A Political Stimulus, Not A Job Stimulus
by Veronique de RugyI received many emails on Friday and this weekend about the data published here showing that on average Democratic districts are getting almost twice the amount of stimulus money than Republican districts. Republican districts also received smaller awards on average. The average dollars awarded per Republican district is $260,675,663, while the average dollars awarded per Democratic district is $471,533,539.
Several readers asked if the difference could be explained by the fact that Democratic districts have many more people than Republican districts have. So I looked at the numbers and here is the result. It’s not.
Republican districts get $362 per capita on average
Democratic districts get $692 per capita on average
Also, on average, Democratic districts received one-and-a-half times as many awards as Republican ones. Democratic districts also received two-and-a-half times more stimulus dollars than Republican districts ($122 million vs. $46 million). Of course, there are more Democratic districts than Republican districts in the Congress.
Is the politics part of the allocation decision?
Well I checked for the correlation between political indicators and stimulus funding. I found that there are no effect of political variables (leadership, tenure in office …) on stimulus funds allocation with one exception: the district’s party affiliation (whether the district’s representation was Republican or Democratic) does matter.
So how much does party affiliation mattered? While the effect is significant, because of the specifications of the model, more confidence should be placed on the relationship between the two variables then on the quantification of that relationship. In other words, while I am confident that whether the district is represented by R or D matters for funding, I just can’t tell you how much this factor matters compared to the other factors that went into the allocation decision.
On the other hand, I can tell you what factor was not a part of the allocation decision: the level of unemployment in each district or the deterioration of unemployment in each district. In other words, unemployment levels didn’t matter. That’s not what the money was supposed to address. Or was it?
Here is a chart to illustrate this point. As you can see the districts where unemployment increased the most during the recession aren’t receiving more money that the ones that were hit more lightly.
All the data is available for download here. (Ignore the picture)
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
539 Comments
The rest of the stimulus money will likely be spent between now and November. A good sized chunk was held in reserve for the elections.
The tricky part for the democrats will be if they should spend it on their base to keep them excited about voting or just do as they have been and funnel as much of it as they can to their contributors for advertising revenue this fall.
The blue states contain higher concentrations of parasites, the what’s in it for me crowd, gleefully sucking up the government cheese, very simple really.
The 'stimulus' bill is nothing more than a slush fund. I'm not surprised, there have been many people saying this since it was passed.
So politicians in power send money back to their own district in order to win reelection? Shocking. In other news, the sun came up today.
I've never seen a bill get rushed through so quickly only to be used so slowly and deliberately.
I hope this is the last "stimulus" we see in this country, because history shows they just aren't helpful for the economy and are clearly just political dollars to pass out to whoever the President wants to give them out to. How can it be said that the blue districts getting double the dollars of red districts is anything other than deliberate manipulation?
Give me the true free market economy I grew up with back, please.
I have been wondering if there is any correlation between the depth of the recession in districts (before the influx of my gubmint-laundered money) and their party affiliation. Were D districts hit harder by their fiscal policies than R districts? The numbers I tried to crunch were inconclusive. Has anyone done any real research on this?
No doubt about that!! Except for the fact that the HealthSnare Reform got so many people riled up, as well as people seeing how Obamao and the Dems are trying to hijack the country, that basket of goodies that is Obamao's personal stash would have cemented the Dems in control with all of the favors.
That is the challenge we face as November approaches, and We the People are showing that we're up to the challenge!!
LOL…true, but the scale of this Obamanation is mind-boggling!
Political BS has been happening for a long time. This is caused by political parties.
I hope we, collectively, can remember all this BS, when next a politician comes before us with fear
in his eyes, to tell us we must suspend capitalist ideals in order to save our capitalist country. Can
you even believe we bought that for 1 day? What a CF !
If I was any more surprised by this, I'd be semi-comatose. As it is, I'm in a persistent vegetative state.
Yep. I think Rush was the first to say it.
You can possibly be that incredibly simple there JD,……………………
The money the poiticians send to their districts for the most part are COLLECTED tax dollars,……..
The "stimulus billions, on the other hand is,………..well I'm sure you know.
If you pass legislation to spend $800 billion and need a way to launder much of it so it can be used for future campaign spending, you need to find willing partners in that crime.
And where are you going to find that level of corruption? Will it be in a right leaning conservative district? Or will it be in a long established, democrat stronghold?
