the cops. I couldn't say for sure whether they did it because the obnoxious protesters were annoying them or whether they felt threatened. In any case that apparently wasn't what Claire would have wanted them to do. She issued an apology for the mixup and agreed to have her staffers meet with the protesters this Monday night. She did promise last fall to listen to all her constituents, whether they voted for her or not, and she's making good on that.
But this situation is typical. Democratic office holders extend courtesy even to yahoos acting like five-year-olds. Republican legislators? Not so much. Billinmidmo, for example, wrote here in August of 2007 that a number or voters and organizations requested that Kenny Hulshof (ninth district) attend a town hall forum about the occupation of Iraq. He didn't come because, according to Hulshof and his staff:
the Iraq War is only important to Columbia. The rest of the district, according to them, does not care about the occupation of Iraq.
For contrast, we called Brownback's office to set up an appointment to talk about his ridiculous animal hybrid bill and were told that since we had met with a staffer a month ago to discuss health care we couldn't come back quite yet. We have been routinely protesting outside Pat Roberts' OP office for a couple years now. His staff has NEVER even bothered to come out and talk to us. But since they have yet to call the cops I guess we should feel fortunate. Of course, we haven't banged on the door and created a disturbance either.
About 35 people showed up at noon Thursday to Claire McCaskill's St. Louis office at a rally organized by MoveOn. (There was another event at Bond's office at the same time. Lotsa luck, folks, making inroads there.) After some of the attendees told the group their own hard luck health care stories, we presented a petition with about 2,000 signatures gathered online to Michelle Sherod, one of Claire's staffers. The petition urged McCaskill to stand strong for a public option and resist letting it be watered down.
Ironies abounded in two of the stories that people had to tell. LaDonna Appelbaum works in the health care industry. And has no health care. This is a woman who's not afraid to let her feelings show on the subject. She wants health care NOW.
Darryl Moore used to help people find work. He "had a great job, helping people find jobs." Now he's out of work, because he got cancer, and the aftereffects of the chemo made him unable to work. Guess what. No job? No health care. He's on the verge of bankruptcy.
As we head into the final two or three months of the push to get health care reform, here's the message I'd like to convey to Claire: Do more than plan to vote for a strong public option. Be active. Beat the drums for it. Speak up at every opportunity. And make opportunities to speak up.
Because a strong public option is a foot in the door that might eventually open onto single payer. A strong public option--none of this co-op nonsense!--is the minimum. Once we have that, perhaps it will be--as it has been for other nations--just the starting point.
When traveling in Europe while studying abroad in college, I would occasionally run into people in hostels who had a strange view of traveling. I would ask them where they had just arrived from, and they would reply something like, "Oh, we just did Budapest." Anyone who said they had just "done" a city was hard-pressed to be able to tell me precisely what they had done, other than a pub crawl. Which was annoying, because I liked to find out about travel experiences from other travelers - what was worth the trip, what was nice enough but too crowded or expensive, etc. The "I just did..." response gave me zero information on how great or terrible destination was.
That's the way this article left me after an initial giddiness about the CBO score of $600 billion over 10 years to cover 97% of Americans, including a government-run public health insurance plan. Sure, I'm glad to find out that leading Democrats on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee included a public option, glad that they had the CBO score the health care plan with the public option this time, and I'm elated that the CBO scored the bill as much cheaper than the incomplete plan submitted back in May. But I still feel like the reporter just "did" the public option.
From the article, all I know is that there's potentially going to be a $60 billion a year government-run health insurance plan. I have no idea from the article whether a trigger will be put in place, a threshhold that will need to be crossed in order to activate the public option. I don't know if the plan will be offered nationally or state-by-state. I don't know if it will be accountable to Congress. I don't know if it will be available to all Americans, or just those who can't currently get coverage. All of these points would make a big difference in whether I would support such a bill or oppose it.
So I'm begging reporters to ask about what a public option would entail when you write about its inclusion in a health care reform bill. And fortunately, dear reader, we don't need a reporter to help us find out where our Senators, at least, stand on these very important questions. Please ask Senators McCaskill and Bond for specific responses.
Do you support a public healthcare option as part of healthcare reform?
If so, do you support a public healthcare option that is available on day one?
Do you support a public healthcare option that is national, available everywhere, and accountable to Congress?
Do you support a public healthcare option that can bargain for rates from providers and big drug companies?
Still haven't heard back from either Bond or McCaskill after two weeks of asking the question.
On June 25th SurveyUSA released a 600 sample poll of adults taken in Missouri from June 12th through the 14th showing the approval numbers for Senators Claire McCaskill (D) and Kit Bond (r). The margin of error is 4.1%.
The poll was sponsored by KCTV in Kansas City.
