Tag Archives: Mitt Romney

The Day After…

Screen Shot 2012-11-08 at 12.50.27 AM

Well, we lost.  Mitt Romney didn’t win comfortably.  BUT, Republicans maintained control of the House of Representatives.  In one of the most ignominious highlights of the night, the GOP lost two senate seats – increasing the Democratic majority by two.  The current makeup is 55 Democrats to 45 Republicans.  In a milestone for the ladies, 20% of the U.S. Senate will be represented by women.  However, the night ended a bit like 2004 in reverse.

While the notions of GOP turnout seemed assured, it was rarely monitored, and turnout for the youth (and voter turnout in general) was unexpectedly high.  To no one’s surprise, young voters broke for the president (60-36), but represented a larger share of the electorate than four years ago.  Romney’s lead amongst independents wasn’t enough to overcome the Latino vote, which he lost to Obama miserably 72%-23%.  Lastly, Romney wasn’t able to cut into the gender gap quite as effectively as he wanted to, with the president winning women, overall, by eleven points.  However, it’s with unmarried women that Romney had a fatal disadvantage with, as they broke for Obama 67% to 31%.

On states, betting on Pennsylvania proved to another catastrophic play.  We haven’t won the Keystone State in almost a quarter century, and it may be time to part company completely.  Concerning Wisconsin, the state may have swung right on recent elections, but perhaps the ‘fairness voters’ – voters who may not agree with Walker’s policies, but are appalled that unions would want to revoke an election result – turned out to vote for the president this time.  In Ohio and Virginia, Romney’s failure to execute the war on coal narrative sooner, and formulating a response to the Bain ads, contributed to his defeat.

Without a doubt, the Bain ads – the Obama campaign’s first official salvo in their ‘Kill Romney’ strategy –  released right after Mitt unofficially clinched the Republican nomination resonated with Buckeye residents, and shame on the Governor’s communications team, who were on the defensive for most of the election cycle.  In short, like with Goldwater in ’64, the Obama campaign was able to define Romney – before Romney could define himself.  It’s another costly misfire.

However, I truly feel that Mitt Romney ran a good campaign, and did the best he could’ve with what he had regarding resources.  It’s hard to be successful when you don’t have a Karl Rove, James Carville, or David Plouffe on your side.  It also hurt that he couldn’t run on health care, since Romneycare served as the blue print for one of the most egregious affronts to the constitution since the Alien and Sedition Acts of the Adams administration.

Yet, if you looked at the field from the beginning, It was either going to be Mitt Romney or Rick Perry fighting for the nomination.  Newt and Cain treated this serious event in American politics with the maturity of eight year olds at a lemonade stand – with the lemonade being books.  For many Americans, Michele Bachmann failed the threshold question of any presidential candidate, which is do I trust this person with nuclear weapons?  Disgraced former Pennsylvanian Senator Rick Santorum failed the conservative test, in my opinion, by voting for Medicare Part D, which added $ 7 trillion to the unfunded liability of the program. That’s 20% of the entire unfunded liability, which we now have to deal with before the fiscal cliff.  He voted for Sonia Sotomayor for circuit judge. Santo voted against National Right to Work, Food Stamp reform, a flat tax, and Medicaid reform.  He voted for internet taxes, the unionization of FedEx (twice), and No Child Left Behind.  He took that one for the team.

Rick Perry, my choice for president, flamed out in one of the most epic derailments we’ve probably seen in a long time.  Jon Huntsman was too moderate.  Ron Paul was well, Ron Paul. So, we were left with Mitt Romney.  Sometimes the pickings of the field aren’t too stellar, and we have to deal with that.

Again, I don’t blame Romney for the loss.  Yes, Obama’s record of economic pain, which he has inflicted without mercy on the American people, is long, but his political team, along with the media, were able to spin it just enough to trivialize the fallout.  As Ralph Reed, Founder and former Executive Director for the Faith and Freedom Coalition, said at CPAC 2012 last February – we’re about to face “the meanest, toughest, most vicious political team we’ve ever faced.”  He was right, and we paid dearly for it.

