After another week spent wrangling with President Barack Obama over deficit negotiations, House Speaker John Boehner is planning to go home to Ohio for the weekend, say Republican aides. 

On whether Boehner's physical absence from Washington could impact communicating with the president concerning the fiscal cliff, an aide indicated that a potential break in the apparent stalemate wouldn't be hampered by distance. 

"Ohio has both cell phone service and airports - so if the President wants to talk or meet, it won't be a problem at all." 

Former Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel is likely to be President Barack Obama's next pick for Secretary of Defense, although the White House has yet to finalize its decision for the cabinet appointment. 

A former Pentagon official tells NBC News that Hagel is the likely pick for the post, while another White House insider says that, while Hagel is a top candidate, it's unclear if the president has made a final decision. 

A senior administration official tells NBC News that "no decision" has been made on the nomination. 

Bloomberg News reported Thursday that President Barack Obama spoke to Hagel about the position on December 4. 

Hagel, who served two terms in the United States Senate representing his home state of Nebraska, has been a member of the president's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board as well as a member of the faculty of Georgetown University since leaving Capitol Hill in 2009. 

He also accompanied then-Senator Obama on his campaign trip to Afghanistan, Iraq and the Middle East in the summer of 2008. 

While in the Senate, he was a member of four Senate committees, including the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Select Committee on Intelligence. 

NBC's Carrie Dann contributed to this report. 

While the new NBC News poll shows that most Americans want Republicans and Democrats to make a deal in the budget negotiations, NBC's Mark Murray and Domenico Montanaro explain that some Republicans are hesitant to give in because of potential primary challenges.

Thanks Amy B. Portland, ME for the question!

Edited by NBC's Matt Loffman.

TRANSCRIPT:

MONTANARO:  I'm Domenico Montanaro, and this is Inside the Boiler Room.  I'm here with my colleague Mark Murray.  And Mark, Amy B. from Portland, Maine, asks, "The general perception is, if we go over the fiscal cliff, the blame will rest with House Republicans.  My question is, why don't Republican leaders sound even the tiniest bit conciliatory towards the President?" 

MURRAY: Well there's I think one simple answer to Amy why there is a lot of Republican resistance to cutting a deal, and that has to do with Republican primaries.  That these folks are looking over their shoulders and saying, 'We see a lot of the same poll numbers that are on the NBC News Wall Street Journal poll that show people want compromise.  They actually want the fact that you end up raising the rates on the wealthiest of income.'  But they also see if they actually cut a deal, they could end up losing their jobs.  And this is even a calculation for House Speaker John Boehner.  If actually completely ends up caving in on almost everything the White House wants, does he even remain Speaker?  So that's a very delicate situation for the Republican Party.

MONTANARO:  Yeah, there are a lot of delicate balances that they have to make.  I do think, though, that Republicans would say that they have been more conciliatory because in 2011, they said that rates, or revenue, was off the table.  Well now they're saying, and John Boehner would say to his great peril because of the speakership, that he's put revenue on the table.  Now that's not raising tax rates. 

MURRAY: Right. 

MONTANARO: Which I think is Amy's point that there's broad support  for raising the tax rates on the top two percent.  But I think Republicans anyway would say that they've been more conciliatory on revenue. 

MURRAY: Right.  And our NBC Wall Street Journal poll actually asks and finds that a majority of the public, 56%, would actually blame both sides equally.  Though, there is a percentage, 24% would blame Boehner and the Republicans more.  Just 19% would blame President Obama.  But when you look at the rest of our poll, it does show that President Obama does seem to have a broad mandate for the things that Democrats are calling for in this budget standoff. 

MONTANARO: Well, but anytime Republicans will see that there's even the tiniest sliver of hope for, within a poll, they're going to use that to go with the ideology that they believe to be able to say, 'See, we don't really have to completely give in.'

Voters looking for signs of progress toward a deal to resolve the fiscal cliff got none on Thursday, as congressional leaders appeared as far apart as ever.

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

House Speaker John Boehner leaves after his weekly news briefing in the Capitol Visitors Center at the U.S. Capitol December 13, 2012 in Washington, DC.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., each held press conferences to outline their positions on the fiscal cliff. And both party leaders appeared as unyielding as ever in their positions.

Boehner again urged President Barack Obama to issue a new plan to outline spending cuts, and he castigated the idea of raising income tax rates.

And Pelosi said Republicans must "get real," arguing that Congress must "come to some agreement in the next couple of days or the very beginning of next week for us to have engineered our way to a solution."

Lawmakers and Obama must reach an agreement before Dec. 31 to forestall the cocktail of automatic spending cuts and tax hikes set to take effect unless Congress acts.

The level of spending cuts and whether tax rates should be increased continue to ensnare negotiations. But as Congress careens toward the end-of-year deadline -- House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., warned Thursday of work around the holidays -- the public posturing continues to highlight the differences that persist between Obama and congressional Republicans.

"We made a reasonable offer. It's now up to the White House to show us how their way to cut spending will give us the balanced approach that the president has talked about for weeks," Boehner said.

Amid additional speculation that striking a deal with Obama that raises takes would imperil his position, the Republican speaker also shrugged off the notion that he was concerned with retaining power.

"I'm not concerned about my job as speaker," he said. "What I'm concerned about is doing the right things for our kids and grandkids."

"Booming," "sky-high," and "formidable" are just a sampling of the adjectives often used to describe Hillary Clinton's popularity, as DC pundits speculate about her perceived ambitions for 2016.

Pool / Getty Images

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton attend a dinner for Kennedy honorees on Dec. 1, 2012 in Washington, D.C.

It's correct that Clinton (bested only by her husband Bill) enjoys the second highest approval rating of the public figures we asked about in our most recent NBC/WSJ poll. With a 58% positive / 28% negative split overall (and 100 percent name recognition), she has the kind of numbers that most political figures experience only in daydreams.

And it's also worth noting that neither she nor her husband are strangers to the political doldrums. In April 2008, as her prospects for a primary comeback waned, she had a net negative overall approval rating. When Bill Clinton left the presidency, after his controversial pardon of Marc Rich, just 34 percent of Americans viewed him positively. 

But as both have seen their numbers rebound to their current highs, are the Clintons' stores of political goodwill  -- built up by a couple that has largely stayed above the political fray since the end of the 2008 election -- resilient enough to bolster another run for the presidency by Hillary? 

Here's a look at where both Clintons stand right now with some of the groups that make up a campaign-building coalition.

(As with all deep dives into cross-tabs, insert caveat here that the margin of error for these subgroups is by definition higher than the poll's overall MOE of +/- 3.10%.) 

Hillary Clinton enjoys a 70 percent approval rating among women. Almost seven-in-ten Hispanic respondents and and 87 percent of African-Americans also said they view her positively.

While she is hardly beloved by the party she once derided for its penchant for "right wing conspiracy," her marks with Republicans are better than the current president's. A quarter of Republicans in the NBC/WSJ survey gave her positive ratings, while 52 percent of independents said the same. (Compare that to 10 percent of GOP respondents and 45 percent of indies for Obama.) 

Other than being slightly underwater among white men, she has net positive ratings among almost every key constituency, with notable strength among suburban women (+44 points), blue collar workers (+24 points) and retirees (+18 points). 

And then there's Bill. 