Big shock that is. You can safely say this is 3 fold. The Democrats had to get their payoffs for their healthcare vote. 2nd to punish the GOP for their opposition to the President. 3rd the Dems districts need more money because they have taxed their constituients to the point of no return. I can imagine Pelosi grabbing some 6'5 man & turn him over & shaking his ankles to get the last of the change out his pockets.
Bad Corporations,…..
Bad CEO's,……….
Bad Bankers………
Bad Wall Street…..
Bad Health Care Insurances,…….
Bad U.S. Constitution,…………..
Good Redistribution of Wealth,………..God are we really that stupid????????????
Thanks for the laugh, Hucbald.
Regards,
Your Fellow Vegetable
Look at it this way.
This is good…let the junkie get his fix…let him get his fix every day. Then once he's hooked cut him off.
Watch him now as he squirms in the streets like Greece in a hot kettle.
It is only a matter of time till they are cut off…when we revolt.
Hey! Come on! You know it takes a lot of money to keep people in poverty! Sheesh!
Humorous cartoon on the "Jobs Myth" at http://drawfortruth.wordpress.com/category/jobs/
I think it's caused by the fact that political parties are collections of people.
Why is this article a surprise?
The entire system is based on Patronage.
Pure and simple. Once that concept is understood, everything else falls into place. It is all based on pork. Whoever delivers the hog feed (cash and votes), from back in the district, will be guranteed to get the bacon when the hog is slaughtered (appropriations from the budget). Unfortunately, they are slaughtering US.
This data demonstrates that the stimulus was largely about helping Democrats rather than Americans. But on the other hand, if conservative Republicans are going to be consistent, they won't be clamoring for government handouts, whereas it is entirely consistent for Democrats to grab as much as they can. Could this also be evidence of some principled Republicans not wanting to make their districts dependent on federal funding, and protecting their constituents from the strings that would be attached?
Hey, here's a concept. Compare and contrast those figures to population distribution, and you might be able to see that the money tends to go where the people are. Last I heard, land mass doesn't require federal assistance.
If you live in a Republican district and are not getting your share of the stimulus money, you need to get on your congressman. I know a lot of them are willing to demand their fair share because I see them smiling in photos in their hard hats, standing next to the big checks.
Problem is, some Republicans have chosen not to partake out of some ideological objection to the stimulus. It is wrong and very bad policy, because the ones who suffer are the folks you represent. So don't refuse the money, then whine because you didn't get your fair share.
Can you be more specific about exactly to whom you refer? Are the "parasites" evenly distributed across communities or are there certain communities more "parasitic" in your view?
they say who is their friend who is their enemy. That is how political parties look at things. We are all Americans. The politician love the progressive tax code it allows them to pick winners and losers.
Hey Demographer, didn't you see that chart that shows distribution of stimulus dollars per capita?
The people who voted for such Republicans also voted for their ideological objections, so I would think it would be wrong for those Republicans to then reject the will of their voters. Republicans thing SOME government spending on SOME things is necessary, so there is no inconsistency. It's a question of whether THIS expenditure is wise.
I cringe at the phrase "their fair share." If every person who wants their fair share of government money had to go door to door to all their neighbors and forcibly confiscate a percent of their money in person, it might stop seeming so fair.
This is all based on votes. The bulk of the stimulus won't be spent until next year. That will give the economy a bump in spring-summer 2012. Just in time for the election. If it works as planned Maobama will be re-elected. On the off chance it doesn't and he loses, the GIANT depression that is caused by just putting off the medicine our economy must take to recover will be blamed on the Republican that gets elected. This has all been planned for YEARS in advance. These people have been waiting for years for the opportunity to take over the U.S. by an economic collapse and the f#$%^^ing populus has been all too willing to oblige them. God help us!!!
APRIL FOOLS, the President really fooled America. Actually he didn't. Most conservative media have been reporting this for a very long time. Like yesterday, everyone was so excited about Obama opening up oil fields but the Conservative Media like http://www.americanparchment.com were reporting that today the EPA raises the Emissions tests by 10 MPG per vehicle and that he was closing down other fields. There were so many political reasons for him to open a few fields. It was done in order to take people off the health care bill, much like visiting Afghanistan was.
To Obama it is all Political.