Given Obama’s record, and Republicans’ inability to defeat him, it begs the question if the GOP should have any business being in American politics.  Yes, they still do, but renovations need to be made.  We need to do better with women – cough nix the rape talk cough cough – hispanics, and younger voters.  The hispanic vote ruined the California GOP back in 1994 when Prop. 187 established a citizenship screening process and barred illegals from using state services was construed as ‘anti-immigrant.’  It was really protecting the territorial integrity of the United States, a core function of a nation in the international system, but that’s a different debate. Regardless, it was the straw that broke the camel’s back, and California Republicans have been in the bunker ever since.

We need to find ways to protect our sovereign soil, but in a way that doesn’t come off as nativist.  Hispanics are hard-workers, religious, and pro-traditional marriage.  Or, at least, that’s what was the conventional wisdom at the time.  Heather MacDonald posted on National Review yesterday that:

a March 2011 poll by Moore Information found that Republican economic policies were a stronger turn-off for Hispanic voters in California than Republican positions on illegal immigration. Twenty-nine percent of Hispanic voters were suspicious of the Republican party on class-warfare grounds — “it favors only the rich”; “Republicans are selfish and out for themselves”; “Republicans don’t represent the average person”– compared with 7 percent who objected to Republican immigration stances.

spoke last year with John Echeveste, founder of the oldest Latino marketing firm in southern California, about Hispanic politics. “What Republicans mean by ‘family values’ and what Hispanics mean are two completely different things,” he said. “We are a very compassionate people, we care about other people and understand that government has a role to play in helping people.”

So, despite Mitt’s shaky conservative credentials, without a doubt, he’s the most hard-lined presidential candidate on immigration we’ve had in the past ten years – and that didn’t hurt him with these voters.  Bain, on the other hand, probably didn’t help.

Nevertheless, I’m not saying we should be for amnesty.  We shouldn’t be.  Amnesty is unfair and unethical – as is the president’s Dream Act light, which requires illegals to bribe the government $465 from doing it’s job enforcing federal law.  However, what 2012 should show all conservatives is that our coalition, which to Paul Krugman’s chagrin truly represents the ‘Real America,’ is static.  It’s more rural, blue collar, and white.  That’s not enough to win elections.  We need to improve outreach with minorities and venture back into the cities, or places where the people are, to make these contests competitive again.  George W. Bush won 44% of the Latino vote in 2004, with increased majorities in the House and Senate.  It’s not impossible. But it’ll be very difficult trying to chip away at the government’s “role in helping people,” which in Democrat speak for getting these people so dependent on us as possible, so they’re a lock when Election Day arrives.

Concerning the ladies, we need to exert a little more discretion when we talk about rape.  While the Democratic National Convention could’ve been Abortion Fest 2012,the senate races in this cycle should have been more appropriately called Rape Fest.  It’s odd that we even have to mention this, and some blame the Tea Party for these mishaps. I don’t.  The Tea Party is the heart and soul of the Republican Party.  As George Will once noted, they’re the best thing to happen in American politics since the Goldwater insurgency.  Republicans would not be where they are now without the Tea Party, but that does not mean we should accept every one of their primary victors as serious candidates.

As Tucker Carlson and Neil Patel wrote in The Daily Caller yesterday:

The tea party believes the GOP establishment is ideologically corrupt. They’re right. But replacing the current leadership with obviously unqualified buffoons is no remedy. Republicans have lost at least five winnable Senate races in the last two cycles because they fielded candidates whose only real qualification was being anti-establishment. Many will argue the GOP can only win going forward with more liberal candidates. That’s not true. But the genuine conservatives they find will have to come with political skills, policy smarts and impressive resumes in order to get elected.