The former president, who once stood at the brink of impeachment, has nearly regained the popularity he enjoyed at his first inauguration in 1993. Just a quarter of the poll's respondents said they view Bill Clinton negatively. His numbers with Republicans and independents are comparable to his wife's, but his overall popularity is buoyed by strength among white men, who view him positively by a margin of more than 30 points. 

Both Clintons are also unsurprisingly strong with the Democratic base -- a data point that's notable only in light of the blistering attacks both launched on Barack Obama during the 2007-2008 primary battle. Disapproval for either barely registers among respondents who classified themselves as liberals or core Democrats. 

None of this is to say that the daily volleys of a possible campaign wouldn't create some cracks in the Clintonian armor; Hillary Clinton's approval rating dropped by 10 points in the two bruising months after the Iowa caucuses in 2008, for example. 

What goes up, both pols know, can come down. 

But for now, speculators, "formidable" is fine. 

The United States Congress could reprise its role as the Grinch who stole Christmas, as lawmakers continue to bicker toward an end-of-year fiscal cliff deadline that threatens to drag legislative drama through the holidays.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, told fellow Republicans on Wednesday to not make any serious plans around or after Christmas, implying that work on resolving the fiscal cliff would extend well through the holiday.

"We can do things very quickly, but this is not something we can do very easily, at least as far as bill-drafting goes," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., told reporters on Tuesday. "I think it’s going to be extremely difficult to get it done before Christmas, but it could be done."

Yet these politicians are engaging in just the latest version of a yuletide game of beat-the-clock in Washington. 

Christmas trees, menorahs and other festive adornments have been placed at the White House and Capitol, but a glum sentiment has overtaken Washington. And it’s all thanks to the emerging annual tradition of late-December partisan standoffs as the president and Congress race to complete unfinished business.

Win Mcnamee / Getty Images

Capitol Hill police check an unidentified man dressed as Santa Claus with a metal detector as he enters the U.S. Capitol on his way to Speaker of the House John Boehner's office on December 12, 2012 in Washington, DC.

And while that’s meant long hours for lawmakers, Hill staffers and reporters, it’s also resulted in a tremendous amount of uncertainty for many Americans. The last few holiday seasons found some shoppers hitting the stores with scarcely any idea of how much their paychecks would be taxed in the new year. And in 2009, the fate of President Barack Obama’s closely-watched health care overhaul rested on the outcome of an early-morning vote on Christmas Eve.

This year is no different. Congress has known since the summer of 2011 that the fiscal cliff – the automatic expiration of the 2001 Bush tax cuts, and the automatic spending cuts set forth by the 2011 debt ceiling deal – would spring into place at the end of December unless acted upon.

Indeed, the automatic spending cuts, which fall heavily upon the defense budget, were designed to be so distasteful as to give Republicans and Democrats time and an incentive to act well before the end-of-year deadline to reach a deal.

Even if Republicans and Obama were able to reach an agreement today, it would take at least a few days to translate that agreement into legislative language. And once that’s drafted, House rules require that the legislation be posted online (for review) 72 hours before a vote. In short, time is running out to reach a deal before the end of the year, let alone Christmas.

The historical idea of a “lame-duck” Congress – a snooze-worthy session in which defeated or retiring lawmakers do little of substance – seems almost antiquated, given the frenzied and substantial work left for legislators during recent holiday seasons.

It almost seems as though lawmakers accomplish more during December than they do during the rest of the year.

Last year, it was the threat of a hike in the payroll tax rate that extended late into the holiday season. Obama and Republicans wrangled over whether a yearlong, 2 percent payroll tax cut – which they authorized in the waning days of 2010 – should be extended for another year.

At the time, Republicans argued that the cost of the payroll tax cuts should be offset with other spending cuts, a position which Obama said was unusual, given the other tax cuts Republicans had previously proposed without a similar offset. The GOP ultimately relented, passing an extension of the payroll tax (only for two months) on Dec. 22.

Of course, that standoff was the byproduct of the previous December’s showdown, which also played a role in setting up the current fiscal cliff currently beguiling lawmakers.

That December featured a negotiation between Obama and Republicans – who had just delivered a “shellacking” to Democrats, in the president’s words, and retaken control of the House – over the fate of the 2001 Bush tax cuts.

Republicans reached a deal with Obama at a relatively early point, on Dec. 6, on a package that preserved existing tax rates for an additional two years past the end of the 2010, when the tax cuts first sought by President George W. Bush were scheduled to expire. In exchange, Obama won an extension in unemployment benefits, which were also set to expire. The president signed the bill on Dec. 17.

It would be easy to look at the record and assign blame for the discord during these past three Decembers to the differences between the Republican-held House and a Democratic White House. But it was the preceding December (in 2009), when Democrats enjoyed strong majorities in both chambers, that saw one of the most high-wire votes in Congress.

The Senate convened on Christmas Eve morning that year to hold a historic, party-line vote on approving the upper chamber’s version of Obama’s health care reform law. Members of the Senate gathered at 7:05 a.m. – giving them enough time to travel home to rejoin their families for Christmas – to vote 60 to 39 to give final approval to the bill that would ultimately serve as the basis for “Obamacare.”

The vote ended months of partisan strife and wrangling over the fate of health care reform, and was designed to advance the legislation to the House before Massachusetts could elect a senator to replace the late Sen. Edward Kennedy, whose seat was held by a placeholder, Democratic Sen. Paul Kirk.

The real drama took place, though, in the weeks preceding that vote. Democrats worked around-the-clock to secure the 60 votes they needed to pass the health care law, and Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson didn’t agree to become the 60th decisive vote until Saturday, Dec. 20.

His support prompted a series of procedural votes to move the health care legislation toward a final vote at 1:05 a.m. on  Dec. 21. But even that vote was almost imperiled by a major blizzard that blanketed Washington and crippled transportation throughout the city, forcing senators to camp out at the Capitol.

Those dark-of-night votes could become another staple of this year’s scramble to reach a deal to resolve the fiscal cliff, the countdown to which will mimic the revelers in Times Square on New Year’s Eve unless Congress and Obama can soon reach an accord.

NBC/WSJ poll: GOP already goes off one cliff -- the image cliff… American public: We want compromise… But this also presents dilemma for White House: Does it bend over backwards to achieve compromise, or does it try to make the GOP cry “Uncle”?... Who gets the blame if the country goes over the cliff? Answer: Both sides… But Obama and the Democrats also have the upper hand… The other big news from our poll: Majority, for the first time, supports gay marriage… And Clinton to testify on Benghazi.

J. Scott Applewhite / AP

House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio, who conferred with President Barack Obama yesterday by phone, walks to a closed-door meeting with the GOP caucus, Wednesday, Dec. 12, 2012, on Capitol Hill.