Yet another reason our government should NOT be in the wealth redistribution business. Federal taxes should only be used for federal responsibilities such as highways, defense, etc… Federal taxes should NEVER be used for State funding, special interest, special state projects, etc… This only leads to inequalities. Why are my Fed tax dollars not being spent in a way that benefits me? Because our politicians are corrupt!
I just blogged about this…http://smallergovernmentnow.blogspot.com/2010/04/...
Its because our fed governemnt has been practicing wealth redistribution for years…
Democrats control congress… Democrats TAKE more for themselves… But criticize US for questioning them. Like we're the bad guys.
The only CHANGE I CAN believe in is in November. We will vote all of the left wing, out of office. NOW THAT IS CHANGE I CAN BELIEVE IN.
"Your fair share" is the pitch for the Census too.
I have a better idea. I'll keep mine and you can keep yours. That's "fair".
Can't argue with you on the ills of the institution of patronage/pork there Cowboy,………
But me thinks you are mixing apples and oranges and inadvertently covering up for this stimulus robbery.
Good ol fashioned American Pork (Sen. Byrd),……
which has been a part of this country longer than a 4th of July parade, has at least been payed for the most part,…
with tax dollars that have already been collected,…..on the other hand,………
This Stimulus sham is going to be payed for in its entirety by tax dollars yet to be collect from our grandchildren.
And to add salt to the wound,………..the posted charts really burn.
Well, it can't be an even distribution: Blue districts have a majority of Democratic voters, and ipso facto a majority of parasites. QED.
A "demographer" ought to know that congressional districts are determined by population, not physical area.
Oh- any comment on the complete non-correlation between stimulus bucks and unemployment?
Ah- we're all supposed to be looters and thieves like yourself?
What's gets to the core of this debate is that the Republican voting districts DON'T WANT THE MONEY. If the local Federal Offices told ya'll to come on down and pick up a free $100 bill how many of us would even show up? I bet almost none of us. On the other hand, Dems WANT the money. They will show up for free money by the thousands (like we saw in Detroit on rumors of free 'Obama Money'. )
It is the core of the debate because it shows how divided the country is. The article on succession that was posted on this page a few days ago illustrated this quite well. If democrats ever learn to be independent and self sufficient and find pride in that, we have hope. Otherwise I'm looking at Dallas as the new political capital of the USA (Heartland.) Long Live Texas!
I was addressing the topic, which is Democrats are getting more stimulus money than Republicans. My point is the money was there to be had, and if you didn't take part it was a choice. So stop acting like you are being cheated after you have taken an ideological stand.
Sounds like the perfect plan. But Mr. Obama can't fool you… you're on to his diabolical plan to destroy America.
Who do you think I’m talking about?
No worries Mik, we’re only in hoc too the tune of 106Trillion in unfunded mandates, soon the host will be dead, and the world will become survival of the fittest.
Lemme go through this slowly. Some Democratic districts are in urban areas, and as such are densely populated. Therefore it stands to reason that money will flow to heavily populated areas, and many of those districts will be Democratic held.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:111th_US_Congre...
This chart shows the current levels of representation. You can see that the most densely populated areas are dark blue, and the least populated states are dark red. In 1911 the ceiling of 435 members was established, therefore some Dem reps are responsible for vastly many more constituents than some of their Republican counterparts.
So yes, stimulus per capita favors Dems because they represent the populated regions of the country. If the government adopted pre-1911 levels of representation there would be thousands of members of the House of Representatives and it would be an overwhelmingly large, perhaps permanent, Democratic majority. Those are simply the facts.
Not true. Since the 435-member ceiling was established, some districts are vastly more populated than others. This is simply objective fact.
I see what you're saying – but I think the point is that Obama is trying to destroy AND remake America in a fashion that I'm sure he believes would be much better, more equitable, more enlightened, etc. But what conservatives are saying is that the ideas he's bought in to will NOT produce those results and will instead ruin the good things about our country while failing to solve the problems.
This is one of the sloppiest pieces of "research" I've seen in a long time.
The money is overwhelmingly going to state capitals. I guess the question is whether you didn't realize this or chose to not mention it because it goes against your "analysis."
http://www.datamasher.org/mash-ups/people-represe...
For further information
Great. Hope you never have to have unexpected surgery or other financial calamity that puts you, through no fault of your own, into a position of dependency. At which point I can hear you asking "where's mine?"
