The Dale Jackson ShowPrep for October 3rd, 2016…

  • 7:00 AM – 7 Things You Should Be Talking About Today
  • 7:30 AM – Former Chief Justice Roy Moore
  • 8:00 AM – Hate at 8!!
  • 9:00 AM – 7 Things You Should Be Talking About Today
  • 9:20 AM – State Rep. Mike Ball
  • 9:55 AM – What in the World with WAAY 31’s Meredith Wood
  • 10:00 AM – Top Ten Tweets at Ten
  • 10:30 AM – (replay) Former Chief Justice Roy Moore

This is bad…

This is more important: How tax plans would impact you….


TRUMP: He would cut the top income tax bracket to 33 percent from its current level of 39.6 percent. Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan has made the same proposal, which the conservative Tax Foundation said would help boost after-tax income for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans by 5.3 percent. Trump would also cap tax deductions at $200,000 per household.

CLINTON: She is proposing several tax increases on wealthier Americans, including a 4 percent surcharge on incomes above $5 million, effectively creating a new top bracket of 43.6 percent. And those earning more than $1 million a year would be subject to a minimum 30 percent tax rate. She would also cap the value of many tax deductions for wealthier taxpayers. All the changes would increase taxes in 2017 for the richest 1 percent by $78,284, reducing their after-tax income by 5 percent, according to the Tax Policy Center.


TRUMP: Would reduce the seven tax brackets in current law to three, at 12 percent, 25 percent and 33 percent. He’d also raise the standard deduction to $15,000 for singles and $30,000 for households.

CLINTON: Says she will not raise taxes on the middle class. Her current proposals would have little impact on the bottom 95 percent of taxpayers, according to the Tax Policy Center.


TRUMP: Would cut the corporate rate from its current 35 percent to 15 percent. Trying to clarify a longstanding question about the plan, campaign spokesman Steven Cheung on Sunday said Trump would let “pass through” corporations, which pay taxes on revenue as personal income, to claim the 15 percent rate. Doing that could cost an extra $1.5 trillion, according to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation, which supports lower tax rates.

CLINTON: Would not change the corporate tax rate.

A more damaging New York Times story is completely ignored…

The campaign hired a private investigator with a bare-knuckles reputation who embarked on a mission, as he put it in a memo, to impugn Ms. Flowers’s “character and veracity until she is destroyed beyond all recognition.”

In a pattern that would later be repeated with other women, the investigator’s staff scoured Arkansas and beyond, collecting disparaging accounts from ex-boyfriends, employers and others who claimed to know Ms. Flowers, accounts that the campaign then disseminated to the news media.

By the time Mr. Clinton finally admitted to “sexual relations” with Ms. Flowers, years later, Clinton aides had used stories collected by the private investigator to brand her as a “bimbo” and a “pathological liar.”

A woman endangers her fetus repeatedly, the media can’t get enough of making her a victim

A 21-year-old woman has spurred a stand-off this week between health experts and prosecutors over the care and punishment of pregnant addicts, who face prosecution more often in Alabama than any other state.

The case also raises questions about the limits of a chemical endangerment law initially designed to safeguard young children from home-based meth labs as a tool to protect unborn children.

In the middle sits Alexandra Laird, who is currently under the care of physicians at UAB Hospital, who have decided not to discharge her to the jail as ordered by Bessemer Judge David Hobdy. Members of the treatment team at UAB have raised concerns about Laird’s safety at the jail, which they say is not designed to treat a pregnancy complicated by heroin addiction.

This woman has repeatedly chose drugs over her KIDS.

The case began earlier this year after Laird was arrested for chemical endangerment. She had given birth to a child in 2015 who tested positive for opioids and amphetamines. Laird was out on bond on that charge when she became pregnant and tested positive for heroin.

The media is actually being critical of this…

Alabama is one of just a handful of states where law enforcement officers arrest and charge women who use drugs during pregnancy – and the most aggressive, according to an analysis last year by and ProPublica.


Lawmakers passed a law against chemical endangerment of a child in 2006, which made it illegal for parents to expose children to the byproducts of home-based meth labs. Soon, prosecutors also began bringing chemical endangerment cases against women who used drugs during pregnancy.

About 500 women have been charged with chemical endangerment in Alabama since 2006, according to the analysis. Medical organizations have opposed laws that criminalize drug use during pregnancy because they might keep women from seeking prenatal care or treatment for addiction, potentially exposing unborn babies to more risky behavior.

Roy Moore is booted again

Nine months after instructing Alabama’s probate judges to defy federal court orders on same-sex marriage, Roy S. Moore, the chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, was suspended on Friday for the remainder of his term for violating the state’s canon of judicial ethics.

It was the second time in his contentious career that Judge Moore, an outspoken conservative, was removed as chief justice, and it followed his most recent star turn in the nation’s culture wars.

