« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Governors still matter.

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  June 4th, 2010 at 12:32 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

I know, I’m not going to harp on this all the time. But after my previous post I read up a bit more on what the doings of the Republican Governors Association.

They really are on the ball. They already had a graphic for the point I was making the other day: The make up of the US House of Representatives, as well as a number of state legislatures, depends on governors who will be elected in November.

Governors with Veto Power

Click the image for the full size version. There’s also a PDF if you have a use for it.

They’re not kidding around. You don’t hear about them antagonizing one faction or another of the party. They’re about winning elections for Republicans. They’re about beating Democrats. I hope we can support them on that. Not just for the elections this year, but for the 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020 House elections as well.

Tags: , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • ltnowis

    deserves a lot of credit for running the RGA so well.

  • http://www.suvstrategery.blogspot.com SoFiMil

    h/t to mbecker.

  • redtillimdead

    Barbour is amazing. He was great at the RNC and is kicking @$$ at the RGA. Him becoming chairman was the one good thing from Sanford’s affair.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Sanford had been my top choice for President for a while. Barbour took his spot on that list as well as at the RGA.

    Now, I have a new top pick, but Barbour’s still in second.

  • ademintconservative

    These are the people we need running for national office, not Romney, Gingrich.

  • mbecker908

    Jan Brewer is OK on exactly one issue… immigration. And, it’s an issue she’d never said one word about until AFTER she signed SB1070. She had no part in drafting it, she stood by and watched in silence as it made it’s way through the AZ legislature and she said not one word about it for about a week after it passed. Until she signed it, nobody in AZ knew what she would do. Since she signed it, she’s done a good job at reading the script defending it.

    On every other issue, budgeting and taxes especially, she is Charlie Crist in drag. Her first response is to find a tax to raise – think Mike Huckabee – and I could no more imagine her taking on the state unions than I could BO rejecting SEIU.

    All that said, she will in all likelihood get reelected because of the early Christmas present that is SB1070 and we’ll have to suffer under her total inability to define “leadership” for another four years. Keep in mind that before 1070, and after the nasty disaster that was her budget cycle, she was polling about 30% in a four person primary and was trailing Terry Goddard, the shoo-in Dem nominee, by 2.

  • Joshua Persons

    I think I understand the point you’re making, Neil, and it’s getting me fired up, but I can’t really make heads or tails of the map. The legend is not at all helpful, and it’s leaving me with tons of questions.

    -What do the parenthetical numbers mean?
    -”Legislative” means “State Legislative”, right? Because matching it against “Congressional” makes it seem redundant.
    -I can’t figure out how to match the bottom summary with the map. For example, according to the summary, 14 of 15 have veto power over Congressional maps, whereas the color legend suggests the number is 30 of 37.
    -I can’t figure out how to match the color legend with the map. For example, it says there are three states where governors have no veto power, but I can only find AZ and ID. Is HI the third? Can’t tell.

    If anyone from RGA is reading this, I support what you’re doing, but please do some reading on data visualization. Graphics like this, presented the right way, can make a powerful argument in the Internet age.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Did you read that?

    It’s about veto power over redistricting.

  • Joshua Persons

    And you’re right to stress this. I’m saying the map doesn’t do a good job of presenting that information. It appears to be self-contradictory (summary counts) and provides data without an explanation for that data (parenthetical counts). After reading your articles for context I can make a guess that the parenthetical counts are representative count changes and that the “15″ total in the summary is of those for some reason. Are those the only states expected to redraw their lines?

    The graphic itself explains none of this, which IMO significantly weakens its impact. The color scheme doesn’t help either. It’s not your fault at all, and that’s why I directed my criticism at RGA.

  • toadold

    Not only do you get congressional districts un-Gerrymandered with the elections of Republican governors but you also build your base of most likely to succeed US Presidential candidates, that is state governors.
    Also a strong conservative presence in state and local politics are what you need to roll back the influence of the Cloward-Priven commies in the state educational system and other institutions.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Hopefully they see this.