*** GOP goes off the image cliff: The clock is ticking over whether President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner can avoid going over the so-called fiscal cliff at the beginning of next year. But our new NBC/WSJ poll shows that the Republican Party has already gone off one cliff, per co-pollster Peter Hart (D) -- the image cliff. The GOP’s fav/unfav rating in the poll now stands at 30%/45% (minus-15), which is down from 36%/43% (minus-7) right before the election. That’s compared with the Democratic Party’s 44%/35% rating (plus-9). And other than self-described Republicans and conservatives, just two other groups have a net positive view of the GOP: folks who live in rural America (39%/33%) and folks who live in the South (39%/38%), that’s it. What’s more, asked to give a word or short phrase to describe the Republican Party, 65% offered a negative comment, including MORE THAN HALF of Republicans. The top responses: “Bad,” “weak,” “negative,” “uncompromising,” “need to work together,” “broken,” “disorganized” and “lost.” By contrast, 37% gave negative descriptions of the Democratic Party, while 35% were positive. A Republican politician or operative might look at our poll and say, “Well, the good news is that our numbers can’t get any lower.” That might be true, and they could very well drag Democrats down with them if there isn’t a deal. But there’s another way to look at the poll: Republicans have a lot to gain, too. And if they want to be a competitive national party again and not simply a regional, rural party, they need to make gains.

*** The American public: We want compromise: The reason they have a lot to gain is that the American public -- Democrats, Republicans, and independents alike -- wants compromise. According to the poll, two-thirds of respondents (67%) are willing to accept an increase in taxes or cuts in federal government programs they care about to reach an agreement to avoid the problem. What’s more, a whopping 76% say it would be acceptable increasing taxes on those who earn more than $250,000 to avoid the cliff, and that includes 61% of Republican respondents. Indeed, for the first time in our poll, a majority of Republicans (59%) say they want GOP leaders to make compromises to gain consensus in the current budget debate. Previously, in 2011, majorities of Republicans said they preferred GOP leaders to stick to their positions rather than make compromises. And the percentage of Democrats who favor compromise on this question (70%) is now at an all-time high in the survey.

*** Does the White House seek compromise -- or total victory? But these numbers present the Obama White House with a dilemma: How does it proceed during what looks like a stalemate right now in the budget negotiations? Does it bend over backwards with Boehner and House Republicans just to get a deal, even if it gives up much of the leverage it has with the Bush-era tax cuts and after last month’s presidential election? Or does it -- as some Democrats and many progressives are urging -- hold fast and be willing to go off the cliff to break the Republican Party and make it cry, “Uncle”? This is a tricky situation for the White House, because there is every chance that we simply go from fiscal cliff to other fiscal cliff over the next few years, and that could end up being politically painful for the White House and could mean the hope of getting OTHER legislative accomplishments in 2013 remote (think immigration or energy or education). 

*** Who is to blame if there isn’t a deal? Answer: Both sides: If there is no compromise on the fiscal cliff and the automatic tax increases and spending cuts go into effect at the beginning of next year, 24% say they will blame congressional Republicans more, while 19% will point the finger at Obama and congressional Democrats. But a majority of respondents (56%) say they’ll blame both sides equally. Still, twice as many Americans say they trust the president more in handling this fiscal situation (38%) than House Speaker John Boehner and the congressional Republicans (19%). And significant majorities believe Obama holds a clear mandate from the election on issues related to this subject -- 65% say he has a mandate on reducing the deficit by BOTH increasing taxes on the wealthy and reducing federal spending, and 59% say he has a mandate on eliminating the Bush-era tax cuts for household income over $250,000 a year. The president has the upper hand as far as the public is concerned.

*** Pessimism and realism: But what’s also striking in our poll is how PESSIMISTIC and REALISTIC the American public has become. (Do we dare say they’re now conditioned by Washington gridlock?)  For starters, almost seven in 10 (69%) believe that the next year on Capitol Hill will be marked by division and little willingness to compromise. Compare that to four years ago, right after Obama’s first White House victory, when a majority (52%) said the next Congress would usher in a period of unity and working together. In addition, the poll finds 53% saying they are either “optimistic and confident” or “satisfied and hopeful” that Obama will do a good job as president after his re-election, versus 47% who are either uncertain or pessimistic.

*** Majority supports gay marriage: Finally, an historical note: For the first time ever in the NBC/WSJ poll, a majority of respondents -- 51% -- support same-sex marriage. That percentage in support is up from 30% in 2004, 41% in 2009 and 49% in March 2012, demonstrating how quickly public opinion on this issue has changed in just eight years.

*** Clinton to testify on Benghazi: Per NBC’s Andrea Mitchell, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee announced yesterday that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will testify about the Benghazi attack on Thursday, Dec. 20 beginning at 9:00 am ET. Officials tell Mitchell that the report is expected to be sharply critical of the State Department security decisions prior to the fatal attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens. Speaking of Benghazi, the toll it had been taking on the president’s job rating on foreign policy is gone. The president is back up over 50% approval on foreign policy. But don’t miss the Susan Rice poll numbers in our survey. If she is nominated to be the next secretary of state, she’ll begin that confirmation fight with a net NEGATIVE personal rating (20%/24%) in our survey; for an unelected Cabinet-level official not named Clinton, she has a surprisingly HIGH name I.D., just 31% said they didn’t know who she was.

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower

*** Thursday’s “The Daily Rundown” line-up: Breaking down the NBC/WSJ numbers with pollsters Fred Yang and Micah Roberts... New 2016 developments with Politico's Jonathan Martin and the Washington Post's Chris Cillizza... Plus former Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), AP's Liz Sidoti and Alfonso Aguilar of the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles.

*** Thursday’s “Jansing & Co.” line-up: MSNBC’s Richard Lui talks to Rep. Jackie Speier, Chris Frates and Ruth Marcus; Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak about his part in the mayoral call with the President on the fiscal cliff, Steve Elmendorf and John Feehery on the Right to Work battle going forward; Steve Perry on whether you should click off the racial boxes on college applications. And lastly, Jonathan Capehart on the Political Fashion (and faux-paus) of 2012.

*** Thursday’s “MSNBC Live with Thomas Roberts” line-up: Thomas Roberts interviews Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC), House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD), NARAL President Nancy Keenan, and MSNBC’S Melissa Harris Perry.  Today’s Power Panel includes: TheGrio.com’s Perry Bacon, Fmr. OH Governor Ted Strickland and The Washington Examiner’s Susan Ferrechio.

*** Thursday’s “NOW with Alex Wagner” line-up: Joy Reid, who’s filling for Alex Wagner, interviews Politico’s Maggie Haberman, the New York Times’ Nicholas Confessore, Time’s Rana Foroohar, Salon.com Editor-at-Large Joan Walsh, and SEIU President Mary Kay Henry.

*** Thursday’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports” line-up: NBC’s Andrea Mitchell interviews Ambassador Nicholas Burns, Politico’s Roger Simon, the Brady Campaign’s Dan Gross and Jonathan Lowy, NBC’s Chuck Todd and Meredith Vieira, the Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza and the State Department’s Ellen Tauscher.

*** Thursday’s “News Nation with Tamron Hall” line-up: MSNBC’s Tamron Hall interviews Rep. Gwen Moore, former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, Daily Beast special correspondent Michael Tomasky Roll Call’s Shira Toeplitz, Dem strategist Chris Kofinis, and Michael Smerconish.

Reuters has the story behind the Michigan “right-to-work” push, started by two freshman representatives, one of whom was formerly a Tea Party activist. “Republicans executed a plan - the timing, the language of the bills, the media strategy, and perhaps most importantly, the behind-the-scenes lobbying of top Republicans including Snyder,” Reuters writes, adding, “November elections turned out to be key to the December move. House Republicans lost five seats, making passage in January a more difficult proposition than pushing through legislation in the lame-duck session. But the November elections had also served up a crushing referendum defeat for unions, which Republicans saw as a sign that public opinion would be behind them in their move to curb organized labor's power.”