The suspension was imposed by the state’s Court of the Judiciary, a nine-member body of selected judges, lawyers and others, which found Judge Moore guilty on six charges. While the court did not take him off the bench entirely, as it did in 2003 after he defied orders to remove a giant Ten Commandments monument from the state judicial building, it effectively ended his state judicial career. His term ends in 2019, and Judge Moore, 69, will be barred by law from running for a judicial position again because of his age.

The court said in its decision that most, but not all, of its members had supported fully removing Judge Moore from the bench, but removal requires a unanimous vote. The decision to suspend him, the court said, was unanimous.

The court found that the “clear purpose” of Judge Moore’s January order to the state’s 68 probate judges to refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, which he called simply a “status update” on the legal situation, was “to order and direct the probate judges, most of whom had never been admitted to practice law in Alabama, to stop complying with binding federal law.”

In a statement, Judge Moore called the decision corrupt. “This was a politically motivated effort by radical homosexual and transgender groups to remove me as chief justice of the Supreme Court because of outspoken opposition to their immoral agenda,” he said.

Mathew D. Staver, Judge Moore’s lawyer and the founder of Liberty Counsel, a legal group that has fought against same-sex marriage, called the decision illegal and said he was appealing to the Alabama Supreme Court.

Judge Moore filed a similar appeal after the Court of the Judiciary’s decision in 2003. The justices recused themselves in that case and selected at random a panel of retired judges to hear it. The judges upheld Judge Moore’s removal.

Here is a fun scenario…


It’s back…

Monday, October 3
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
Virginia: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Christopher Newport Univ. Clinton 42, Trump 35, Johnson 12, Stein 1 Clinton +7
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton LA Times/USC Tracking Clinton 42, Trump 47 Trump +5
Sunday, October 2
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
New Mexico: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Albuquerque Journal Clinton 35, Trump 31, Johnson 24, Stein 2 Clinton +4
New Mexico: Trump vs. Clinton Albuquerque Journal Clinton 44, Trump 34 Clinton +10
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton LA Times/USC Tracking Clinton 42, Trump 47 Trump +5
Nevada Senate – Heck vs. Cortez Masto Las Vegas Review-Journal Heck 47, Cortez Masto 45 Heck +2
President Obama Job Approval Gallup Approve 52, Disapprove 45 Approve +7
Saturday, October 1
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
Nevada: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson Las Vegas Review-Journal Trump 44, Clinton 45, Johnson 5 Clinton +1
New Jersey: Trump vs. Clinton Richard Stockton College Clinton 46, Trump 40 Clinton +6
Friday, September 30
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein FOX News Clinton 43, Trump 40, Johnson 8, Stein 4 Clinton +3
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton FOX News Clinton 49, Trump 44 Clinton +5
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Rasmussen Reports Clinton 43, Trump 42, Johnson 6, Stein 2 Clinton +1
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson Gravis Clinton 47, Trump 43, Johnson 6 Clinton +4
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton Gravis Clinton 50, Trump 50 Tie
Florida: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Mason-Dixon Clinton 46, Trump 42, Johnson 7, Stein 1 Clinton +4
Florida: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein FOX 13/Opinion Savvy Clinton 47, Trump 46, Johnson 4, Stein 2 Clinton +1
Nevada: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson Suffolk Trump 38, Clinton 44, Johnson 7 Clinton +6
Michigan: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Detroit News Clinton 42, Trump 35, Johnson 9, Stein 3 Clinton +7
New Hampshire: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein WBUR/MassINC Clinton 42, Trump 35, Johnson 13, Stein 4 Clinton +7

LA Times poll is the only poll showing Trump up

Nonetheless, we talk about polls being Clinton-leaning or Trump-leaning all the time — so here’s some more detail about what that means. In the table below, you’ll see the house effects for all firms that have conducted at least 5 national polls this year or conducted surveys in at least 5 states. A couple of technical points: First, although it’s not shown in the table, our models calculate house effects for Clinton and Trump (and Gary Johnson) separately. A poll could be deemed to have both a pro-Clinton and a pro-Trump house effect if it tended to show few undecided voters, for instance. The numbers in the table are net figures. Also, you’ll see the house effects presented in two ways: as a raw figure and a discounted one. The raw figure reflects the magnitude of the house effect so far, while the discounted one is essentially what the model predicts the house effect will be going forward. The less data we have from a given firm, the more the raw house effect is discounted, since it may reflect statistical noise rather than anything systemic.

Here’s the data,4 with pollsters sorted into three major groupings based on their methodology: internet polls, automated polls (robopolls) and traditional live-caller telephone polls:


As you can see, the LA Times poll has the strongest house effect of any major pollster: a raw house effect of about 6 points in Trump’s direction, or a discounted one of about 4 points. Other Internet-based polls have been a mixed bag. The UPI/CVoter tracking poll has also been Trump-leaning. Ipsos/Reuters formerly had a strong Clinton-leaning house effect but, after a methodology change, it has pretty much gone away.5 Other prolific online polling firms, such as Morning Consult, YouGov and SurveyMonkey, don’t have strong house effects.

%d bloggers like this: