GOP Voters Increasingly Dissatisfied With Their Presidential Choices

At this point in the presidential nomination process, voters usually start getting comfortable with at least some of the candidates who have been campaigning for many months. Republican voters have gotten to know their candidates and attending agendas pretty well by now.

And yet, as the Pew Research Center found, rank-and-file Republicans are finding themselves less satisfied with their presidential choices, not more.

As the Pew report, released today, explained, "In fact, more Republican and Republican-leaning registered voters say the GOP field is only fair or poor (52%) than did so in early January (44%)."

In other words, this field of candidates isn't just unappealing to the party's own voters; it's increasingly unappealing.

As Paul Begala recently observed, "When I look at the economy, I think Obama can't win, but when I look at the Republicans, I think he can't lose. The economy is starting to get better; the Republicans aren't."

Pew Research Center for the People & the Press:

Amid a bruising primary campaign, Republicans remain unimpressed with their party’s presidential field. In fact, more Republican and Republican-leaning registered voters say the GOP field is only fair or poor (52%) than did so in early January (44%).

By comparison, just 46% of Republican voters have positive opinions of the GOP field, according to the latest survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Jan. 26-29 among 1,006 adults, including 341 Republican and Republican-leaning registered voters. In early January, shortly before the New Hampshire primary, 51% gave the field excellent or good ratings while 44% rated the candidates collectively as only fair or poor.

That survey showed that GOP voters’ ratings of the field are far less positive than were opinions of the Republican field in 2008. At about this point four years ago, 68% of Republican and GOP-leaning voters rated the field as excellent or good. (See “GOP Voters Still Unenthused about Presidential Field,” Jan. 9, 2012.)

Who Understands Problems of Average Americans?

Separately, the survey, in partnership with The Washington Post, finds that far more voters say Barack Obama understand the problems of average Americans than say that about either Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich. More than half of all registered voters (55%) say Obama understands the problems of average Americans very or fairly well. About four-in-ten (41%) say he understands people’s problems not too well or not at all well.

Only about four-in-ten voters (39%) give Romney high marks for understanding the problems of average Americans; about the same percentage (36%) says Gingrich does very or fairly well in understanding people’s problems.

About half of independent voters (53%) rate Obama positively in understanding the problems of average Americans; only 38% and 37% of independents, respectively, give Romney and Gingrich positive ratings. Democratic voters overwhelmingly say that Obama understands the problems of average people (84%). Smaller majorities of GOP voters give Romney (61%) and Gingrich (60%) positive ratings.

Full story @ Pew Research Center for the People & the Press

No Joy On A Quick Redistricting Agreement Between The State And Plaintiffs

The Austin Chronicle / 1:17pm, Mon. Jan. 30:

Monday, February 6, 2012 -- That's the deadline set last Friday by the San Antonio District Court redistricting panel for all parties to agree on interim House, Senate and Congressional maps, or they'll miss the deadline for the April 3 unified primary.

There were rumors floating around all weekend that there could be a deal struck as early as today on interim maps, but with all parties traveling to D.C. for closing arguments in the D.C. District Court preclearance hearing on Tuesday, Jan. 31, that seems unlikely.

... The D.C. District Court is expected to rule this week on whether the legislature's maps violate the preclearance terms of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

... There are undoubtedly voices in the negotiating room suggesting that the plaintiffs would be in a much stronger negotiating position – and that the state would have little legal wiggle room – if they just wait a couple more days.

... The Mexican American Legislative Caucus told the Chronicle this morning that a deal is not imminent, even though they are all working towards some kind of agreement.

... LULAC [League of United Latin American Citizens] attorney Luis Roberto Vera, Jr. confirmed to the Chronicle that his clients (who are still pushing for coalition districts) are still pushing to wait for the D.C. ruling, which was the position all plaintiffs stated to the San Antonio District Court panel before this weekend.

"As to negotiations," Vera wrote in an email to the Chronicle this afternoon, "they have totally broken down as of now. I am sure they will resume but I doubt an agreement if at all by this Monday so I don't expect an April 3rd election." (emphasis added)

Read the full story @ The Austin Chronicle

Even if the parties miraculously agree to a set of maps this week and the San Antonio District Court the accepts those maps on or before February 6 - the unified election date will likely push out from April 3 to at least April 17.

