Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Beware of big fish wannabes in small ponds

The Detroit News has a story out that has my guard up. The title is this. Tea party groups work to unseat Stabenow. There already is a process for that. It's called a PRIMARY. We will decide the GOP nominee in August.

Invitations are being sent to all eight GOP candidates for a Jan. 14 debate at Central Michigan University, organizers announced. Two leaders from each qualified tea party group will be invited to participate in a Feb. 25 straw poll at CMU to determine who wins the tea party endorsement.

Uniting under the banner, Michigan 4 Conservative Senate, organizers say endorsing one candidate and rallying behind him is the best way to ensure a conservative candidate defeats Democratic incumbent Sen. Debbie Stabenow in November.

"It's just a way to take a pulse of tea party groups and encourage them to work together and rather than work apart," said Cindy Gamrat, an organizer for Michigan 4 Conservative Senate.

1. What is "qualified?"
2. Who are the designated "leaders?"
3. What is the "tea party?"

That type of talk gets my guard up. It looks like a power move to me.

Speaking for myself, I'm not "tea party." I agree with them more than I don't, but I do things my own way. I've been to a couple of RetakeourGov meetings and met some folks from Brighton Tea Party, but haven't finally contributed to any tea parties. I also am not a member of any leadership there, nor choose to be. I'll stick with being an occasional spectator.

The media talks about "Tea Party" being one singular thing. It isn't. There are hundreds of different local parties with their own personalities and opinions. Some of them are larger and more organized than others. Some are more ambitious when it comes to politics than others. I'm impressed with what I've seen from retakeourgov and their organization at the meetings I've seen. I haven't been to a Brighton Tea Party meeting, but they (along with a Milford group and Retakeourgov) did a good job with the senate candidate forum recently.

Most tea party members I know aren't trying to be "big fish in a small pond." Almost all of them never start out that way. Eventually many leaders or "lieutenants" in these organizations gain a following, get told how great they are, and start to believe their own press clippings. Many, not all, not even most. The good ones stay grounded.

However, this is politics. The definition of politics is "who gets what, when, and how." Power. Power brings out the worst in a lot of people. Politics is nasty for a reason, and nothing can get more nasty than internal political wars (along with local cities, school boards, and townships). Been there, done that, and weary of being involved in it again. I don't know the internals of this, but it's looking like a couple of power moves here.

I don't know much about Cindy Gamrat outside of her being a recent Indiana transplant to Plainwell in Southwest Michigan. Michigan 4 Conservative Senate is the website for this plan. This is modeled after Indiana's attempt to take out the center-left Dick Lugar in Indiana. Dick Lugar however is a Republican. Far leftist Debbie Stabenow is not.

So is this a "Stop Stabenow?" It's not. Stabenow will be quasi one on one (and some 3rd parties) against the Republican nominee whoever it is. This is about "stop Hoekstra." This is an attempt to have a coronation of the favorites of a few people. This is no different than the coronation attempt many establishment folks are trying to set up for Pete Hoekstra.

The question is who's the favored candidate.

"I think it's really disingenuous to have a group of people come together and anoint themselves as tea party leaders and take it further and endorse a candidate," said Patty McMurray, of Birmingham, co-founder of the Michigan Conservative Alliance, which wasn't invited to the straw poll.

Modeled after the tea party unification in Indiana, Michigan tea party organizers say it's important to not only vet the candidates but also the tea party groups themselves. Gamrat has been whittling down the original list of 120 conservative groups in Michigan to ensure their longevity and activeness, and that they are truly a tea party group, not affiliated with a national organization and not a political action committee. Those who qualify are allowed to have two members cast votes in the straw poll. McMurray's group was excluded because it's a PAC, Gamrat said.

Vetted by which people? WHO decides what is "legit?" McMurray's group is punished due to having a PAC? MANY tea party groups have PAC's. It's good organization. Anyone can form a PAC. It's not hard to set up, although it takes discipline to manage properly. Those with a PAC are doing good work. I think McMurray is attacked for supporting Hoekstra.

Currently she expects about 110 people to cast straw poll votes, representing 55 tea party groups statewide.

How large are these 55 groups? How are the votes weighted? Will the locals support this?

McMurray and fellow MICA co-founder, Leisa Audette, are both Hoekstra supporters and feel the event is rigged so Hoekstra doesn't win. Though he co-founded the Tea Party Caucus while in Congress, some fellow candidates have painted Hoekstra as not conservative enough and part of the Washington establishment.

It is rigged against Hoekstra, along as all candidates except one. It's a coronation attempt - the same thing that much of the establishment is doing for Hoekstra.

On a side note, this whole "Tea Party Caucus" in Congress is a joke. This is a case of politicians in DC calling themselves "Tea Party" and trying to pass themselves off as conservatives. I never bought into that talk. Talk is cheap. Votes are what matter, and Hoekstra has a long history of votes. Good and bad. He can stand by those votes and defend them, or admit mistakes if he's changed his mind on the issue. Debbie Stabenow can join the "Tea Party Caucus" if she wants. Does that make her tea party? No way. Talk is cheap. Deeds not words.

Randy Bishop, of the Northern Michigan Patriots, has been actively promoting the tea party convention and openly criticizes Hoekstra. He says unifying behind one candidate is necessary to avoid splitting the vote — as what happened in the governor's race last year leading to a Rick Snyder victory, he said.

"Just as much as much as we respect their choice not to participate we hope they would respect ours to participate," Bishop said of uninterested tea party groups.

By excluding those with a PAC? I'm interested in who Gamrat and Bishop are supporting. I'm more interested if it's the same person, and that is who they and a few others want to win.

The good and bad with tea parties is that many of them are new to politics. The good about that is that the old boys and girls club gets shaken up. The GOP establishment is largely as disliked as the democrats. They want to get involved and make a difference.

However, not all of the "establishment" is bad. Many of us have been involved 10, 20, or 30 years. Many of us are as conservative or more so as the tea party members. We also have a long history of inside baseball and power struggles and good intentions producing bad results. I've seen big fish and small pond syndrome. I've seen folks become yesman to become popular with big fish in small ponds.

