New WSJ Poll: Walker’s Rocking, Rubio’s Doing Fine, Jeb’s Pretty ‘Meh’

Today on NRO

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: Hillary Clinton is the star of the Democratic party — and for Democrats that's a big problem. How Many Straws on Hillary's Back?

KEVIN D. WILLIAMSON: Another caudillo, another progressive darling. The Left's Mess in Venezuela.

THOMAS SOWELL: Statistical disparities between ethnic groups are normal, not evidence of racism. The 'Disparate Impact' Racket.

RICH LOWRY: There is a reason that so many of Hillary's political donors also give to the family foundation, and it's not because they have never heard of the Red Cross. The Clinton Foreign Fundraising Machine.

PHOTO ESSAY: Pricey Timepieces.

Morning Jolt
. . . with Jim Geraghty, Conservative Journalist of the Year

March 10, 2015

New WSJ Poll: Walker's Rocking, Rubio's Doing Fine, Jeb's Pretty 'Meh'

I don't know how I got a reputation as a Jeb Bush guy when I was the skeptic who put him in the second tier. I do realize that if you criticize Wisconsin governor Scott Walker, everybody who currently likes Walker gets furious and suspects you're a Jeb Bush guy. And Walker has a lot of fans these days. He's performed miracles in Wisconsin. He's got street cred with the Tea Parties, but he's got enough accomplishments and a mild-mannered demeanor to please the establishment. He's earned rave reviews from Rush Limbaugh, George Will, and Charles Krauthammer. To speak ill of Walker is like speaking ill of Baby Jesus.

Either way, Jeb Bush has some spectacularly unspectacular numbers in the new national Wall Street Journal poll:

Mr. Bush, an early favorite for the Republican nomination among GOP donors, faces more resistance within his party. Some 42 percent of people who plan to vote in GOP primaries say they couldn't see themselves supporting Mr. Bush, the survey found, and poll participants view him more negatively than positively, with 34 percent seeing him in an unfavorable light and 23 percent viewing him favorably.

Insert all the standard caveats -- we're still about nine months away from anyone casting votes that matter, parties don't pick nominees based upon national polls, the self-identified Republicans in this sample may not end up actually voting in GOP primaries, etc. But this is not where Jeb Bush wanted to start.

The two Republicans who begin the race on the strongest footing in the poll are Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. More than half of GOP primary voters said they were open to supporting Messrs. Rubio or Walker, compared with 49% who said so of Mr. Bush.

Resistance within the party to Messrs. Rubio and Walker is far lower than for Mr. Bush: Some 26% said they couldn't see themselves supporting Mr. Rubio, and 17% said so of the Wisconsin governor.

He is the Baby Jesus! Everybody loves him!

Walker, next to a model of his birthplace in 2009.

GOP Senators to Iran: Any Deal You Reach with Obama Ends with His Presidency

Completely fair game by 47 Republican senators, in their open letter to the Iranian leadership:

It has come to our attention while observing your nuclear negotiations with our government that you may not fully understand our constitutional system. Thus, we are writing to bring to your attention two features of our Constitution—the power to make binding international agreements and the different character of federal offices—which you should seriously consider as negotiations progress.

First, under our Constitution, while the president negotiates international agreements, Congress plays the significant role of ratifying them. In the case of a treaty, the Senate must ratify it by a two-thirds vote. A so-called congressional-executive agreement requires a majority vote in both the House and the Senate (which, because of procedural rules, effectively means a three-fifths vote in the Senate). Anything not approved by Congress is a mere executive agreement . . .

What these two constitutional provisions mean is that we will consider any agreement regarding your nuclear-weapons program that is not approved by the Congress as nothing more than an executive agreement between President Obama and Ayatollah Khamenei. The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time.

Democrats contend that letter amounts to "sabotaging the negotiations." Hey, it's just facts, guys.

President Obama knows full well he's pursuing a deal without the support of Congress. Congressional Republicans believe Obama and Kerry are pursuing his own interest of polishing his legacy, and the Iranians are pursuing their interest of preserving their nuclear program and rapid "breakout capability" to build a nuclear weapon. Nobody in the negotiations is adamantly attempting to keep Iran as far from a nuclear weapon as possible; everybody's eager to get to the glamorous historic photo-op in Geneva.