More: “A group linked to the conservative billionaire Koch Brothers, owners of an energy and trading conglomerate who are reviled by unions and Democrats, held three conferences in Michigan in early 2012 on right-to-work featuring renowned conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart. Three Republican presidential candidates including Romney and some 1,500 activists attended the last conference on February 25 sponsored by Americans for Prosperity, four days before Breibart's death. The right-to-work campaign gathered momentum when the activists linked up with Dick DeVos, the son of Richard DeVos, co-founder of Michigan-based Amway, and Ronald Weiser, former chairman of the Michigan Republican Party and ambassador to Slovakia under President George W. Bush.”

“While the ‘fiscal cliff’ of looming tax increases and spending cuts dominates political conversation in Washington, some Republicans and business groups see signs of a ‘regulatory cliff’ that they say could be just as damaging to the economy,” the AP reports. “For months, federal agencies and the White House have sidetracked dozens of major regulations that cover everything from power plant pollution to workplace safety to a crackdown on Wall Street. The rules had been largely put on hold during the presidential campaign as the White House sought to quiet Republican charges that President Barack Obama was an overzealous regulator who is killing U.S. jobs. But since the election, the Obama administration has quietly reopened the regulations pipeline.”

How many times can you write the same story? “Republicans aren't budging on tax rates, and Democrats are resisting steps like raising the eligibility age for Medicare. Negotiations on averting a year-end fiscal train wreck combining big automatic tax hikes and sweeping spending cuts again appear stalled,” the AP writes.

House Democrats are resisting calls for raising the Medicare retirement age.

Jim DeMint thinks Republicans will cave and taxes will go up. “The president campaigned on raising taxes and getting rid of the Bush-era tax cuts, and he’s going to get his wish,” DeMint said on CBS. “I believe we’re going to be raising taxes not just on the top earners, everyone is going to be paying more taxes in the country and I believe that’s what the president wants.”

Hillary Clinton will be on Capitol Hill Dec. 20^th to testify at a hearing on Benghazi.

Elizabeth Warren got that assignment on the Banking Committee.

Bring back the greatest hits: “Speaker John A. Boehner and GOP leaders are considering throwing some red meat onto the House floor in the coming weeks as frustration mounts from members who are tired of sitting idle while high-level fiscal cliff negotiations continue between the Ohio Republican and the White House,” Roll Call says. “Boehner’s warning Wednesday that members should be ready to stay through Christmas to deal with any fiscal cliff measure has set off a round of griping from Republicans who already think that if they must be on Capitol Hill, they should at least have a proactive agenda. As a result, leadership is considering bringing back to the floor a bill to replace the scheduled 10-year, $1.2 trillion sequestration cuts to defense and social programs — a bill that already passed earlier this year.”

The Boston Globe sees Scott Brown’s farewell speech as something of a preview of his return. Brown said, “As I’ve said many times before, victory and defeat is temporary. Depending on what happens, and where we go, all of us, we may obviously meet again.”

Why is it that everyone urges compromise when they leave the Senate?

Richard Lugar, ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, also delivered his farewell speech yesterday after losing a primary to Richard Mourdock (who lost in the general election to Democrat Joe Donnelly): “Republicans must be willing to suspend reflexive opposition that serves no purpose but to limit their own role in strategic questions and render cooperation impossible. All parties should recognize the need for unity in the coming year when events in Iran, Syria, Afghanistan, North Korea and other locations may test American national security in extreme ways."

More: "Governance requires adaptation to shifting circumstances. It often requires finding common ground with Americans who have a different vision than your own. It requires leaders who believe . . . that their first responsibility to their constituents is to apply their best judgment."

Joe Lieberman’s farewell, addressing how you break Washington gridlock: “It requires reaching across the aisle and finding partners from the opposite party. That is what is desperately needed in Washington now.”

“Sen. Robert Menendez employed as an unpaid intern in his Senate office an illegal immigrant who was a registered sex offender, now under arrest by immigration authorities, the Associated Press has learned. The Homeland Security Department instructed federal agents not to arrest him until after Election Day, a U.S. official involved in the case told the AP. A Homeland Security spokesman, Peter Boogaard, said Wednesday that it was ‘categorically false’ that the department delayed the arrest of Luis Abrahan Sanchez Zavaleta, 18, until after the election.”

Menendez commented on this story on MSNBC’s “News Nation with Tamron Hall.”

Rep. Jim Moran’s (D-VA) son “pleaded guilty to assaulting his girlfriend, admitting to a role in an alcohol-fueled incident outside a Northwest Washington nightspot this month,” the Washington Post reports. More: According to a police account of the Dec. 1 incident contained in court documents, an officer saw Moran grab a woman by the back of her head and slam it into a trash can about 1:23 a.m. in front of the Getawaynightclub in Columbia Heights.” And, of course, there’s this: Moran resigned from his post as field director for his father’s reelection campaign in October after a conservative activist released an undercover video of Moran discussing potential ways to commit voter fraud.”

Oh, so NOW it’s because Mitt Romney didn’t focus on Solyndra enough. OK… Ousted Rep. Cliff Stearns, who had been the GOP’s “point man” on Solyndra: "The president somehow was able to sidestep [Solyndra], and Romney did not make it an issue. Just like Benghazi. Benghazi was a great issue for Romney, but he did not use it as well as I thought he could."

An overwhelming majority of Americans want Congress and the Obama White House to reach a deal featuring both tax increases and spending cuts to avert the so-called fiscal cliff, according to the latest national NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

Click here for full results from the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll (pdf)

In fact, majorities of Democrats, Republicans and political independents each support such a deal.

Yet respondents are split over whether any kind of agreement can be reached, and nearly seven in 10 believe that the coming year will feature Democrats and Republicans in Congress showing little willingness to come to an agreement on important matters.

Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted the survey with Republican pollster Bill McInturff, says the public is sending this one-word message to Washington: compromise.

“Doing something trumps doing nothing,” Hart said.

Related: Boehner: 'Serious differences' separate GOP from Obama

The survey – conducted a month after November’s election – also shows a positive uptick in opinion toward President Barack Obama, and more negative views about defeated GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney and the Republican Party. The poll also finds that a majority of Americans now support gay marriage.

‘Hints of a thaw’

According to the poll, a combined 68 percent of Americans say that the fiscal cliff – the looming combination of tax increases and spending cuts set to take place at the beginning of next year if nothing is done – is either a “very serious” or “fairly serious” problem.

A similar two-thirds of respondents are willing to accept an increase in taxes or cuts in federal government programs they care about to reach an agreement to avoid the problem.

Asked another way, 65 percent say leaders in Congress should find a compromise to reduce the budget deficit, even if that means Democrats would need to accept targeted spending cuts to Social Security and Medicare, and that Republicans would need to accept targeted increases in tax rates.

By comparison, just 28 percent believe that leaders should stick to their traditional positions on the deficit – even if that means Congress goes over the fiscal cliff, triggering those automatic spending cuts and tax increases.

“There are hints of a thaw here, compared to previous data we’ve seen,” McInturff says.

Indeed, for the first time in the poll, a majority of Republicans (59 percent) want GOP leaders in the House and Senate to make compromises in order to gain consensus in the current budget debate.