A representative for Texas county election offices told the San Antonio court last Friday that the larger counties require a 10 weeks lead time to organize an election from whatever date the court sets as the new candidate filing deadline, after new district maps are drawn. The first day of early voting for a April 3 election would be March 19. It may a logistical impossibility for county election officials to draw election precinct maps, mail voter registration cards, prepare ballots, hire election Judges, Alternate Judges and Clerks, and program voting machines by March 19, if they don't have Senate, House, and Congressional maps until some time after Feb. 6.

The Justice Department also told the San Antonio District court in a filing on Friday that the foreshortened February 6 - April 3 primary schedule proposed by the Texas Republican Party wouldn’t allow the 45 days specified in both federal (MOVE Act) and Texas law for military and overseas voters to participate in the election process.

Increasingly, it seems the only conceivable option remaining to hold an election on April 3 is to split the election into two parts, with part one held on April 3rd. The primary election held on April 3rd would allow voters to cast ballots for presidential candidates. A second primary election for all other statewide and local offices would then be held at a later date - maybe as late as June - after the courts resolve the redistricting disputes.

Americans' Political Views Not So Far Apart

From LiveScience

In an election year, it's hard to turn on the television or read a newspaper without getting the sense that Americans are becoming ever more divided into red versus blue. But a new study finds that perception may be downright wrong.

In fact, political polarization among the public has barely budged at all over the past 40 years, according to research presented here on Jan. 27 at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology. But, crucially, people vastly overestimate how polarized the American public is — a tendency toward exaggeration that is especially strong in the most extreme Democrats and Republicans. (The results do not apply to Congress, politicians or media pundits, but rather to the general public.)

"Strongly identified Republicans or Democrats perceive and exaggerate polarization more than weakly identified Republicans or Democrats or political independents," said study researcher John Chambers, a professor of psychology at the University of Florida.

The people who see the world split into two opposing factions are also most likely to vote and become politically active, Chambers said in a talk at the meeting. This means that while real growing polarization is illusory, the perception of polarization could drive the political process.

Read the full story @ LiveScience

Fox News "Dead People Voting In SC" Story Collapses

Media Matters

Over the last two weeks, Fox has repeatedly promoted the claim that voter fraud is indicated by records showing that more than 900 South Carolina residents were recorded as casting a vote after their reported death date. Lou Dobbs, Bill Hemmer, and Neil Cavuto all gave state Attorney General Alan Wilson a platform to offer up this assertion, and on Monday Bret Baier reported that Wilson had notified the Justice Department of this "potential voter fraud."

These claims were always shaky, and have now completely dissolved.

On January 11, state Department of Motor Vehicles director Kevin Schwedo testified before the state legislature that his analysts had compared state Election Commission records with data from the Department of Vital Statistics and the Social Security Administration and found 957 people who could have voted after they had died. He subsequently turned the data over to law enforcement.

But the Columbia Free-Times' Corey Hutchins reports that the Election Commission has examined six names from the list -- the only six names Wilson's office had turned over. At a hearing this morning, the agency revealed that none of those cases involved a ballot actually being cast in a deceased person's name:

In a news release election agency spokesman Chris Whitmire handed out prior to the hearing, the agency disputed the claim that dead people had voted. One allegedly dead voter on the DMV's list cast an absentee ballot before dying; another was the result of a poll worker mistakenly marking the voter as his deceased father; two were clerical errors resulting from stray marks on voter registration lists detected by a scanner; two others resulted from poll managers incorrectly marking the name of the voter in question instead of the voter above or below on the list.

The attorney general's office had only given the State Election Commission six names off its list of 957 names to examine. The agency found every one of them to be alive and otherwise eligible to vote, except for the one who had voted before dying.

This was entirely predictable.

When DMV director Schwedo originally testified, he made clear that the discrepancy could be explained by voters casting absentee ballots before their deaths or by data errors. Indeed, such deceased voter claims are almost always revealed as unfounded for those very reasons. But these facts never made their way to Fox, which has a long history of trumping up voter fraud allegations and pushing voter ID requirements as the only possible solution.