Unsurprisingly, the American people are more appropriately skeptical of the Iranian regime than Foggy Bottom is:

Most Americans believe that a nuclear deal with Iran would not make a real difference in preventing that country's production of a nuclear weapon, according to a new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll.

Seventy-one percent of Americans say that the nuclear negotiations, which are backed by the Obama administration and strongly opposed by most Republicans, will not make a real difference in affecting Iran's potential production of a nuclear weapon.

Hillary's System Probably Let Obama's E-Mails Get Hacked. Probably.

Let's review.

1. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama traded e-mails while she was Secretary of State.

2. The communications of the U.S. Secretary of State would be an extremely high-value target for foreign-intelligence services.

3. Hillary's e-mail system used "obsolete and insecure" protocols and earned an overall "F" rating for security. We already know about one mostly mischievous hacker who broke into Hillary's account in 2013. If he could do it, it seems like a safe bet that the Russians, Chinese, Iranians, or others could do it.

Conclusion: Because of Hillary Clinton's decision to use her own server and e-mail system instead of the official State Department systems, she exposed the president's personal e-mails to her and his e-mail address.

If that likely scenario is the case, maybe this explains why President Obama, David Axelrod, Congressional Democrats, and other liberals aren't rushing to Hillary Clinton's aid in this accelerating scandal. She's actually fouled things up on a scale so serious and consequential, not even they can excuse it or forgive it.

Remember, the most recent spin from Team Hillary is that this is "all about nothing." If the spin isn't even remotely plausible, it isn't really a good lie.

Meanwhile, the government accountability group Cause of Action made three new FOIA requests regarding HRC's email use.

One is being sent to the State Department's inspector general, asking for all documents relating to any review, audit, or investigation, whether merely considered, ongoing, or completed, concerning Secretary's Clinton's compliance with electronic recordkeeping requirements and use of personal devices for agency business.

The group is also asking for "All documents, including but not limited to electronic communications, including any person at the White House, the U.S. Department of State, the Clinton Family Foundation, and the Clinton Foundation, referring or relating to any document in the request above."

Cause of Action's Geoff Holtzman writes, "It's clear that the White House, including President Obama, knew Secretary Clinton was using a non-government email address. The key question we're asking is, did the White House ever do anything about it?"

(SPOILER ALERT FROM JIM: No.)

"We now know that the president was communicating with Secretary Clinton via an unsecured email address, but we don't know whether or not the White House did anything about it," said Cause of Action President Dan Epstein. "We intend to get an answer to that question, as well as a series of others."

The FOIAs, which are directed at the State Department, the State Department IG and the National Archivist, also attempt to unearth the following:

Did Secretary Clinton ignore records management training or guidance?

Was the State Messaging and Archive Retrieval Toolset (SMART) system used by the State Department removed from Secretary Clinton's computer or mobile device?

Was Secretary Clinton granted any waivers pertaining to the SMART system or the Federal Records Act?

ADDENDA: Over at Ricochet, Cameron Gray asks, "Can you crowdfund an entire news network?"

www.NationalReview.com

Sail with National Review

Join your favorite writers for National Review's 2015 cruise to Alaska — a once in a lifetime opportunity for you and your family. Learn more here.

What National Review is reading — order your advanced copy today!

The Conservatarian Manifesto: Libertarians, Conservatives, and the Fight for the Right's Future
By Charles C.W. Cooke

Love National Review online? Save 75% off the newsstand price and subscribe to National Review magazine — print or digital versions available!

Looking for the perfect gift for that special conservative in your life? Give the gift of National Review or shop the NR store!

To manage your National Review e-mail preferences or unsubscribe, click here, or to read our privacy policy, click here.

This e-mail was sent by:
National Review, Inc.
215 Lexington Avenue, 11th Floor
New York, NY 10016

Search This Blog

Diogenes-Light

New WSJ Poll: Walker’s Rocking, Rubio’s Doing Fine, Jeb’s Pretty ‘Meh’

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Megyn Kelly -> Pete Hegseth responds to 2017 rape accusation. 🔥

FOLLOW THE MONEY - Billionaire tied to Epstein scandal funneled large donations to Ramaswamy & Democrats

Readworthy: This month’s best biographies & memoirs