So now using public money constitutes thievery? You know the original tea partiers did not object to taxation per se. The famous part you are leaving out is "no taxation without representation." Cynical dupes are being led to believe that it is patriotic to want to absolve one's self from owing taxes of any kind. Most of us would call that plain greedy.
But the trillions in military spending over the last 6 years, with no end in sight, and no definition of victory, didn't muss your hair one little iota I'm betting.
"…per capita"
Spending per capita
Do you know what "per capita" means?
Aska Obama, the chicken hawk president, who said that Afghanistan was a good war, why we are still in Iraq.
“Greedy!” Tells you all you need to know about the demographer.
Thanks for providing the data behind this – can't argue with hard math!
Actually, \”plain greedy\” is the desire to take from others that which is
theirs. A mugging victim is not \”greedy\” if he objects.
\”Cynical dupes are being led to
> believe
> that it is patriotic to want to absolve one's self from owing taxes of
> any kind.
\”
What a pathetic strawman! Libertarians are not anarchists. Of course
taxes are necessary, as is some government. But both are, today, vastly
beyond any sense or reason and accelerating out of control. Even Keyenes,
the econ-god of the liberal, thought that 25% of GDP was the maximum
government could healthily extract from the private economy.
That would be a reasonable assumtion marginally employable (crack heads, drug addicts, ex cons), and unskilled workers ( drop outs, drug addled) are always the last hired and first fired. Lazy workers however following the Peter Principle always rize to the highest level of Unions and Government. In Otherwords democrates were hit hardest initially by the recesion and had to be bailed out. The rest of us will pay.
Change is inevitable and like all of us, the president has a vision of what the future should look like. When we use rhetoric like "destroy" we label all change as evil and that's where communication stops.
Fear of change is not ideological… it is the human condition. It is one of the reasons we have survived for two millions years (or 6,000, depending on who's counting). In our country political change is guided by elections. If you want to be the guide you have to win an election, but it is not productive in the long run to try and manipulate mass fear of change. Both sides do it, but on this list it comes from my right.
Well Anon and the MSM sure think so
Our collapse will take care of that as well chicken, I know you’ll be so proud.
Any correlation between the distribution of stimulus funds and the percentage of minorities in these districts?
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/04/study-clai...
This must be extremely embarrassing for Ms. de Rugy, so I'm not going to make any comment other than that.
obvious attempt to race-bait. ignore @demographer. probably "ANON" in disguise
[...] that I would like to see the same data shown per capita to take account of district size. She has delivered: Several readers asked if the difference could be explained by the fact that Democratic districts [...]
Aren't we all taught from a young age that the greatest virtue of a great society and all it's people is based in principle on truth and honesty. What does that say about the United States of America today where the two controlling political parties, the republicans and the democrats, lied to the American people when they put forth Barak Obama as a candidate for the Office of President knowing that he was never eligible to ever become a presidential candidate because of his father never ever being a citizen of the United Sates. Why is it so important for the democrats and the republicans and practically all of the main stream media that the United States and it's great people should suddenly rely upon deceit and malfeasance as the new principle for which a great society and it's people is based upon? Why do they want us to go throughout our lives knowing that life in America is nothing but a lie? Deceit and malfeasance prevails in America while truth and honesty has passed away! So much for providing for our POSTERITY!
I'm trying to figure out how it's anything other than that simple. Politicians are buying votes, with taxed and borrowed money, as they have ever since they had to stop sucking up to the king to get their jobs. Are people really just figuring out that this is what professional politicians do?
Yeah, because the Republicans never send an energy or defense appropriations bill back to their donors at Haliburton, Lockheed Martin, or Boeing. Both sides pull these stunts.
I agree, it's audacious in scale, but it's still the same thing professional politicians always do. I can't believe anyone is even a little surprised by this.
"Are people really just figuring out that this is what professional politicians do?"
Please tell me which politician ever, by one stroke of a pen, had 850 billion dollars printed up and,………..
not indicate how one red cent is to be spent and by whom,………….
"………the money was there to be had………"
You really are,…..a liberal with a capital L,…there Mickey,………I have lost all hope for you,……..
I am deeply disappointed,……….
Saw pictures of the looting here in Chicago after the MLK assassination.
Animals jumping out of storefronts with stolen merchandise.,….. why????????
because,…it was there to be had.