Read the full article @ Media Matters

Related:

• Dead People Voting? Let's Wait Until The Data Is Done Talking
• Texas Voter Photo ID FAQ

The GOP Complains That Obama Has Succeeded Despite GOP Obstruction

PoliticusUSA

The contrast between Pres. Obama’s State of the Union speech and Indiana Gov. Daniels' Republican response was that the President cited empirical data of his accomplishments and laid out specifics for moving the country forward, while Daniels made generalized accusations based on lies and misinformation. Governor Daniels provided a wealth of lies in his response, but a few stand out that are easily debunked; for those with a strong constitution, the text of Daniels’ response is worth a read. ...

... Daniels’ response was suspiciously similar to the Heritage Foundation, CATO Institute, Americans for Enterprise, and Koch Industries’ mission statements on economic policy and fixes designed to help the 1% maintain their advantaged position in America.

... Daniels took John Boehner’s cue and lied about the number of jobs the proposed Canadian pipeline will create. He said “the extremism that cancels a perfectly safe pipeline that would employ tens of thousands” is a pro-poverty agenda;” the pipeline’s builders, TransCanada, claim it will employ hundreds.

Daniels also claimed the President failed to create jobs with “all those stimulus dollars the President borrowed and blew.” President Obama blew the stimulus dollars saving America’s automobile industry and creating millions of jobs at home, and he proposed creating more by eliminating tax breaks for corporations that outsource jobs and rewarding manufacturers with incentives for relocating back to America. The President’s specific proposal to create jobs is identical to the one Republicans blocked last year to protect corporate un-taxable foreign income.

Daniels proposed strengthening Social Security, but Republican’s propose shifting a wildly successful government retirement system to a private 401(k) system to enrich Wall Street. The simplest fix to maintain Social Security’s solvency for a thousand years is eliminating the cap that allows wealthy Americans to avoid contributing the same percentage as those earning less than $102,600. That means Willard Romney pays the same.062% on his $22-plus million income as a minimum wage janitor, and if every rich Republican paid the same percentage as working Americans, the controversy over extending the payroll tax-cut would vanish.

The prescient question is; why does every Republican resort to generalized lies about this President’s accomplishments? One might answer; to protect the wealthy, Wall Street, the oil industry, the corporate world, and because Mr. Obama’s is African America and those are all correct.

However, the simple answer is Republicans are irked that despite their obstruction and fallacious rhetoric, President Obama succeeded saving the economy Republicans crashed with deregulation and unfunded, out-of-control spending during Bush’s presidency. The underlying tone of Daniels’ response was that President Obama failed to right the economy after Bush-Republican’s economic malfeasance, and achieve full employment in the process. Of course, the President made no such promise, but Republicans are framing the 2012 election on that premise because they have nothing else.

Read the full article @ PoliticusUSA

Related:

Mitch Daniels' SOTU Response Wrong on Social Security

Right-Wing Media Launch Predictable Attacks On Obama's State Of The Union Address

The GOP Thinks Failure Is Their Best Option In 2012

by Frederick Barrow and Michael Handley with hat tips to Addicting Info and JM Bell

In a CNN poll taken last October, Republican voters were the only group that wants Obama’s policies to fail. From the poll's internals:

In general, do you hope that Barack Obama’s policies will succeed or do you hope that his policies will fail?

• Republicans: Succeed 39% vs Fail 51%
• Democrats: Succeed 92% vs Fail 5%
• Independents: Succeed 66% Fail 24%
• Total: Succeed 67% vs Fail 25%

Even more interesting, when Republican voters were then asked about some of the Obama policy ideas themselves — without Obama’s name attached to them — majorities of Republicans supported them.

According to the poll, 58% of Republicans support the payroll tax holiday, 63% support federal aid for teachers and first responders, 54% support federal aid for rebuilding roads, bridges, and schools, and 56% support raising taxes on income more than $1 million.

That's a terrible and self-destructive case of misplaced priorities, putting their hatred of the president ahead of their own views about what's in the best interest of the country.

The Republicans are rooting against the American economy and American workers. They believe that they will do better politically in the 2012 presidential elections, if the economy does worse. And for the last thirty-six months Republicans in congress have done everything they can to assure that the American electorate sees Pres. Obama as a failed President.

After Republicans regained control of the House of Representatives in the 2010 mid-term elections they repeated threatened to shut down government and allow the U.S. to default on its obligations all during 2011. Republicans controlling the House refused to compromise and meet Pres. Obama half way, often even 90% of the way, to GOP positions, just to paint Pres. Obama as a failed President.

Republicans claim they just have a different view of what will create jobs. And that is partly true. Generally their view is that whatever is in the short-term interest of the big Wall Street banks, insurance companies, big oil and their wealthy donors is what is "good for the economy" and "good for job creation."

Republicans implemented their program of $1.8 trillion in tax cuts for the rich and allowed the reckless Wall Street banks to do whatever they pleased for eight long years during the Bush administration. The result was a $2,000 decrease in real income for most Americans, a massive increase in incomes for the top two percent of the population, zero net private sector job creation, and the collapse of our economy in the closing months of Pres. Bush's administration in 2008.

But it's not just their commitment to tax cuts for the rich "trickle down" economics that has caused them to do everything in their power to block economic recovery. They believe that their political fortunes can rise only if the fortunes of the rest of us decline.

The next time someone tells you that the Republicans care about the American people just give them this list of just some of the bills that Republicans have blocked, or attempted to block, since Obama became President:

President Obama’s 2012 State of the Union Address

Full text of President Obama’s 2012 State of the Union address, as prepared for delivery:

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans:

Last month, I went to Andrews Air Force Base and welcomed home some of our last troops to serve in Iraq. Together, we offered a final, proud salute to the colors under which more than a million of our fellow citizens fought – and several thousand gave their lives.

We gather tonight knowing that this generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world. For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in Iraq. For the first time in two decades, Osama bin Laden is not a threat to this country. Most of al Qaeda’s top lieutenants have been defeated. The Taliban’s momentum has been broken, and some troops in Afghanistan have begun to come home.

These achievements are a testament to the courage, selflessness, and teamwork of America’s Armed Forces. At a time when too many of our institutions have let us down, they exceed all expectations. They’re not consumed with personal ambition. They don’t obsess over their differences. They focus on the mission at hand. They work together.

Imagine what we could accomplish if we followed their example. Think about the America within our reach: A country that leads the world in educating its people. An America that attracts a new generation of high-tech manufacturing and high-paying jobs. A future where we’re in control of our own energy, and our security and prosperity aren’t so tied to unstable parts of the world. An economy built to last, where hard work pays off, and responsibility is rewarded.

We can do this. I know we can, because we’ve done it before.

GOP Response To Pres. Obama's STOU Address

Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels delivers the Republican response to President Obama's State of the Union address.

Tea Party Response To Pres. Obama's SOTU Address

Herman Cain Delivers the Tea Party Response to President Obama's 2012 State of the Union Address.

Still A Path To A April 3rd Primary Election?

In an order issued this afternoon, the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas in San Antonio asked lawyers for the State of Texas and plaintiffs' groups (the parties) to appear for a status conference on Friday, January 27, at 1 p.m. The San Antonio court has asked the parties for input on the Supreme Court's ruling last Friday that leaves senate, house and congressional candidates without political districts.

Texas A.G. Greg Abbott Sues USDOJ To Get Voter ID Implemented

The Texas attorney general’s office today filed suit against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Justice to have the state’s controversial voter photo ID law implemented without further delay.

When the U.S. Justice Department blocked South Carolina's new voter ID law on December 23, 2011, because of possible discrimination against minorities, attention quickly focused on Texas, which passed nearly identical photo ID legislation in 2011.

Under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the Justice Department or a federal court is required to pre-clear laws affecting voters in jurisdictions with a history of voting discrimination, including Texas and South Carolina. The Texas Secretary of State’s Office sought preclearance from the Justice Department on July 25, 2011, but the agency is still holding the matter under review.

Originally set to go into effect on January 1, 2012, the Texas law would require voters to present one of a limited selection of government issued photo IDs to election Judges in order to qualify to vote. The accepted forms of currently dated photo identification are: Department of Public Safety issued Texas driver's license, Texas election ID , or personal identification card; Texas concealed handgun license; U.S. military ID card; U.S. citizenship certificate; or U.S. passport.