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Claire McCaskill is doing as United States Senator? (June 2009)
All 52% - approve
41% - disapprove
6% - not sure
Democrats [41% of sample]
74% - approve
22% - disapprove
4% - not sure
republicans [27% of sample]
19% - approve
71% - disapprove
10% - not sure
Independents [25% of sample]
54% - approve
40% - disapprove
5% - not sure
Compared to April Claire McCaskill's overall approval numbers have remained roughly the same. The approval numbers among Democrats, republicans, Independents are also similar to the April numbers.
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Claire McCaskill is doing as United States Senator? (June 2009)
Gender
Male [48% of sample]
55% - approve
42% - disapprove
3% - not sure
Female [52% of sample]
50% - approve
41% - disapprove
9% - not sure
On May 1st SurveyUSA released a 600 sample poll of adults taken in Missouri from April 24th through the 26th showing the approval numbers for Senators Claire McCaskill (D) and Kit Bond (r). The margin of error is 4.1%.
The poll was sponsored by KCTV in Kansas City.
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Claire McCaskill is doing as United States Senator?
All 51% - approve
40% - disapprove
8% - not sure
Democrats [39% of sample]
72% - approve
23% - disapprove
5% - not sure
republicans [26% of sample]
21% - approve
71% - disapprove
9% - not sure
Independents [27% of sample]
53% - approve
41% - disapprove
6% - not sure
Compared to March Claire McCaskill's overall approval numbers have improved slightly. The approval numbers among Independents has improved significantly. The numbers among Democrats and republicans remain essentially unchanged. It appears that whatever Claire McCaskill does, those republican numbers ain't gonna budge.
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Claire McCaskill is doing as United States Senator?
Gender
Male [48% of sample]
55% - approve
38% - disapprove
7% - not sure
Female [52% of sample]
48% - approve
43% - disapprove
9% - not sure
Hmmm. There appears to be something of a gender gap.
On March 26th SurveyUSA [link fixed] released a 600 sample poll of adults taken in Missouri from March 20th through the 22nd showing the approval numbers for Senators Claire McCaskill (D) and Kit Bond (r). The margin of error is 4.1%.
The poll was sponsored by KCTV in Kansas City.
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Claire McCaskill is doing as United States Senator?
All 49% - approve
44% - disapprove
7% - not sure
Democrats [41% of sample]
68% - approve
25% - disapprove
7% - not sure
republicans [31% of sample]
23% - approve
72% - disapprove
4% - not sure
Independents [20% of sample]
46% - approve
46% - disapprove
8% - not sure
Compared to February Claire McCaskill's approval numbers have dropped. There is significant erosion among Democrats and republicans. The approval among Independents remains unchanged (an even split).
On March 3rd SurveyUSA released a 600 sample poll of adults taken in Missouri from February 20th through the 22nd showing the approval numbers for Senators Claire McCaskill (D) and Kit Bond (r). The margin of error is 4% for the results on Bond and 4.1% for the results on McCaskill.
The poll was sponsored by KCTV in Kansas City.
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Claire McCaskill is doing as United States Senator?
All 54% - approve
40% - disapprove
6% - not sure
Democrats [33% of sample]
83% - approve
14% - disapprove
3% - not sure
republicans [33% of sample]
35% - approve
62% - disapprove
3% - not sure
Independents [27% of sample]
44% - approve
44% - disapprove
12% - not sure
Compared to January Claire McCaskill's overall numbers haven't changed much. There is some improvement among self-identified republicans. This month's survey sampling has a lower percentage of Democrats and a higher percentage of republicans.
I'm in hearing on defense acquisition policy all morning.Ive focused on this area for last two years.Massive improvement needed.Competition!6:02 AM Mar 3rd from web
On my way to meet with the President in a few. He's making an announcemnet re:contracting. Lots of $ to save there.about 7 hours ago from web
In hold waiting for the Pres. Sen Levin,Senn McCain, Rep Towns,Rep Welch also going to be in attendance.about 7 hours ago from TinyTwitter
McCain? McCain? Didn't he run for something a while back? He's not one of those partisan obstructionists, is he?
Senator McCaskill and President Obama appear to be on the same page:
On January 30th SurveyUSA released a 600 sample poll of adults taken in Missouri from January 20th through the 21st showing the approval numbers for Senators Claire McCaskill (D) and Kit Bond (r). The margin of error is 4.1%.
The poll was sponsored by KCTV in Kansas City.
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Claire McCaskill is doing as United States Senator?
All 52% - approve
39% - disapprove
10% - not sure
Democrats [43% of sample]
78% - approve
18% - disapprove
4% - not sure
republicans [26% of sample]
22% - approve
66% - disapprove
12% - not sure
Independents [26% of sample]
39% - approve
48% - disapprove
14% - not sure
Hmmm. Claire McCaskill only has a net positive approval from Democrats. I wonder who she's listening to?
Located in the heart of Westport --
The Original Kansas City
Californo's: Elegant dining in a delightful atmosphere,
located in the heart of Westport