Previously, in 2011, majorities of Republicans said they preferred GOP leaders to stick to their positions rather than make compromises.

And the percentage of Democrats who favor compromise on this question (70 percent) is now at an all-time high in the survey.

Who’s to blame if there isn’t a deal? Everyone

Yet the public is split – 48 percent of respondents are optimistic, and 48 percent are pessimistic – over whether Congress will be able to reach consensus to avoid the fiscal cliff. And another 69 percent believe that the next year on Capitol Hill will be marked by division and little willingness to compromise.

If there is no compromise on the fiscal cliff and the automatic tax increases and spending cuts go into effect at the beginning of next year, 24 percent say they will blame congressional Republicans more, while 19 percent will point the finger at Obama and congressional Democrats.

But a majority of respondents (56 percent) say they’ll blame both sides equally.

Still, twice as many Americans say they trust the president more in handling this fiscal situation (38 percent) than House Speaker John Boehner and the congressional Republicans (19 percent).

And significant majorities believe Obama holds a clear mandate from the election on issues related to this subject:

• 68 percent say he has a mandate on cutting taxes for families earning less than $250,000 per year
• 65 percent say he has a mandate on reducing the deficit by both increasing taxes on the wealthy and reducing federal spending
• And 59 percent say he has a mandate on eliminating the Bush-era tax cuts for household income over $250,000 a year.

Obama’s lift vs. the GOP’s decline

Speaking of Obama, the poll shows an uptick in his numbers after his victory in last month’s presidential election.

Fifty-three percent of adults approve of his overall job performance, and 49 percent approve of his handling of the economy – higher marks on these questions than at any time during the 2012 campaign.

Another 53 percent say they feel either “optimistic and confident” or “satisfied and hopeful” Obama will do a good job as president, which is up three points from Oct. 2012.

“Any president has a little bit of a lift heading into the first few months of any new term in office,” McInturff, the GOP pollster, says.

But if Obama is getting a lift after the election, the Republican Party is seeing a further decline.

The GOP’s favorable/unfavorable rating in the poll now stands at 30 percent/45 percent (minus-15 points), which is down from 36 percent/43 percent (minus-7) right before the election.

That’s compared with the Democratic Party’s 44 percent/35 percent rating (plus-9 points).

What’s more, asked to give a word or short phrase to describe the Republican Party, 65 percent offered a negative comment, including more than half of Republicans.

Some of the responses: “Bad,” “weak,” “negative,” “uncompromising,” “need to work together,” “broken,” “disorganized” and “lost.”

By contrast, 37 percent gave negative descriptions of the Democratic Party, while 35 percent were positive.

“Republicans have gone off the image cliff,” says Hart, the Democratic pollster.

“Elections have consequences,” McInturff adds about the GOP. “And among those consequences is the cost of losing.”

The consequences of losing also exist for Romney, whom Obama defeated in November.

Romney’s favorable/unfavorable rating in the poll is 35 percent/44 percent (minus-9 points), down from his 43 percent/44 percent score (minus-1) before the election. Much of that drop comes from Republicans and conservatives. 

Majority supports same-sex marriage

Finally, for the first time ever in the NBC/WSJ poll, a majority of respondents – 51 percent – support same-sex marriage.

That percentage in support is up from 30 percent in 2004, 41 percent in 2009 and 49 percent in March 2012, demonstrating how quickly public opinion on this issue has changed in just eight years.

The NBC/WSJ poll was conducted Dec. 6-9 of 1,000 adults (including 300 cell phone-only respondents), and it has an overall margin of error of plus-minus 3.1 percentage points.

It's a voting bloc as big as Hispanics, 18- to 24-year-olds and the staunchest pro-lifers, and it broke for the Democratic presidential nominee by a margin of 44 points. 

"Religiously Unaffiliated Voters For Obama" doesn't really have a bumper-sticker catchiness to it, but it rang true in 2012. 

Larry Downing / Reuters

President Barack Obama acknowledges supporters while addressing his election night victory rally in Chicago, November 6, 2012.

Voters who say they don't have a specific affiliation with a particular religion -- increasingly referred to with the minimalist moniker "the nones" --  made up 12 percent of the electorate in 2012 and 2008, a share that has more than doubled since 1980 and is up by 3 percent since 2000. Even more, 17 percent of 2012 voters said they never attend church. 

Pew study: 'Nones' on the rise

"This is a big group, it's a growing group, and it's politically a pretty important and consequential group in that the religiously unaffiliated are one of the strongest Democratic constituencies in the population," said Greg Smith, senior researcher at the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion and Public Life. 

And there are many more who haven't shown up to the polls. In a new study, Pew found that in 2012, nearly one in five survey respondents nationwide classified themselves as "atheist," "agnostic" or "nothing in particular." 

All of that adds up to a substantial chunk of the American public in a country that just nominated (but didn't elect) its first non-Protestant presidential ticket this year. The unaffiliated bloc is comparable with the share of the electorate made up by either black or Hispanic voters. They make up nearly a quarter of Democratic or Democratic-leaning voters. In 2008, they were as reliable a constituency for Barack Obama as white evangelical Protestants were for John McCain.

That's not to say that the Democratic Party has gone out of its way to court them. 

Lauren Anderson Youngblood, spokesperson for the Secular Coalition for America -- which lobbies on behalf of atheists, agnostics and other "nontheistic" citizens -- says that Democrats have been, at best, confused about how to reach out to non-believers, if not completely dismissive of the "nones" as a group. 

"If you want to reach out to someone, you will. If you want to work for their vote, you will," she said. "We're still a very stigmatized community that people don't necessary want to be associated with because the word 'atheist' has all of these negative connotations." 

Broderick Johnson, a senior adviser to the Obama campaign who concentrated on outreach to Catholics, said that while the campaign concentrated on messages of societal values that may appeal to unaffiliated voters, there was not a specific effort to court them as a unique constituency during the 2012 race. 

"I don't know of an effort which was predicated on the idea that there was a large group of people who are unaffiliated with any particular religion, and the way to them was to talk about a certain set of issues," he said. 

Data show that these voters' liberal affiliation comes primarily from social issues, like LGBT and abortion rights. Socially liberal but divided on issues of government and public life, religiously unaffiliated voters are far more likely than the general public to embrace same-sex marriage and to believe that all abortions should be legal.  

But at the same time, half of them also say that they prefer a smaller federal government that provides fewer public services. One in five calls their political ideology "conservative," and another 40 percent describe themselves as "moderate." 

"That segment really feels ignored," Youngblood said. "This is viewed as a very liberal movement, but there is also a segment that would identify as Republicans if it weren't for a lot of these social issues. It's really the intermingling of religion and government that's turning nontheistic Americans and religiously unaffiliated Americans off from the Republican Party." 

The formal institutions of secular thought aren't exactly over the moon with the current president, either. While it clearly favored Obama over Romney, the Secular Coalition for America gave Obama an overall "C" grade in its presidential "election scorecard" this year, with failing marks for the categories of "Discrimination by religious organizations receiving taxpayer funding" and "Role of religion in decision making as president." 

Those grievances reflect one of the common threads that link the "nones," even those who say they believe in God in some form: a distrust of institutionalized religion's exertion of political influence. 

Fully two-thirds of the group said that churches and other faith-based organizations are too involved in politics, and 70 percent say that religious institutions are "too concerned with money and power." 