That's a danger here I see with consolidation or quasi consolidation attempts. I understand the thought of trying to herd cats or tea party folks to supporting one candidate to stop a Snyder, but:

1. Who decides?
2. What's the process?
3. What's the criteria for the endorsement?

This is a dangerous game that can easilly become more about personalities than about issues. Certain people like to see themselves as power brokers. You get on the right PAC boards and you become "an important person." You can puff yourself up to sound even more important, and can have some yesman who follow you, tell you how great you are, and then try and take your spot in the future. There's also yesmen "leaders" who will automatically "lead" their group to follow whatever some big name wants. That's what I refer to as big fish in little pond syndrome. I've seen it over 11 years of involvement in PACs, C4's, Party, and office politics. Guess what. Most of those who think they are big names, really aren't that important. The ones who puff themselves up in the room, usually aren't important, and deep down, they know it.

I hope the tea parties (plural) stay about ideology, and less about personalities. THAT is their strength. Once they become about personalities and favorites, it's all downhill from there. The cost is respect.

As for this races, I think the primary needs to work itself out over the next few months before any push towards going behind one candidate. I understand the push. Joe Schwarz in 2004 taught a harsh lesson.  Hoekstra I'd vote for over Stabenow easily. No hesitation. Candidates will rise and fall as they are vetted, organized, and make more statements. Our Senate primary is in August. Not February.

Monday, December 19, 2011


One of the better undergrad political science classes I took at MSU focused on polling. There a lot of polls right now with a lot of different samples, in different areas, by different companies, with different results. Polls are educated guesses.

The first thing with a poll to look at is as follows. Is it scientific? If not, it's worthless. The next. Margin of error. Anything over 5% is worthless. Throw it out. If it's got a 3% or 4% margin of error, it's supposed to be considered good. That means if a poll says Gingrich 28, Romney 24, and real numbers are 32-20 or 24-28, that's good. What I mean by real numbers, is also the results from that day. Not January 3rd. If there's movement in that last week, a poll may look way off. It may actually be right - at that time.

Polls when done right, are a snapshot in time of a representative sample of the population covered. A good poll from December 19th, is a sample of the opinions of the population from December 19th. Between now and then, people may change their minds, or the undecideds may all move in one direction, or not. Generally, the larger the race, the better the polls. National is usually closer than statewide, which is closer than congressional. Congressional downward tends to often be quite inaccurate - to the point where state rep/senate races oftentimes don't even use polling. It can be way off. Not always. I was quite skeptical of some 2010 polling in some districts. To the person who told me that we were leading in some of those districts - you called it. I needed to see it to believe it, and I saw it in the actual results. The worst polling however is with issues. Those are almost never right. I've seen issues polled 60-40 in favor end up losing election time on a common basis. I chalk that up often to people lying to pollsters.

The biggest unfortunate aspect with public polls, and we ALL are guilty to some degree here, is with the bandwagon effect. We rely on these polls to shape our voting tactics. That's especially when we want to stop a candidate more than support one. People want to vote for a winner, or they want to stop a frontrunner. I look a whole bunch of polls and look at the momentum, trying to shift through the outliers.

Luckily in Michigan, we AREN'T first. We get to see real results besides opinion polls. Iowa. New Hampshire. South Carolina. Florida. Nevada. Colorado. They will vet candidates and make their decisions. Those are going to shift the polls here, as electability is more apt to be determined.

So when you see a poll, appreciate it for what it is if done right. A snapshot in time of a representative sample of the population covered. From the day the question was asked. That may or may not be the final numbers.

Thursday, December 08, 2011

State House Redistricting - District 47 (HD-47)

State House - District 47
Current Rep - Cindy Denby (R-Handy Twp)

GOP - Cindy Denby (R-Handy Twp),
Dem - Shawn Lowe Desai (D-Howell)

Update 5-26-2012 - We have both a primary and a general in one of my old districts. Harold Melton is a GOP activist who is running. Cindy's a deceptively strong incumbent. She's not a braggart and has a more low key personality that some mistake as weakness. She's a hard worker, and shouldn't have a major problem in the primary, even if Harold is a strong challenger. That's not a shot at Harold, but Cindy is probably the 3rd best campaigner in the county behind Joe Hune and Mike Rogers. Desai has money, but so did Post, and Desai has an even harder district than Post did.

Update 8-30-2012 - Cindy won the primary. 

2010 Results - Old District (47th)
Cindy Denby - 22,713
Garry Post - 10,001

This is one of two Livingston County based districts. It makes some minor changes and contracted due to population growth. The old district dropped Putnam and Hamburg Townships giving them to Bill Rogers. The new district picked up Marion and Oceola Townships from Bill Rogers. The rest of the district stayed the same.

The district actually got safer as Putnam and Hamburg Townships are two of the more marginal GOP areas in the county. I don't think that was due to partisan reasons as I never heard Bill Rogers complain about the new district in public or private, but due to geography. The 47th is more Howell/Fowlerville based, rather than Brighton based. Marion and Oceola Townships are more identified with the Howell area than the Brighton area. Hamburg is mostly the Pinckney and Brighton areas, and Putnam Township contains Pinckney. Redistricting keeps the areas mostly intact, outside of Southernmost Marion Twp. Cindy shouldn't have trouble in the new district, and neither should the next GOP nominee when it opens up.