Obama Vows To Protect Women's Choice

Drawing a stark contrast between himself and the Republican presidential candidates on the issue of women's reproductive rights, President Barack Obama released a statement on Sunday, the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, reaffirming his commitment to protect a woman's right to choose.

As we mark the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we must remember that this Supreme Court decision not only protects a woman’s health and reproductive freedom, but also affirms a broader principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters. I remain committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose and this fundamental constitutional right.

While this is a sensitive and often divisive issue -- no matter what our views, we must stay united in our determination to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant woman and mothers, reduce the need for abortion, encourage healthy relationships, and promote adoption. And as we remember this historic anniversary, we must also continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams.

The Obama administration made a particularly notable decision in favor of reproductive rights on Friday when Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced that all U.S. employers -- with the exception of churches and other places of worship -- would be required to fully cover the cost of contraception for the women they employ. The religious community had been lobbying to broaden the exemption to include all faith-affiliated organizations, such as Catholic hospitals and universities, but the Department of Health and Human Services denied that request to ensure that millions more women could benefit from birth control coverage.

By contrast, the four remaining GOP candidates have not only said they would like to see Roe v. Wade reversed, they also want to outlaw women's choice to use birth control contraceptives through a "personhood" amendment to the constitution.

GOP: No Right To Family Planning Choices

Many people do not remember that the purchase and use of birth control products or literature about birth control options, even by married couples, was against the law in many states until 1965. There are those who, for the last 46 years, have worked to reverse the 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut Supreme Court finding that Americans have a fundamental right of privacy. That right includes making family planning decisions and the right to learn about and use birth control contraceptives.

During an ABC interview with Jake Tapper presidential candidate Rick Santorum said that premarital sex should be outlawed, that women have no right to accessible reproductive health care, that contraceptives should be illegal and that states can outlaw the sale, purchase and use of contraceptives.

“The state has a right to do that, I have never questioned that the state has a right to do that. It is not a constitutional right, the state has the right to pass whatever statutes they have. That is the thing I have said about the activism of the Supreme Court, they are creating right, and they should be left up to the people to decide.”

Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney and nearly all the other GOP presidential candidates have committed to a "personhood" constitutional amendment that would outlaw most common contraceptive choices available to women. Mother Jones reports that Republicans in the U.S. Congress also want to pass a federal Personhood Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Cecile Richards had a great discussion with Rachel Maddow on the latest from the Republican field. It is unbelievable that these candidates are campaigning on a platform that is so anti-women’s health, they're even going after something as mainstream as birth control.

Roe V Wade @ 39: The Struggle For Female Liberty Continues

PoliticusUSA

In the South and Midwest of our country, an evil struggling against female freedom is winning ground. In Mississippi, a woman is charged with murder for giving birth to a still born. In Alabama, a mother of three awaits a ten year sentence for a Cesarean that resulted in the death of her baby. In South Carolina, over 300 women have been charged with some form of fetal homicide. In Indiana, a young woman who tried to kill herself by taking rat poison is in jail, charged with murder and attempted fetal homicide.

These cases are but a few examples of the way women’s rights have come under assault in this country, land of the supposed “free.”

Since the Tea Party takeover, these rights can’t be taken for granted. Whether it’s taking a law meant to protect women from spousal abuse misused to prosecute her for attempted murder or fetal homicide laws as a direct attempt to push back on Roe V Wade, women’s rights in America are being swept away on a Tea Party tide with nary a cry of notice. Grain by grain, with each new law, women are being relegated to citizens without rights or choices over their own bodies.

Perry's Standing Diminished In Texas

Public Policy Polling

Rick Perry had fallen so far by the end of his Presidential campaign that it's not even clear he could have defeated Barack Obama in Texas. Our poll of the state last weekend found Perry leading Obama just 48-47, including a 51-44 deficit with independents. Perry had led Obama by 7 points on a September poll there.

Perry will come home to only a 42% approval rating, with 51% of voters disapproving of him. He's fallen from 78% to 67% favor with Republicans over the last four months, and independents split against him 35/59. By comparison Obama's approval rating in Texas is 44%, although his disapproval is also higher than Perry's at 54%.