Of course, money and power -- or at least the organizational structures that foster it -- are what make faith groups like evangelical Christians and Catholics ripe for targeting by campaigns that can gather data from churches about potential voters, plugging into the vast communication networks that unite congregants.

That's one advantage that unaffiliated voters, who have little formal structure outside of groups like the Secular Coalition, don't have. 

"It's hard to know how, organizationally, they might be reached or mobilized, " Smith said. "That's the question." 

As the Obama White House and Congress negotiate to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff, nearly two-thirds of Americans say they favor a balanced deal to reduce the deficit -- consisting of both higher tax rates and cuts to key entitlement programs.

According to the latest national NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, 65 percent say congressional leaders should make compromises to deal with the budget deficit, even if that means Democrats would need to accept targeted spending cuts to Social Security and Medicare, and that Republicans would need to accept targeted increases in tax rates.

Getty Images

President Barack Obama speaks about the economy at the Daimler Detroit Diesel engine plant Dec. 10, 2012 in Redford, Mi.
Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, walks to the House chamber to speak on the pending fiscal cliff negotiations Dec. 11, 2012 in Washington.

That includes 68 percent of Democrats, 66 percent of Republicans and 56 percent of political independents who support this position.

By comparison, just 28 percent believe leaders should stick to their traditional positions on the budget deficit, even if that means Congress goes over the fiscal cliff, triggering the automatic spending cuts and tax increases that are set to take place at the beginning of the year if Congress is unable to reach an agreement.

The full NBC/WSJ poll -- which was conducted of 1,000 adults from Dec. 6-9 and has a margin of error of plus-minus 3.1 percentage points -- will be released at 6:30 pm ET.

This particular question has margin of error of plus-minus 4.4 percentage points.

House Speaker John Boehner said Wednesday that "serious differences" continue to separate Republicans from President Barack Obama on work toward resolving the impending "fiscal cliff" at the end of this month.

Speaking this morning on Capitol Hill, the Ohio Republican said that his conversation Tuesday with Obama was "open and honest," but that a new proposal put forth by the White House could not muster enough support to pass through Congress.

"The president and I had a deliberate call yesterday and we spoke openly about the differences we face," Boehner told reporters following a meeting with fellow Republicans. "The president has called for $1.4 trillion dollars in revenue, that cannot pass the House or the Senate."

Two sources familiar with the Obama-Boehner call yesterday described it to NBC News as a "tense" conversation. Amid dueling, new proposals, Boehner proposed a permanent extension of existing tax rates for the wealthy, a Democratic source familiar with the call told NBC's Kristen Welker.

J. Scott Applewhite / AP

House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio, who spoke with President Barack Obama yesterday, arrives for a closed-door meeting with the GOP caucus, Wednesday, Dec. 12, 2012, on Capitol Hill in Washington.

Sources confirmed Tuesday that the administration's new offer included $1.4 trillion in new revenue and $600 billion in spending cuts -- slightly less revenue and slightly more cuts than Obama had initially proposed.

The level of spending cuts and the method of raising new revenue -- along with the manner in which savings might be found in entitlement programs -- have confounded lawmakers and the White House for the better part of the last two years. Obama has insisted that higher tax rates for the wealthy, a priority on which he campaigned, are essential to a final deal. Republicans argue that enough revenue can be raised through the elimination of tax loopholes and deductions.

Still, Boehner did try to publicly project some optimism as to whether a deal could be reached before the end of the year, when the automatic tax hikes and spending cuts that constitute the fiscal cliff are set to take effect. He counseled lawmakers to plan carefully around the holidays and to expect to return to work shortly after Christmas.

"Listen I was born with a glass half full, I remain the most optimistic person in this town but we got some serious differences," he said.

NBC's Kristen Welker and Luke Russert contributed reporting.

Fiscal talks: one step forward, two steps back… Cautiously optimistic vs. cautiously pessimistic… It’s NBC/WSJ poll day!!!... What does labor do now after Michigan passes right-to-work legislation into law?... And Haley narrows down her appointment list to five names.

Bill Pugliano / Getty Images

President Barack Obama speaks about the economy at the Daimler Detroit Diesel engine plant Dec. 10, 2012 in Redford, Mi.

*** One step forward, two steps back: That’s probably the best way to view what has transpired in the fiscal negotiations between President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner over the past 72 hours. The step forward: Sunday’s meeting between the two men. The two steps back: yesterday’s news of dueling counteroffers, which really didn’t go anywhere. On Monday, the White House sent over a proposal that lowered its revenue target from $1.6 trillion to $1.4 trillion, NBC’s Luke Russert confirms. The White House also reportedly threw in increasing spending cuts from $400 billion to $600 billion, as well as a promise to achieve corporate-tax reform. Yet that counteroffer is what prompted Boehner to take to the House floor. “Where are the president’s spending cuts?” Boehner asked, per the Washington Post. “The longer the White House slow-walks this process, the closer our economy gets to the fiscal cliff.” Then Boehner’s side made its counterproposal, which essentially was the same as its original proposal -- $800 billion in revenue. That was their way of telling the White House, “We’re not impressed with your counteroffer.”

*** Cautiously optimistic vs. cautiously pessimistic: So where do things stand? We saw a little bit of negotiating movement, but not nearly what either side thinks it needs to begin feeling that real progress was made. That’s the bad news. The good news that is both sides are still talking (Obama still spoke by phone with Boehner last night). More importantly, neither side is PUBLICLY trashing the specifics of either proposal. If that happens, then you know things are bad. Talk to insiders involved in the talks and you get this sense: The White House is cautiously optimistic about a deal, while House Republicans are cautiously pessimistic. So we still have a ways to go. Meanwhile, for his part, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is also calling on the White House to focus on spending cuts as much as the taxes. "The president seems to think that if all he talks about are taxes, and that's all reporters write about, somehow the rest of us will magically forget that government spending is completely out of control, and that he himself has been insisting on balance," he said, per the AP.

*** NBC/WSJ poll day! What does the American public think of the fiscal-cliff negotiations? Does it want higher tax rates on the wealthy, more spending cuts, or both? Also, what are Americans thoughts about President Obama one month after his re-election? And how do they view Mitt Romney and the Republican Party? For the answers to these questions, tune into NBC’s “Nightly News” -- or click on to NBCNews.com -- beginning at 6:30 pm ET. By the way, here are two other polls that are out today. Washington Post/ABC poll: Voters are split, 47%-46% on how Obama’s handling the fiscal cliff negotiations, but they overwhelmingly disapprove Boehner’s handling them, 24%-54% disapprove. And Bloomberg: “President Barack Obama won the public argument over taxes so decisively that almost half of Republicans now say he has an election mandate to raise rates on the rich.”

*** What does labor do now? Here’s the Detroit News on yesterday’s action-packed day in Michigan: “Gov. Rick Snyder's signature Tuesday made Michigan the nation's 24th right-to-work state on a day both sides of the politically charged labor issue predicted would change the course of its history… Snyder's action capped a drama-filled day at the Capitol that put the birthplace of the modern labor movement in the national spotlight as an estimated 12,500 right-to-work advocates and protesters swarmed the capital.” A separate Detroit News piece notes that labor and its allies essentially have two options to overturn the new law. First, they have filed legal actions charging that the process violated the state’s Open Meetings Act. “Opponents said quick passage of the bills in the Legislature — outside the normal committee process and without public hearings — was unconstitutional because citizens didn't have a chance to weigh in.” Second, critics say they could overturn it by passing a voter-initiated law, which would require getting 258,000 signatures to get on the ballot. And, of course, there’s 2014, when Snyder is up for re-election.