McCain Obama Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Cohoctah Twp 1046 652 1698 394 61.60% 38.40% 23.20%
Conway Twp 956 689 1645 267 58.12% 41.88% 16.23%
Deerfield Twp 1329 912 2241 417 59.30% 40.70% 18.61%
Handy Twp 1922 1729 3651 193 52.64% 47.36% 5.29%
Hartland Twp 4689 3087 7776 1602 60.30% 39.70% 20.60%
Howell 2068 2160 4228 -92 48.91% 51.09% -2.18%
Howell Twp 2022 1459 3481 563 58.09% 41.91% 16.17%
Iosco Twp 1090 756 1846 334 59.05% 40.95% 18.09%
Marion Twp 3302 2169 5471 1133 60.35% 39.65% 20.71%
Oceola Twp 3694 2428 6122 1266 60.34% 39.66% 20.68%
Tyrone Twp 3362 2236 5598 1126 60.06% 39.94% 20.11%
Unadilla Twp 860 811 1671 49 51.47% 48.53% 2.93%
Total 26340 19088 45428 7252 57.98% 42.02% 15.96%

Bush  Kerry Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Cohoctah Twp 1091 548 1639 543 66.56% 33.44% 33.13%
Conway Twp 1025 540 1565 485 65.50% 34.50% 30.99%
Deerfield Twp 1449 831 2280 618 63.55% 36.45% 27.11%
Handy Twp 2056 1225 3281 831 62.66% 37.34% 25.33%
Hartland Twp 4925 2329 7254 2596 67.89% 32.11% 35.79%
Howell 2499 1751 4250 748 58.80% 41.20% 17.60%
Howell Twp 2202 1134 3336 1068 66.01% 33.99% 32.01%
Iosco Twp 1071 468 1539 603 69.59% 30.41% 39.18%
Marion Twp 3137 1600 4737 1537 66.22% 33.78% 32.45%
Oceola Twp 3513 1768 5281 1745 66.52% 33.48% 33.04%
Tyrone Twp 3560 1917 5477 1643 65.00% 35.00% 30.00%
Unadilla Twp 919 641 1560 278 58.91% 41.09% 17.82%
Total 27447 14752 42199 12695 65.04% 34.96% 30.08%

Last St House GOP DEM Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Cohoctah Twp 819 291 1110 528 73.78% 26.22% 47.57%
Conway Twp 852 259 1111 593 76.69% 23.31% 53.38%
Deerfield Twp 1068 411 1479 657 72.21% 27.79% 44.42%
Handy Twp 1624 571 2195 1053 73.99% 26.01% 47.97%
Hartland Twp 3916 1328 5244 2588 74.68% 25.32% 49.35%
Howell 1624 871 2495 753 65.09% 34.91% 30.18%
Howell Twp 1632 571 2203 1061 74.08% 25.92% 48.16%
Iosco Twp 880 299 1179 581 74.64% 25.36% 49.28%
Marion Twp

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Oceola Twp

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Tyrone Twp 2609 1014 3623 1595 72.01% 27.99% 44.02%
Unadilla Twp 728 380 1108 348 65.70% 34.30% 31.41%
Total 15752 5995 21747 9757 72.43% 27.57% 44.87%

State House Redistricting - District 46 (HD-46)

State House - District 46
Current Rep - Bradford Jacobsen (R-Oxford Twp)

GOP - Bradford Jacobsen (R-Oxford)
Dem - Daniel Sargent (D-Oxford)

Update 5-26-2012 - Surprisingly dem primary here.

Update 8-30-2012 - Daniel Sargent won the primary.

2010 Results - Old District (46th)
Bradford Jacobsen - 24,363
David Jay Lillis - 9,241

This is probably the most Republican area in Oakland County after redistricting.

The old district covered Addison, Brandon, Groveland, Holly, Orion, Oxford, and Rose Townships. The new district drops Holly, Groveland, and Rose Townships, and picks up most of Oakland Twp.

This is a safe district going over 55% for McCain (according to Dave's Redistricting) and over 60% in most elections for whoever the GOP nominee is.

State House Redistricting - District 45 (HD-45)

State House - District 45
Current Rep - Tom McMillin (R-Rochester Hills)

Declared Candidates:
Rep - Tom McMillin (R- Rochester Hills)
Dem - Ted Golden (D-Rochester Hills), Joanne VanRaaphorst (D-Rochester), Douglas Wilson (D-Rochester Hills)

Update 5-26-2012 - Surprisingly a three way primary here. McMillin is extremely disliked by the MEA, so I can see them trying to make a run here.

Update 8-30-2012 - Joanne VanRaaphorst won the primary. 

2010 Results - Old District (45th)
Tom McMillin - 24,974
Mary Ward - 11,815

This district contracted and got slightly less Republican, but should stay ours. The old district covered Rochester, Rochester Hills, and all of Oakland Township. It dropped part of Oakland Township but otherwise stays the same.

The new district is about a 51% McCain district, but Rochester and Rochester Hills is stronger GOP downticket. McCain won it narrowly. McMillin won it by a much bigger margin in 2008 than McCain did. However this area and the Troy area are two districts to keep an eye on for the future. They should stay ours, but they should not be taken for granted as Obama did very well there in 2008. Part of it was an aberration (I consider 08 AND 10 aberrations and floor/ceiling numbers) but it's still something to keep an eye on when it is an open seat.

State House Redistricting - District 44 (HD-44)

State House - District 44
Current Reps - Eileen Kowall (R-White Lake)

Declared Candidates:
Rep - Eileen Kowall (R-White Lake)
Dem - Tom Crawford (D-Milford)

Update 8-30-2012 - Tom Crawford wins the primary. 

Update 5-26-2012 - Surprisingly, there's a primary on the dem side. Tom Crawford's a frequent candidate.

2010 Results - Old District (44th)
Eileen Kowall - 25,714
Phil Fabrizio - 9,395

This district is still a safe West/North Oakland seat based in the White Lake area, although it changes some and contracted with population growth. The old district was made up of Clarkston, Highland Twp, Independence Twp, Springfield Twp, and White Lake Twp. The new district drops Clarkston and Independence Twp, and picks up Milford Twp from Bill Rogers and part of Waterford Twp from Gail Haines.

The district is a 54% McCain district according to Dave's Redistricting, so it is one of the safest in Oakland County.

State House Redistricting - District 43 (HD-43)

State House - District 43
Current Reps - Gail Haines (R-Waterford Twp)

Declared Candidates:
Rep - Gail Haines (R-Lake Angelus),
Dem - Neil Billington (D-Waterford)

5-26-2012 - One primary on the GOP side. Billington is a party switcher and UAW guy, ran as a republican because of the district, and is now a democrat again. He complains about NORC, but it's little wonder why they like someone else. RINO turned dem?

8-30-2012 - Haines wins her primary.