Not to rain on your parade (I'm from the Austrian school of economics and don't like the Keynesian/Progressive Stimulus either), but there is apparently some unintended selection bias in the study due to the way that Stimulus is reported by Congressional district.
As reported on FiveThirtyEight (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com), the majority of largest recipient districts also turned out to contain the state's capitol. As much of the Stimulus money went to state government, Nate Silver's analysis makes sense.
Study Claiming Link Between Stimulus Funding and Partisanship is Manifestly Flawed
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/04/study-clai...
replace "stimulous" with "health care funds" and this is how a politicized health care system will work. The better you kiss burreaucrat ass the better health care you will get
That said, it does raise another interesting question. Why is it that Congressional districts surrounding state capitols also appear to lean more Democratic and less Republican? It is, as some Democrats have argued, that state capitols tend to have more educated professionals, especially lawyers and, being more educated, tend to vote Democratic (no, that's elitist, is it)? Or, is there something else involved?
The FiveThirtyEight site only includes districts for 42 districts. But here's the breakdown.
Party affiliation for Congressional districts that include the state's capitol.
30/42 are Democrat (71%)
12/42 are Republican (28%)
Is this above or below the representation of each group in Congress as a whole?
253/430 are Democrat (59%)
177/430 are Republican (41%)
Could it be that Congressional districts around state capitols are also likely home to government workers? Is there a connection between government workers and a preference for the Democratic Party? Might that connection be public-employee unions, as it appears to be in California? Don't take my word for it. Here are comments from two forthright California Democratic leaders.
Former California Assembly Speaker, Democrat Willie Brown wrote about the implications of the cozy relationship between California Democrats and public-employee unions.
http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2010/03/even...
Current California Democrat Treasurer Bill Locker has also complained about the coming public-employee pension crisis in California, admonishing fellow Democrat legislators that they need to take action.
http://soquelbythecreek.blogspot.com/2010/02/cali...
I think it's fairly obvious he doesn't have the slightest idea.
Are you going to comment on Nate Silver's total destruction of your thesis by simply pointing out that 18 of the top money-getting districts contain state capitals and are receiving money intended for their entire state, not just that district? How could you have failed to mention this?
With all the taxes and fees we pay to local, state, and federal government, we're forking over at least a third to a half of what we earn.
So who's greedy, exactly? Us, or the government that steals half of our money? And yes, I'm quite intentionally using the word "steal" because government cannot take our money without the threat of force. Whether other people give the government permission is irrelevant; democratically-mandated robbery is still robbery.
And, just in case you don't already know that politicians are infinitely smarter than the populace, here is living proof!
Congressman Hank Johnson (D-GA-4) on Possibility of Guam Capsizing Due to Overpopulation (I'm guessing probably due to global warming, but I'm too stupid to know)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNZczIgVXjg
I sure hope that Congressman Johnson was just having a bad day or this was an April Fool joke. Otherwise, God help us all.
We have charities and our families and friends to take care of us in time of need. There is no such thing as "coerced charity." There is, however, such a thing as "armed robbery."
The government has a monopoly on force. Using that monopoly to take from other citizens is immoral. Would you walk up to your neighbor and steal his wallet to help pay for your medical bills? Why do you think it is no big deal when the government does the same thing?
The Lib-Dems/Progressives plan on bribing their base with Other People's Money (OPM) as the November elections become closer. The Chicago way is not just knea-capping but bribing the made-dependant people to keep their support. Without the bribes, the Lib-Dem/Progressives have no way of keeping support for their clearly anti-American agenda.
Funny, how anti-American billionaire, George Soros, pays both Obama and McCain …. Could this be the two sides of the same coin in Soros' pocket? Come November, Americans need to re-take control of our government.
I agree with this column, but come on, didn't everyone see this from the start?
ACORN got most of it, I'm sure.
Sorry to disappoint… maybe next time we can find something to agree on…
The real important point in this whole matter is the fact that it exposes the political and economic racism by the DEMONcrats and the Oblabby administration. It's "disproportional and targeted" at "white districts", this is racism straight up!