*** Haley’s final five: NBC’s Ali Weinberg yesterday confirmed a report that South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) has whittled her list of possibilities to fill Sen. Jim DeMint’s Senate seat to these five candidates: Rep. Tim Scott, Rep. Trey Gowdy, former state Attorney General Henry McMaster, former South Carolina First Lady Jenny Sanford, and Catherine Templeton, who heads state Department of Health and Environmental Control. Among these five names, Scott has to be the odds-on favorite, while Jenny Sanford (!!!!) is the buzzy name. But don’t lose sight on McMaster, who quickly endorsed Haley after he failed to make the 2010 gubernatorial run-off. MSNBC’s Michael LaRosa reminds us that Jenny Sanford is no ordinary political spouse (or ex-spouse). “She has confronted the challenges of South Carolina's rough and tumble political world before, starting in 1994 when she managed her husband's upstart campaign for Congress proving to be the ultimate Cinderella story for a candidate and manager with no prior political experience. Jenny went on to manage Sanford's winning congressional and gubernatorial campaigns.”

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower

*** Wednesday’s “The Daily Rundown” line-up: DCCC Chair Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY) on the cliff clash… NBC's Meet the Press Moderator David Gregory and Executive Producer Betsy Fischer Martin on 65 years of history-making shows featured in a new e-book… Historian David Nasaw on his new book "The Patriarch" about Joe Kennedy Sr… Plus National Review's Robert Costa, USA Today's Jackie Kucinich, The Grio's Perry Bacon Jr. and Democratic pollster Margie Omero.

*** Wednesday’s “MSNBC Live with Thomas Roberts” line-up: MSNBC’s Thomas Roberts interviews former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL), chair of the SEIU’s Republican Advisory Cmte. Andy Potter, and Star Trek Star & gay activist George Takei. Today’s Power Panel includes:  TheGrio.com Managing Editor Joy-Ann Reid, The Nation Correspondent Ari Melber, and Republican strategist Alice Stewart.

*** Wednesday’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports” line-up: NBC’s Andrea Mitchell interviews Rep. Cathy McMorris Rogers (R-WA), Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), former Defense Department official Michele Flournoy, the Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza and Eugene Robinson, Director Oliver Stone, American University Associate Professor Peter Kuznick.

*** Wednesday’s “News Nation with Tamron Hall” line-up: MSNBC’s Tamron Hall interviews The Hill’s AB Stoddard, Dem strategist Keith Boykin, The Atlantic’s Molly Ball, Michael Smerconish and Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ).

The Detroit Free Press’ Riley: “History was an important task that somebody forgot to assign, so now there is a generation of young people -- and other not-so-young-people -- who don't belong to unions, don't know the union history and don't really care about what legislators are doing this week. Unions built the middle class. Unions improved the standard of living for workers. No one standing Tuesday at the state Capitol shouting at the top of his or her lungs about injustice and calling the governor a rat was talking enough about history or marketing the good work of unions.”

The Detroit Free Press editorial: “The two bills the state House dispatched to the governor Tuesday afternoon included an appropriation that innoculates them against a voter referendum. When he signed both bills into law hours later, Snyder completed a cynical charade that mocks the citizen choice he purports to champion.” It also calls what Snyder and Republicans did “cowardly” and “completely trashes the democratic process.”

It concludes: “Snyder's conceit is that he'll be inaugurating a new era in Michigan when he affixes his signature to the bills House Republicans approved Tuesday. But it's an era in which he'll have fewer options, and speak for a narrower, more partisan constituency than the one that elected him two years ago.”

On MSNBC’s Morning Joe, Snyder again blamed unions for going against his urging to push Proposal 2. “The discussion was going on and since it was getting louder, I decided to take a leadership” stance. “I don’t believe this is actually anti-union. … Unions have to step up to deliver value.”

Yesterday, Snyder was on MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports, in which he also laid the blame on labor, intimating that a grudge is at the center of his reversal. A year ago, Snyder said, “I don't think it's an appropriate subject for us to be dealing with today, because we have higher priorities that need to be addressed in our state.” And during his campaign, he said of right-to-work laws: "It is a divisive, polarizing issue that will drive people apart.”

He even told Congress just this year that despite some pushing the issue in the state, “My perspective is is that I’ve made it clear it’s not on my agenda. Right to work is an issue that’s a very divisive issue people feel very strongly about … I’m the relentless positive action person, so we have many problems in Michigan that are much more pressing that I can find common ground issues we can work together on before we get into divisive issues, and we’re showing great success. … Right to work is an issue that may have its place, but I don’t think it’s appropriate in Michigan in 2012.”

Is what’s behind Snyder’s reversal really that unions defied his advice and brought “right-to-work” on themselves, or is it something else? The Detroit Free Press reported last week: “Gov. Snyder's right-to-work initiative has the coordinated support of Americans for Prosperity, the conservative non-profit organization that funded Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's efforts to strip that state's public employee unions of their collective bargaining rights. AFP was founded by wealthy industrialists Charles and David Koch. Their business interests in Wisconsin include a branch of their pulp and paper giant Georgia-Pacific, a coal subsidiary, timber plants and a pipeline network.”

From an AFP press release: “Michigan passage of right-to-work legislation will be the shot heard around the world for workplace freedom," AFP said in a press release Thursday. "A victory over forced unionization in a union stronghold like Michigan would be an unprecedented win on par with Wisconsin that would pave the way for right to work in states across our nation."

Politico reports that labor unions “are eyeing a large-scale counteroffensive against the conservative state leaders who have slashed away at union power since the 2010 midterm elections. For national labor groups, the upcoming gubernatorial elections in 2013 and 2014 may be a greater test of their political swat than even the 2012 presidential race.”

Said AFL-CIO political director Michael Podhorzer: “We consider 2014 to be absolutely crucial. These are politicians who aren’t even listening to the results of the election. They have an agenda to not just destroy unions, but many of them go after immigrants. All of them go after voting rights. And giving them another four-year term is going to be horrific for the workers and citizens in those states.”

“President Obama and House Speaker John A. Boehner were struggling late Tuesday to prevent negotiations from breaking down after they traded dueling proposals for averting the year-end ‘fiscal cliff’ that made no progress toward an agreement,” the Washington Post writes. “Obama telephoned Boehner (R-Ohio) on Tuesday, hours after receiving the speaker’s latest proposal for a deal on taxes and spending. The offer was virtually identical to the document Obama summarily rejected just one week ago, according to Republican aides. Obama’s chief negotiator, Rob Nabors, later rushed to the Capitol to meet with Boehner’s top aides.”

Obama told ABC: "I'm pretty confident that Republicans would not hold middle class taxes hostage to trying to protect tax cuts for high-income individuals. I don't think they'll do that… I remain optimistic. I'd like to see a big package. But the most important thing we can do is make sure that middle class taxes do not go up on Jan. 1." He added, “The outlines, the framework of what a deal should look like are pretty straightforward."

More: "If the Republicans can move on that [taxes] then we are prepared to do some tough things on the spending side. Taxes are going to go up one way or another. And I think the key is that taxes go up on high-end individuals." He also left on the table the possibility of changes to Social Security and Medicare.

Republicans say they’re waiting for Obama to outline specific spending cuts. The White House says its waiting for Republicans to submit a deal that includes raising tax rates on the wealthiest.

Voters are split, 47%/46% on how Obama’s handling the fiscal cliff negotiations in a new Washington Post/ABC poll, but voters overwhelmingly disapprove of how Speaker John Boehner’s handling them -- 24% approve/54% disapprove.

Bloomberg: “President Barack Obama won the public argument over taxes so decisively that almost half of Republicans now say he has an election mandate to raise rates on the rich. Majorities of about 2-to-1 also read the election results as an endorsement of Obama’s pledge to protect Social Security and Medicare benefits, according to a Bloomberg National Poll of 1,000 adults conducted Dec. 7-10.”

Obama’s job approval is 53% in the poll, his highest since December 2009.

How much confusion is out there? Just look at these two headlines:

AP: “Fiscal cliff talks appear to be stalled.”

The Hill: “Both sides edging toward deal in deficit-reduction negotiations.”

Joe Biden pens an op-ed in the Kansas City Star on the need to extend the tax cuts for 98%.

Treasury is selling its shares of AIG bringing the government’s profit on the financial bailout to $22.7 billion.

Here’s the Obama administration’s PSA on housing.

Jimmy Carter thinks pot legalization is “OK.”

Obama’s special envoy to Sudan is stepping down.

The inaccurate quote on the MLK memorial will be removed.

Circulating on Capitol Hill… a letter from the National Taxpayers Union, signed by 180 economists, including two former OMB directors, Douglas Holtz-Eakin and Jim Miller, warning of "significant, lasting damage" if tax hikes are implemented as part of the fiscal cliff deal. It not only calls for no hike in marginal tax rates, even for the wealthiest, but also argues against other revenue. “[L]awmakers must resist other destructive proposals that would boost effective tax burdens, such as curtailing itemized deductions for higher earners or imposing discriminatory taxes on energy or other industries,” per the letter.

Here we go… On 12/12/12, “Republicans argued Tuesday that the Obama administration has not provided enough evidence that its $60.4 billion request in Hurricane Sandy aid is needed,” The Hill reports. Pushing this… Senators from Alabama (Sessions) and Arizona (Kyl). Neither state was impacted by the storm. And get this, echoing Eric Cantor’s call to offset tornado relief for his own district, by the way (!!!),House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers of Kentucky “has not said whether either bill would need to be offset by spending cuts elsewhere.”

Republican polling firm Resurgent Republic holds a news conference today at the National Press Club at 9:00 am ET to unveil the results of its latest poll, conducted with the Hispanic Leadership Network, an initiative of the conservative American Action Network. It points out: “Regardless of how they typically vote Hispanic voters say the Republican party does not respect the values and concerns of the Hispanic community by 51 to 44 percent in Florida, 54 to 40 percent in New Mexico, 59 to 35 percent in Nevada, and 63 to 30 percent in Colorado. The Democratic Party fares much better, with Hispanic voters saying the party does respect the values and concerns of Hispanic voters by 67 to 28 percent in Florida, 72 to 23 percent in New Mexico and Nevada, and 76 to 20 percent in Colorado. 

“Resolving these challenges is imperative if Republicans hope to remain a competitive force in national politics. The party offers an impressive cadre of Hispanic leaders, and an array of possible immigration reforms and other popular policy initiatives regarding education and small businesses and that are consistent with conservative principles. These four surveys also demonstrate the potential for Republican candidates in four very different Hispanic electorates, and the short and long-term steps that can improve Republicans’ standing in the Hispanic community. When asked a version of a generic ballot for president in 2016, the percentage of Hispanics who say they will likely for a Republican plus those who may vote for a Republican if they like the candidate and his policies surpasses 40 percent in all four states. “

Meanwhile, the Washington Post makes a point that one of us made last week in a look-back at what the Romney campaign did wrong – it paid higher advertising rates than the Obama camp did. The Post: “Obama and his allies spent less on advertising than Romney and his allies but got far more — in the number of ads broadcast, in visibility in key markets and in targeting critical demographic groups, such as the working class and younger voters in swing states. As the presidential race entered its final, furious phase, for example, millions of college football fans tuning in to televised games saw repeated ads for Obama but relatively few from the Romney campaign.”

While the mood may be icy when it comes to political sparring in Washington, there was a warm bit of good cheer in the U.S. Senate.  Minnesota's Sen. Al Franken, inspired by an old grade school tradition from his childhood, organized a Secret Santa gift exchange again this year.  The parties regularly tangle over government spending, but the senators did agree to a $10 spending cap for gifts. 

Aides say a bipartisan group of 60 senators participated by picking names, mostly across the aisle, keeping those identities secret and then delivering small presents at a gathering over eggnog and seasonal treats Monday night.

Frank Fey / U.S. Senate Photographic Studio

Sen. Al Franken, right, speaks with colleagues during the gift exchange.

Not just any fruitcake was served -- the Senate kitchen began making fruitcake a few months ago, giving the brandy enough time to soak the cake.  Due to fog that delayed some flights and therefore postponed Senate votes, some members were not able to attend the Monday party but were spotted exchanging wrapped gifts on the Senate floor late Tuesday.

Among the gifts given and received:

• Sen. Franken received a VHS copy of the movie "Tunnel Vision" and a DVD of  "Harvard Beats Yale 29-29" from Wyoming Republican Sen. John Barasso.
• Franken, in turn, gave Arkansas Republican Sen. John Boozman a mahnomin porridge kit from Hell's Kitchen, a popular restaurant in Minneapolis. Sen. Franken serves that breakfast porridge at his weekly breakfast with constituents.
• Florida Republican Marco Rubio gave Godiva chocolates to Delaware Democrat Chris Coons. 
• North Carolina Democrat Kay Hagan gave her state's famed peanuts to fellow Democrat Bob Casey of Pennsylvania.
• New Hampshire Republican Kelly Ayotte gave Hagan a book, "1,001 Gardens you Should See Before You Die."
• Wyoming's Mike Enzi, R-WI, gave Virginia Democrat Mark Warner a George Washington University T-shirt and a book on bicycling.  Aides say Enzi "refrained from getting him a book on freestyle BMX tricks because of the safety issues Sen. Enzi works on."
• Alaska Democrat Mark Begich presented a cookbook and wine from his home state to Missouri's Claire McCaskill.
• Nebraska Republican Mike Johanns gave Nebraska wine to Florida Democrat Bill Nelson.
• Johanns received a shirt for his undergraduate alma mater, St. Mary's University, from Minnesota Democrat Amy Klobuchar.
• Montana Democrat Jon Tester gave home state chocolates to Ohio Republican Rob Portman.
• Portman gave Louisiana's Mary Landrieu a Cincinnati favorite, Graeter's Buckeye Blitz ice cream.
• Arkansas Republican John Boozman gave Georgia's Saxby Chambliss Mason jar wine glasses.

In 2011, the participation was a bit better, with 62 senators exchanging gifts. This year, with much year-end business left to complete, senators may spend more of the holiday season together as the “fiscal cliff” looms.