2010 Results - Old District (43rd)
Gail Haines - 17,294
Regina Strong - 9,064

This district is one that got much safer with redistricting. It picks up all of Independence Township, picks up Clarkstron, keeps Lake Angelus, drops part of Waterford, and drops its portion of West Bloomfield. This part of West Bloomfield is much more republican than the Lisa Brown district was, but was real close in the 2008 election. The old district was in the "Good enough to lose" category for democrats. They were competitive, but never won there, even in 2008 when it was a 900 vote race. Lake Angelus is republican, but small. Waterford is competitive. The portion of West Bloomfield was slightly Republican leaning even though the township is strongly democrat.

Independence Township makes this district likely safe or close to it. It's one of the most Republican areas in Oakland County. The Dave's Redistricting estimates has this district at 50.2% McCain, winning by 1,100 votes. Haines won a more competitive seat when it was open.

Saturday, December 03, 2011

Cain taps out of the presidential race

I'm not surprised about this. Cain's situation is a mess, regardless of whether it is true or not.

From Yahoo news

Plagued by allegations of sexual harassment and marriage infidelity, businessman Herman Cain announced Saturday that he is officially suspending his campaign for president of the United States.

"As of today, with a lot of prayer and soul searching, I am suspending my presidential campaign," Cain said at what was supposed to be new campaign headquarters in his hometown of Atlanta. "I am disappointed that it came to this point that we had to make this decision."

But he added, "Before you get discouraged, today I want to describe Plan B. ... I am not going away. I will continue to be a voice for the people." With that, he unveiled the headquarters of his new website, TheCainSolutions.com.

Cain, one of the first Republican candidates to launch his campaign for the White House last spring, spent most of his run as an obscure, low-polling candidate that was a hit at tea party rallies. But as the Republican field took shape, and it became clear that high-profile party hopefuls like Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie would not enter the race, Republicans seemed willing to give any of the candidates a fair shake

I don't know if Cain's guilty or not. I am suspicious of the claims to a degree because every single one of them was from his time at National Restaurant Association. Nothing was from his time at Godfather's or Pillsbury or his talk radio show. Maybe he was guilty. Maybe he was guilty only of pissing off some people. The harassment claims have just as much credence as Larry Sinclair's claim about being in the back seat with Obama snorting coke and doing other things (why doesn't the tabloid 'mainstream' leftist media give as much time to that?). They aren't proven and the credibility is in question. Is it possible? Yes. Likely? I'm skeptical. The affair? I still don't know, although that's more likely to be either proved or disproved if there was a 13 year claim. Politics is a nasty business at times. As the unofficial definition of politics from polysci 101 goes. "Politics is who gets what, when, and how." Politics is about power.

Whatever the case is, Cain is out. If you want to ruin a campaign, get some "friend of the program" to hire 5 or 6 women (or men if it is a woman candidate) at different times who have at least all crossed paths with a candidate to claim harassment or an affair. Have them set up news conferences. It doesn't matter if it is true. It can all be BS. In the court of public opinion, when there is multiple accusers, we are guilty till proven innocent. People believe there can't be a semi-coordinated attack from multiple people. They think "When there smoke, there's fire." If I had $100,000 (maybe less) - chump change in a presidential race, to spend on political black-ops, that I didn't have to report, I could set something like this up with any sort of time if I want to go down that road. It's not hard. All I'd need is a good scouting report to find the right targets. $20,000 each can buy a lot, and it doesn't even have to be a direct payment, or something all at once.

Dirty tricks are nothing new. It's a staple of Chicago style politics. Obama won his senate race by getting Jack Ryan (who had young kids) off the ballot because he didn't want his divorce file unsealed. Certain details sealed he didn't want out there. Neither did his ex-wife for that matter. It was Obama's cronies and his media allies.

It's a dirty business, and all of us involved at any level have to be ready for it.

How does Cain dropping out effect things? I don't know. This election has been crazy so far. I had Newt Gingrich as one of the big losers early on because of the straw poll results in Iowa. He's now the possible frontrunner. For now. That could change. I don't see anything for sure at least until Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina make their decisions.

My wild guess for now.


Newt Gingrich. I would not be surprised if Cain backs Newt. They are friends, or at least were until the campaign. If there isn't some falling out that we don't know about, Newt may benefit from this.

Jon Huntsman. If Newt falters when his past comes back, then who?

Could go either way - Romney. At first glance, one could thing this narrows down the "anyone but Mitt" vote. Possible. Another school of thought thinks with Romney avoiding some of the news that it helps him. Some think he's the most electable. I disagree for a lot of reasons, but Cain's dropping could benefit him that way.

As far as the effects regarding Bachmann, Paul, and Perry, I don't see a lot of changes although some may give them a second look. Bachmann and Perry collapsed and have not recovered. Paul will get his share no matter what, but has a problem breaking the 10% ceiling.

We'll see what happens over the next month. I think I'm going to need to take a long shower after primary day (and the general). I had a bad feeling about this really since Mitch Daniels decided he wasn't running, compounded with Pawlenty dropping out after Iowa.

Monday, November 28, 2011

Who is the actual RINO? (2012 primaries)

I have a hit or miss view when it comes to Joe Scarbrough. Sometimes he gets it dead on and sometimes he is way off. This one here is quite good.

From Politico

The insult du jour for Republican candidates this election cycle is being labeled a RINO, a Republican in Name Only. Unfortunately, the insult has been so overused lately it’s been rendered meaningless. The insult is even emptier because it is so detached from actual statements, campaign promises and voting records.

A candidate like Newt Gingrich can get away with supporting the biggest socialist scheme in American government over the past 30 years because he says nasty things about the press and calls Barack Obama a Marxist. Jon Huntsman, on the other hand, can have a stellar conservative record as Utah’s governor, be anti-abortion and adored by the NRA. But if he refuses to spit out angry screeds against Obama, he’s dismissed as a RINO, the facts be damned.

So as a public service to POLITICO readers, I, your humble conservative servant, have put together a “Who is the Real RINO?” test. based on voting records, candidate quotes and facts! (Shocking, I know.)

Good luck!

1. Who said, “I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose. I am not going to change pro-choice laws in any way”?

A. Mitt Romney

C. Newt Gingrich

C. Jon Huntsman

I got all but two of them right. Politico didn't line up page two properly, so one of the answered I picked Newt was Mitt. I also got the Rockefeller State Chair wrong.