Why doesn't Hannaity, Limbaugh, O'reiley hammer home that point. They are so afraid to go after these racist bastards it make me sick. I would hammer everyday those black caucus reps who claimed they were call nigger…(oh poor little boys can't handle a bad word…did they go home and cry all day…do they need a hug and diaper change from mommy…they called me a teabagger and I didn't squel like a little sissy boy…those bad words..oh you'll be ok…. YOU LIAR) I would have a sign up: day 10 no evidence…I demand that suit (or was he wearing a blue dress) that was spit on for independent dna testing…a Tea party nationwide manhunt for the "supposed spitter".
Go after these pieces of garbage and shove their trash right back across the table.
Why do you think that bill was called PORKULUS? Everyone knew what it was for…only thing is, not enough was spent to satisfy the looters/parasites who are still waiting for their rent, mortgage, payments…and that new truck obama was promising. He IS taking care of them with Health Takeover and College Loans…but we the taxpayers are the real fools…we gotta PAY HUGE TAXES to fund them…and get told NO…if WE need medicare since he is cutting that $500 BILLION. After we already paid for Medicare and Social Security…Social Justice, Financial Justice, and Democrap payback is a BEACH for the working people…unless you are UNIONIZED.
Lots of that PORKULUS money went to NON-Existent Zip Code Areas. I'm sure there is a "name" for those kinds of DOLES, right? Graft, Theft, money laundering, Embezzlement…I know, the best is BUYing VOTES!
So you must be a socialist…of the welfare state kind.
Thieves in the night!__Why someone did not stand up and ask why we needed the stimulus $$ by Monday is beyond me. I can not understand why someone did not ask Bernake how it was he just found out at the end of one week we were in a crisis and the economy would be destroyed on Monday. Is the fed not hired to predict these things…this was a scam from the start and Obama just rode the waves to get his re-election $$ for 2012 and to further scam the taxpayers with stimulus $$ to destroy our republic so he can re-distribute wealth for socialism.__Disgusting lot all of them (Democrat and Republican)
I know the BORDER FENCE $$$ was scaled back – http://www.BorderInvasionPics.com
oops TARP for Bernake..my bad.
Sorry, no…. I'm a capitalist. I make my living buying low and selling dear. Well regulated capital markets contribute to the greatest economic engine ever devised by man and I'm a true believer.
TAKE AWAY THEIR MONEY! Can we please make that our new mantra and vision? Forget federal campaign reform, let's just take away their (our) money and pull back the tax dough to our states.
Since the Obama stimulus was never about encouraging private sector growth but about funding government programs this is hardly a surprise. Most of the money has gone to bureaucrats and Democrats dominate those districts where such individuals are likely to live and work. One strongly suspects that if there was a way to track the political affiliation of the people who got the money they would likely to be even more Democratic.
We are certainly headed for another "hurdle to jump" in this economy, that politicians are not telling you about. When you print money, with nothing to" support it like gold" we will undoughtly see rises in prices do to bad monetary policy and political policy. This will be a dagger through the heart of this economy, and jobs which politicians are not telling you. We need to halt these bad polices now before it is to late. The reason I am posting this is because, when I was a teenager, I remember these polices from former "President Jimmy Carter", and they where very harmful to the economy. Can you say" baton down the hatches". Now is that time. Be prepared and look into ways to protect yourself, and your money before it is too late. This is one of those little things that politicians and their staffs will not tell you about their polices. They throw money at everything and yet never solve a thing, but only make things worse.
This will continue to be a threat, until we let the private sector to do its thing ,and take the "government shackles" off of all businesses. Most importantly off of all of us. Until this happens we will always be on the brink, of collapse. Due to socialist control of our government. Being a socialist means you do not understand free markets, and how they operate. This is just a fact. Keep up all your efforts here to keep democracy alive, and say no to big government. "Let Freedom Ring Once Again, and May God Bless America".
I seriously think this information should be pasted on billboards from coast to coast.
Ms de Ruby,
Since you are clearly not from the US, France I think is your calling, you have probably have not had a chance to memorize the US State capitols. This was unfortunate, as the state capitols mostly explains your stimulus bias that you thought was "horror of horrors" a secret trick by the Democrates to steal money from the rest of us. I assume you have now read Nate Silver's smackdown. So, to help you from making this mistake in the future let me recommend that learn our capitols by listening to the state capitol song. see the You Tube site:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlrHJzJH0ww
and let me welcome you to America.
Although, if you are Nate Silver, you can point out stupidity in the use of the data. Go read the top story on fivethrityeither.com today.
You must be logged in to post a comment.