Our Texas Presidential poll is another reminder that a Gingrich surge would be very good news for President Obama. Obama actually holds a slight edge over him, 47-45. Only 33% of Texans have a favorable opinion of Gingrich to 53% with a negative one.

The GOP would start out ahead with any of its other potential nominees: Romney and Santorum lead Obama by identical 7 point margins at 49-42, and Paul has a 6 point advantage at 46-40. Democrats' dream of turning Texas to the blue column doesn't seem likely to come true this year unless they get the gift of running against Gingrich.

We also tested a three way contest involving Obama and Romney with Paul running as an independent candidate. In that scenario Romney leads Obama just 40-38, with Paul getting 17%. Although a Paul third party bid seems highly unlikely it's interesting to note that he actually wins the independent vote with 32% to 30% for Obama and 27% for Romney. That really shows the extent to which voters unhappy with both parties this year are at least open to considering an independent candidate.

Full results here

Jon Stewart Rips SOPA Proponents, Shows How Bill Would Affect 'The Daily Show'

As someone who makes a living mocking the online content that could become illegal under the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), Jon Stewart turned the focus on himself and how much he relies on online content to produce "The Daily Show" night after night. Watch the full segment and hear a little about Stewart's already-full plate when it comes to dealing with legal copyright claims, even before the murmurs of SOPA began.

Rick Perry Is Dropping Out Of Presidential Bid

Rick Perry has told senior staff and supporters that he is withdrawing from the presidential race.

According to reports from Politico, Perry is expected to endorse Newt Gingrich.

Perry entered the race this summer as a frontrunner. And he exits it before a single ballot has been cast in the American South. Erick Erickson, the conservative activist behind RedState.com introduced Perry into the race earlier this year, yesterday, he called on the Texas governor to drop out.

Perry had cancelled most of his schedule yesterday, and was attracting just 4 percent of potential South Carolina voters in the POLITICO/Tarrance poll released today. Like Jon Huntsman earlier this week, he is dropping out of the race before he did any further damage to his brand.

Perry's campaign will be the subject of lots of post-mortem analysis for the candidate's many verbal gaffes, and some of the odder positions he took, such as saying he would put American troops back in Iraq.

He attracted fewer votes in this primary season than Jon Huntsman, but spent more than twice as much as did Huntsman on his campaign.

Perry will give a press conference at 11am in North Charleston.

DEVELOPING...

Whither The Texas Primary?

With the Supreme Court yet to rule, questions inevitably have turned to whether there is any way it will be possible to keep to an April 3 primary.

Senator John Cornyn and many election law lawyers think that chance is becoming increasingly remote. In fact, many observers aren’t even certain when the primary could be held if it needs to be moved.

Consider the logistical challenges @ Michael Li's excellent TxRedistricting.org blog.

Texas Democrats' Rick Perry Opposition Book

To see the Texas Democrats' 500-page 0pposition book on Gov. Rick Perry, created by Texas Democratic campaign consultant Jeff Rotkoff and obtained by The Huffington Post from the super PAC Texans for America's Future, click here.

Poll: Republicans Trust Fox News And Nothing Else

Fox News viewers are less informed than people who don't watch any news, according to a November 2011 poll from Fairleigh Dickinson University. Another study from the University of Maryland found that Fox News viewers are more likely to believe false information about politics.

A new PPP poll finds that while Democrats trust most news outlets, to varying degrees, Republicans trust only a single one — Fox News. While a massive 68 percent of Republicans trust Fox, the next highest rating among any major TV news outlet is PBS, which just 30 percent of GOPers trust, according to the PPP poll.

The numbers show just how powerful Fox can be in setting the agenda and influencing the world view of conservatives, with virtually no competition or accountability from the outside world.

This monopoly on news penetration for an entire half of the electorate would be bad no matter the network, but it’s especially troubling considering Fox’s shoddy, and often agenda-driven “reporting.” And unlike an openly-ideological news outlet like this Blog or Red State, which freely note their perspectives, Fox insists it’s a traditional “far and balanced” news outlet.

People who accept the Fox News world view are unlikely to be convinced by any argument of real fact. Modern American, when presented with facts they know to be false, they nonetheless reject it if it offends or undermines your belief system.