It's biased, heavily towards Huntsman. However Newt is hit or miss, and we all know how Romney panders to every audience. Huntsman isn't AS BAD as his reputation which he got by taking a job as ambassador. That doesn't mean he's perfect. He's on board the global warming bandwagon and supported Cap and Trade in Utah which is an automatic two strikes against him. He spent too much as governor, although he did cut taxes. (Growth helped him in Utah) He supports civil unions for gays which I mildly oppose (tax money paying for it), but really don't have strong opinions about one way or the other on that issue. Many do. I do think he's the most electable in the general election however, and have said that since the beginning. I'm worried he's a Bush Republican, but we'll see.

Back in September, I was on board the Perry camp. It was an "anybody but Romney" move. I also didn't expect to see a collapse and implosion after the immigration comments and gaffes in debates over and over again. What I was looking for was the best alternative to Romney who can beat Obama. That's where my vote is going to go. Anybody but Romney who can beat Obama. Maybe Perry can recover. We'll see.

I'm not the only one in that boat. Especially post Obamacare/Romneycare, Romney, despite his money, organization, and an attempted coronation by the political class, so far can not bust through the ceiling. A lot of candidates are jockeying for position in this horse race, but Romney has in only one poll in November broke 30%. He did that once in October, three times in July, and once in June. At least 68% are looking for an alternative if you take his high recent numbers. That going off a bunch of polls showing similar results, not just a cherrypicked one. The 32% was high number.

In July, Bachmann and Romney were 1 and 2. Bachmann collapsed. In September, Perry consistently led. When Perry collapsed, Cain took the lead. When he collapsed, Newt's taking the lead. Newt Gingrich of all people is now the "anti-establishment" candidate. How is a former speaker and pundit non establishment? Because he's not Romney, the choice of the beltway. He was also their choice last time, more than McCain.

Some say the national polls don't matter. It's state polls. The real polls start in Iowa and New Hampshire in a little over a month. The state opinion polls aren't as often as national, but the results have generally been this:

Iowa (1-3) - Newt over Romney recently, before that Cain over Romney consistently. Ron Paul gets consistently 15%-20%. Romney peaks at 20%. Newt leads around 30%

New Hampshire (1-10) - Romney leads big. Almost all polls (one outlier has Newt leading) have him at around 40% A lot of Massachusetts transplants live in New Hampshire. Despite the reputation, polls had them voting for Bush twice. Other state transplants and natives costs Bush in 2004. The "Massholes" as they are often called are going to be deciding this one.

South Carolina (1-21) - The state that won it for Bush and McCain. Romney and Cain battled in October. This month it is Newt and Cain. Newt leads in the last poll, and Cain led before that. There's still a lot of movement in this state.

Florida (1-31) - No recent polls, but Romney and Cain have battled here for awhile.

Nevada and Maine (2-4) - Caucuses. Maine has no recent polling. October had one with a 6%+ margin of error with Cain over Romney, but 6% is almost worthless. Another October poll has Mitt and Cain battling in Nevada.

Colorado and Minnesota (2-7) - Nothing recent in either state before October.

Arizona and Michigan (2-28) - One recent poll in Arizona had Newt up 28-23 over Romney with Cain at 17% Michigan is Romney's old home and where his dad was governor in the 60's. He won here last time 39-30%. EPIC/MRA had a 6.1% margin of error poll that had him leading Newt 34-20. That could mean 40-14 or 28-26. Michigan has a quasi-open primary, so that will factor in.

March 6th is Super Tuesday. It'll be likely decided by then.

Back to Romney, why isn't he catching on? People don't trust him. People also do not trust political establishments. This goes back to the end of the Bush era with the spending, bailouts, and the like. Obama the Peter Principle in Chief is deeply unpopular, but so is much of the GOP establishment, and Romney is getting the brunt of it. Some of that goes back to his record as Massachusetts governor. Some of that is due to the consultant proxy battles between Romney/McCain/Palin in the post 2008 blowups. Much of that goes down to trust. People don't trust Romney. He campaigned and was a liberal, and all of a sudden "became a conservative" when he ran for president. I don't think so. Actions not words. People don't trust a tax raising, gun grabbing, Romneycare enacting individual. If organization and money equal automatic wins, Romney would have already won. He's king there, and he still trailing nationally.

There's a big opening for someone to take out Romney. However, somebody has to take it. Either someone new has to come in (Newt rising from the ashes, Huntsman, or maybe even Ron Paul, but he'll likely get his 5-15%) or someone who collapsed has to rehab enough to get a couple of upsets. Bachmann, Perry, Cain. That is what has to happen, and it may or may not happen. Much like 2008, nobody is running away with this. Too bad that Mitch Daniels didn't run.

Right now the search is on for who can beat Romney - but also can beat Obama. (for the record, I think Obama beats Romney easily unless Obama beats himself) The search is ongoing. Anybody but Romney in the primary.

Friday, November 25, 2011

State House Redistricting - District 42 (HD-42)

State House - District 42
Current Reps - Bill Rogers (R-Genoa Twp)

Declared Candidates:
Rep - Bill Rogers (R-Brighton)
Dem - Shanda Willis (D-Brighton)

Update 5-26-2012 - Bill Rogers has a challenger from Novi Teacher Dale Rogers, who often posts on the Livingston Post website. Bill's favored to win, although I think Dale has the potential with his background to be a strong challenger if he really knows how to run a state rep campaign. Adding Hamburg and Putnam Twps did not do Bill any favors. While most MEA teachers are democrats, there are many who are swing voters or sometimes weak GOP because of some issues. I noticed that from other campaigns, including some names I recognized that I'd never expect to be on a GOP list until I saw one major indicator that would explain it. I'm not going to bet against Bill here, but I don't expect this to be a repeat of Joe Hune vs Paul Rogers.  

Update 8-30-2012 - Bill Rogers wins the primary. 

2010 Results - Old District (66th)
Bill Rogers - 23,480
James Delcamp - 8,246

The new 42th is descended from the old 66th district in Livingston County. This district changed slightly with redistricting. It dropped Milford to the 44th district. It dropped Oceola Twp and Marion Twp to the 47th district with Cindy Denby. It picks up Hamburg and Putnam Townshops from Denby. This new district is much less republican than it was previously, but Brighton and Genoa Townships will carry this even in bad year barring a Don Sherwood level of disaster. I think the last time a dem won this district was maybe  1990 or more likely 1986 for Frank Kelley.

Bill Rogers has one more term left, then this district will open up.

McCain Obama Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Brighton 1984 2097 4081 -113 48.62% 51.38% -2.77%
Brighton Twp 6589 4188 10777 2401 61.14% 38.86% 22.28%
Genoa Twp 6592 4502 11094 2090 59.42% 40.58% 18.84%
Green Oak Twp 5522 4395 9917 1127 55.68% 44.32% 11.36%
Hamburg Twp 6355 5922 12277 433 51.76% 48.24% 3.53%
Putnam Twp 2210 2157 4367 53 50.61% 49.39% 1.21%
Total 29252 23261 52513 5991 55.70% 44.30% 11.41%

Bush Kerry Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Brighton 2226 1763 3989 463 55.80% 44.20% 11.61%
Brighton Twp 6977 3525 10502 3452 66.43% 33.57% 32.87%
Genoa Twp 7081 3608 10689 3473 66.25% 33.75% 32.49%
Green Oak Twp 5779 3618 9397 2161 61.50% 38.50% 23.00%
Hamburg Twp 6933 4933 11866 2000 58.43% 41.57% 16.85%
Putnam Twp 2417 1792 4209 625 57.42% 42.58% 14.85%
Total 31413 19239 50652 12174 62.02% 37.98% 24.03%

Last State House GOP DEM Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Brighton 1747 950 2697 797 64.78% 35.22% 29.55%
Brighton Twp 5585 1827 7412 3758 75.35% 24.65% 50.70%
Genoa Twp 5692 1806 7498 3886 75.91% 24.09% 51.83%
Green Oak Twp 4603 1888 6491 2715 70.91% 29.09% 41.83%
Hamburg Twp

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Putnam Twp

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Total 17627 6471 24098 11156 73.15% 26.85% 46.29%

State House Redistricting - District 41 (HD-41)

State House - District 41
Current Reps - Open, Marty Knollenberg termed out

Declared Candidates:
Rep -  Martin Howrylak (R-Troy)
Dem - Mary Kerwin (D-Troy)

Update 5-25-2012 - Three way primary here. I've heard the name Matt Pryor from somewhere, although I'm not 100% sure from where. I also don't follow Troy politics closely.

Update 8-30-2012 - Martin Howrylak wins the primary.

2010 Results - Old District (41st)
Marty Knollenberg - 22,751
Ed Spillers - 11,571

This is an open seat based in Troy and Clawson. It's unchanged with redistricting. Troy leans republican but is getting more competitive. Clawson is very competitive and voted for Gore, Bush, and Obama.

I'll be surprised if this seat flips, even in an open seat. However, it could be a darkhorse if 2012 is a disaster. I know there's been county commissioner seats competitive in this area in the past. This area does generally lean republican with Troy, McCain/Obama  being a big exception.

McCain Obama Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Oakland County:

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Clawson 2998 3912 6910 -914 43.39% 56.61% -13.23%
Troy 21230 21517 42747 -287 49.66% 50.34% -0.67%

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Total 24228 25429 49657 -1201 48.79% 51.21% -2.42%

Bush Kerry Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Oakland County:

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Clawson 3584 3471 7055 113 50.80% 49.20% 1.60%
Troy 24171 18175 42346 5996 57.08% 42.92% 14.16%

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Total 27755 21646 49401 6109 56.18% 43.82% 12.37%

Last State House GOP Dem Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Oakland County:

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Clawson 2407 1677 4084 730 58.94% 41.06% 17.87%
Troy 20047 11571 31618 8476 63.40% 36.60% 26.81%

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Total 22454 13248 35702 9206 62.89% 37.11% 25.79%

State House Redistricting - District 40 (HD-40)

State House - District 40
Current Reps - Open or Lisa Brown (D-West Bloomfield), Chuck Moss termed out.

Declared Candidates:
Rep - Michael McCready (R-Bloomfield Hills),
Dem - Dorion Coston (D-West Bloomfield)

Update 5-26-2012 - Four way primary here for an open seat. Brown's not running here either. Potts is probably a favorite to win being a county commissioner, but others aren't rookies. Lawrence is on the school board, McCready is on Bloomfield Hills City Commission and an ex-mayor. Wolkinson is the only candidate from West Bloomfield. This is going to be a primary to watch.

Update 8-30-2012 - Michael McCready wins the tough four way primary with several strong candidates. Big win for him, and he'll be favored in the general, although this is not a gimme of a district.

2010 Results - Old District (39th)
Lisa Brown - 17,137
Lois Shulman - 17,051

Old District (40th)
Chuck Moss - 27,622
Julie Chandler - 13,346

This district become much more potentially competitive. The old district covers Birmingham, Bloomfield Hills, Bloomfield Township, Keego Harbor, Sylvan Lake, Orchard Lake, and Southfield Twp. It drops Keego Harbor, Sylvan Lake, and Orchard Lake to the 29th District, Southfield Township to the 35th District, and adds Eastern West Bloomfield to the district.

Bloomfield Hills and Bloomfield Township are solidly Republican. Birmingham leans our way but can be competitive. This portion of West Bloomfield is extremely democrat. Dave's Redistricting has this seat at a little over 52% for Obama. On paper, this district is like the new 39th in partisanship, but I think this is the weaker district now. Bloomfield Hills and Bloomfield Township's population demographics are slightly less favorable than Commerce Township.

I do think this district should stay ours, but I'm not going to count this one for us in 2012 just yet.

State House Redistricting - District 39 (HD-39)

State House - District 39
Current Reps - Open or Lisa Brown (D-West Bloomfield)

Declared Candidates:
Rep - Klint Kesto (R-Commerce),
Dem - Pam Jackson (D-Commerce)

Update 5-26-2012 - Interesting matchups. There's a primary on both sides.  I think this open seat leans slightly GOP without Brown, but with a six way primary, this is going to be interesting. Jackson on the dem side ran for state senate in 2010. She lost big, but that was partly due to the district and the year.

Update 8-30-2012 - Pam Jackson and Klint Kesto won the primaries. This one I think should stay ours, but keep an eye on it.

2010 Results - Old District (39th)
Lisa Brown - 17,137
Lois Shulman - 17,051

Redistricting split West Bloomfield more as a East/West split instead of a North/South split so I'm not sure if Brown is in the 39th or 40th district.

This race has been down to the wire the last three elections. West Bloomfield is usually solidly democrat and Commerce Township is usually solidly Republican. The new district adds Wixom and takes slightly less of West Bloomfield. Wixom used to be leaning republican, but went democrat in 2008 due to a high turnout in the apartments area. Wixom is split politically with the republican north and the democrat south.

Dave's redistricting has this seat at about 52% Obama. I think the Dem/GOP numbers in reality are lower than that. In an "average" year, West Bloomfield is about 56% dem overall and Wixom probably 54-55% GOP. The parts of West Bloomfield dropped from the old district run about 65%+ Obama. I wouldn't be surprised if the GOP takes this seat in 2012.

State House Redistricting - District 38 (HD-38)

State House - District 38
Current Reps - Hugh Crawford (R-Novi)

2010 Results - Old District (38th)
Hugh Crawford - 22,873
Jeffrey Gedeon - 10,998

Declared Candidates:
Rep - Hugh Crawford (R-Novi)
Dem - Chuck Tindall (D-Novi)

Update 5-25-2012 - No primary here. It's a one on one battle.

This district is one of the more Republican leaning districts in Oakland County, although not quite as much as it used to be. The new district contracts some because of population growth. It covers Novi (city/Twp), Lyon Twp, Walled Lake, South Lyon, and the Oakland County portion of Northville. It drops competitive Wixom.

Obama came close in that big 2008 year, but even McCain won this district. It would take a perfect storm for this district to flip.

McCain Obama Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Lyon Twp 4120 3009 7129 1111 57.79% 42.21% 15.58%
Northville 1127 1001 2128 126 52.96% 47.04% 5.92%
Novi 13264 14397 27661 -1133 47.95% 52.05% -4.10%
Novi Twp 52 57 109 -5 47.71% 52.29% -4.59%
South Lyon 2983 2712 5695 271 52.38% 47.62% 4.76%
Walled Lake 1517 1823 3340 -306 45.42% 54.58% -9.16%
Total 23063 22999 46062 64 50.07% 49.93% 0.14%

Bush Kerry Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Lyon Twp 4082 2274 6356 1808 64.22% 35.78% 28.45%
Northville 1269 866 2135 403 59.44% 40.56% 18.88%
Novi 14484 10612 25096 3872 57.71% 42.29% 15.43%
Novi Twp 67 40 107 27 62.62% 37.38% 25.23%
South Lyon 3191 2236 5427 955 58.80% 41.20% 17.60%
Walled Lake 1664 1580 3244 84 51.29% 48.71% 2.59%
Total 24757 17608 42365 7149 58.44% 41.56% 16.87%

Last State House GOP DEM Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Lyon Twp 3638 1255 4893 2383 74.35% 25.65% 48.70%
Northville 1057 467 1524 590 69.36% 30.64% 38.71%
Novi 11987 6072 18059 5915 66.38% 33.62% 32.75%
Novi Twp 56 28 84 28 66.67% 33.33% 33.33%
South Lyon 2461 1055 3516 1406 69.99% 30.01% 39.99%
Walled Lake 1223 809 2032 414 60.19% 39.81% 20.37%
Total 20422 9686 30108 10736 67.83% 32.17% 35.66%

The politics of anti-bullying laws

I think everyone reading agrees that bullying is bad. Those that don't agree can be subjected to a bunch of Swirlies.

The controversy is the solutions. Some think it requires a legislative solution. I think that legislative solutions are worthless. There's a lot of controversy regarding one bill that passed the senate that I think makes the mistake of trying to be all things to all people.

There's a lot of bad press regarding Senate Bill 0137. It's the bill passed by the senate regarding "bullying." The text of the legislation is here. The house is according to reports rejecting the language of the senate bill. One of the fights is over listed classes and protected classes. The one that passed had listed of protected classes.

This section does not prohibit a statement of a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction of a school employee, school volunteer, pupil, or a pupil's parent or guardian.

The issue was worries about someone who is Catholic or Evangelical getting busted for bullying due to a statement like "Homosexuality is wrong. It's against my religion." That's why the language was included. However, there's the problem of unintended consequences. The left has gone crazy with that language, and they actually have a point with that. This opens up a whole other can of worms. Wahhhabi Islam doesn't have much use for "Infidels." Westboro "Baptist" "Church" hates everybody. Those could be considered "sincerely held religious beliefs." That doesn't get to moral convictions which can cover anything. Some of the Westboro types may be able to chant at somebody over and over and over again in their face "God hates fags." There's a fine line between "Homosexuality is wrong. It's against my religion." and "God hates fags."

The senate bill makes things blurry. Other proposals may classify the former as bullying. Those that use the latter aren't going to give a damn what any law says anyway.

What the legislature is doing is trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Bullying is a problem. It's a school society issue. It can not be fixed by a law. This proposed law does NOTHING. It sets up some guidelines for schools telling them to do something - things they probably have already. Other than that, it's a way for politicians to pat themselves on the back and tell voters they are going after bullying. Then, this is forgotten about and nothing changes. Same as it ever was.

School officials care about one thing and one thing only. Order. Order over anything else. It doesn't have to be good order either. If a few people are bullies and the bullies don't cause too much trouble for the schools, it's a price the schools are willing to pay without controversy. Protecting the bullies is a policy against self defense. That's because in their minds, violence is always wrong for any reason. Both parties get suspended equally and it doesn't matter who starts it. It's wrong, but it is what it is. It's easy for people years removed from grade school to say don't worry about getting suspended for that. However, for most folks in school, a suspension is a big deal.

How can that be changed? By laws? Not much, unless they want to push a self defense immunity provision. By school policies, put in a policy allowing for self defense against bullying. Would that be perfect? No. But it damn well will help. The one thing bullies need more than anything else is an ass whooping and humiliation. Preferably, by a target, and preferably in front of all the bully's friends.

How can it be changed by us? The one thing needed more than else that bullied folks need is mental confidence. Easier said than done, but there are ways to help.

The first way is parents. Don't accept bullying behavior from your kids. That's the easy part.

The other part is toughness, especially mental toughness and confidence.

In the old days of the UFC almost 20 years ago, there were no weight classes. The earliest tournament winners weren't Dan Severn or Ken Shamrock. Big guys who were very good fighters and looked the part. The winner was a skinny 6'0 170lb guy named Royce Gracie. Gracie's family introduced Brazilian Jiu-jitsu. Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu training is a great way for smaller folks to be able to defend themselves against larger opponents. The Gracie family changed martial arts forever. In today's UFC, there is a combination of Muay Thai kickboxing, wrestling, and Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu.

With the rise of the UFC's popularity, kickstarted by Royce Gracie showing the value of techniques, MMA classes have sprouted up nationwide. Leaning those techniques and the discipline lead to mental confidence. Getting stronger and lifting weights also leads to mental confidence. At the same time, nobody want to mess with a Royce Gracie or a Urijah Faber. Those that do, will learn not to do so.

Bullying can be reduced if society wants it to happen. It won't be reduced by politicians passing laws, patting themselves on the back, and having things be the same as it always is.

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

State House Redistricting - District 37 (HD-37)

State House - District 37
Current Reps - Vicki Barnett (D-Farmington Hills)

Declared Candidates:
Dem - Vicki Barnett (D-Farmington Hills)
GOP - Bruce Lilley (R-Farmington)

Update 5-25-2012 - No primaries here. It's strictly a one on one battle. 

2010 Results - Old District (37th)
Vicki Barnett - 20,750
Christopher Atallah - 12,633

This district has been unchanged for 20 years. It covers Farmington Hills and Farmington. It's been democrat for 10 years when Rocky Raczkowski was termed out, and with demographic changes, is likely to stay that way barring a surprise. Aldo Vagnozzi held the district after Rocky, and Vicki Barnett replaced Aldo. Bush ran almost 50/50 in 2000, lost this district in 2004, and Obama won it big in 2008. The reason I think is largely migration. This was once fairly republican territory and Joe Knollenberg country. A lot of the Republicans in Farmington Hills are now out in places like South Lyon or Livingston County. More and more of Southfield is now here. This is now a 30% minority district.

If it's a good year, I can see maybe more strong attempt at this seat when it opens up, depending on candidates. It'll take the right year and the right match up to possibly steal this district back.

McCain Obama Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Oakland County:

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Farmington 2416 3183 5599 -767 43.15% 56.85% -13.70%
Farmington Hills 17026 26862 43888 -9836 38.79% 61.21% -22.41%

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Total 19442 30045 49487 -10603 39.29% 60.71% -21.43%

Bush Kerry Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Oakland County:

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Farmington 2873 2680 5553 193 51.74% 48.26% 3.48%
Farmington Hills 20019 22931 42950 -2912 46.61% 53.39% -6.78%

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Total 22892 25611 48503 -2719 47.20% 52.80% -5.61%

Last State House GOP Dem Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Oakland County:

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Farmington 1657 2351 4008 -694 41.34% 58.66% -17.32%
Farmington Hills 10976 18399 29375 -7423 37.37% 62.63% -25.27%

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Total 12633 20750 33383 -8117 37.84% 62.16% -24.31%

State House Redistricting - District 36 (HD-36)

State House - District 36
Current Reps - Pete Lund (R-Shelby Twp)

Declared Candidates:
Rep - Pete Lund (R-Shelby Twp),
Dem - Robert Murphy (D-Romeo),

Update 5-25-2012 - There's a primary and general on both sides. Murphy wants a rematch.

Update 8-30-2012 - There will be a rematch between Lund and Murphy.

2010 Results - Old District (36th)
Pete Lund -25,523
Robert Murphy - 11,027

This district doesn't change much. The old district covered Shelby Twp, Bruce Twp, and Washington Twp. The new district covers the same areas, but a slightly less portion of Shelby Twp due to population changes. Partisanship doesn't change much. This is probably the safest Republican district in Macomb County.

The new district is approximately 55% McCain.

State House Redistricting - District 35 (HD-35)

State House - District 35
Current Reps - Rudy Hobbs (D-Southfield)

2010 Results - Old District (35th)
Ruby Hobbs - 28,729
Michael Weinenger - 3,932

GOP - Timothy Sulowski (R-Southfield)
DEM - Rudy Hobbs (D-Southfield) ,

Update 5-26-2012 - A four way primary here. Hobbs is the incumbent and favored to win.

Update 8-30-2012 - Hobbs won the primary. 

This district expanded from the old district which covered Southfield and Lathrup Village. It still covers those two areas, but also adds "Southfield Township." You never hear about Southfield Township because usually it's referred to by the village there. Bingham Farms, Franklin, or Beverly Hills. It drops part of Oak Park and Royal Oak Twp.

It's gotten "less" democrat, but it's still a black majority 75%+ district. The race is the primary.

McCain Obama Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Oakland County:

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Lathrup Village 471 2433 2904 -1962 16.22% 83.78% -67.56%
Southfield 4701 38000 42701 -33299 11.01% 88.99% -77.98%
Southfield Twp 4570 4925 9495 -355 48.13% 51.87% -3.74%
Total 9742 45358 55100 -35616 17.68% 82.32% -64.64%

Bush Kerry Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Oakland County:

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Lathrup Village 686 2169 2855 -1483 24.03% 75.97% -51.94%
Southfield 7269 33827 41096 -26558 17.69% 82.31% -64.62%
Southfield Twp 5245 4346 9591 899 54.69% 45.31% 9.37%
Total 13200 40342 53542 -27142 24.65% 75.35% -50.69%

Last State House GOP Dem Total Diff GOP DEM Diff
Oakland County:

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Lathrup Village 394 1724 2118 -1330 18.60% 81.40% -62.80%
Southfield 3370 24184 27554 -20814 12.23% 87.77% -75.54%
Southfield Twp

0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Total 3764 25908 29672 -22144 12.69% 87.31% -74.63%