The sad truth is that even if the Republican Party did all this — sent its current leaders home and stopped nominating losers — it still wouldn’t be enough. The country is changing too fast. Most people have the sense that America is different demographically from what it was 20 years ago. But unless they’ve been reading the latest census data, they have no real idea. The changes are that profound. They’re also permanent and likely to accelerate. In order to remain competitive outside Utah, the GOP will have to win new voters, and soon.

That’s the Republican reformation plan, Stage B. They may get there. First they’ll have to tackle the basics, like finding fresh leadership and candidates who aren’t embarrassing.

That will take some serious vetting.  Furthermore, we’re Republicans.  We’re pro-life, and the American people know that about our movement.  In elections centered on the economy, you can easily pivot away from such issues.  Sadly, some of our fellow party members couldn’t help themselves, they shot their mouths off, and got trounced.  There is much intra-party work to do – and it starts now.

Meanwhile, a divided America exists and the government we elected is representative of that partisanship.  Michael Barone wrote also wrote in National Review that Americans on the right, and the others of the left, are no longer becoming culturally cohesive.

Ronald Reagan, speaking the language of the old, universal popular culture, could appeal to both Americas. His successors, not so much. Barack Obama, after an auspicious start, has failed to do so.

As a result, there are going to be many Americans profoundly unhappy with the result of this election, whichever way it goes. Those on the losing side will be especially angry with those whose candidate won.

Americans have faced this before. This has been a culturally diverse land from its colonial beginnings. The mid-20th-century cultural cohesiveness was the exception, not the rule.

We used to get along by leaving each other alone. The Founders established a limited government, neutral on religion, allowing states, localities, and voluntary associations to do much of society’s work. Even that didn’t always work: We had a Civil War.

An enlarged federal government didn’t divide mid-20th-century Americans, except on civil-rights issues. Otherwise, there was general agreement about the values government should foster.

Now the two Americas disagree, sharply. Government decisions enthuse one and enrage the other. The election may be over, but the two Americas are still not on speaking terms.

It’s sort of like this exchange between President Bartlet and Governor Ritchie.

Right now, Obama is in a good position to increases taxes, which will happen when Obamacare’s fully implemented in 2014, nominate SCOTUS appointments, which threaten to curtail our constitutional rights, and to continue this destructive surge in government spending that only shackles people to the will of the state through dependency.  It’s up to House Republicans to obstruct Democratic plans, and put forward a deluge of alternatives of their own. Granted, we won’t be able to filibuster Supreme Court appointments, but this president’s agenda, and that of the Democrats, is inherently dangerous to the socioeconomic fabric of the country and we must fight them all the way.  Concerning the fiscal cliff, maybe compromise can be reached.  Yet, we should also remember that compromise is how we got Medicare Part D, No Child Left Behind, and the first round of federal stimulus under the Bush administration.  Policies that attributed to the near collapse of the conservative movement in this country.

I’m pessimistic that a deal will be reached.  This president’s ego would bust the marble in the Capitol dome – and he exuded poor presidential leadership as described in Bob Woodward’s new book The Price of Politics.  Yet, Mr. Will again reminds us that throughout the course of American history there is not a single thing that the American people wanted intensely and protractedly that they did not eventually get from the federal government.

Why Obama’s Election Win Did Not Defeat Conservative America

John House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) discusses how President Obama must deal with fiscal cliff facing the nation

What happened? What happened in America on November 6th in reelecting Barack Obama to a second term was not indicative of how wrong conservative America is in standing up for principles. Instead, the result displayed how far left the mainstream media and the nation’s achievement challenged liberal president has performed.

Obama convinced the country to accept the notion that the America values was based on how much it could give away to targeted groups with welfare checks without work requirements. He increased food stamps to 47 million Americans and handed out education and housing vouchers to illegal immigrants, as well as gay marriage protection against federal laws that prohibit it.

The liberal pundits and mainstream media gotcha specialists have been pontificating about the Romney loss to the hate and revenge president. There are plenty of liberals and even some republican moderates in the media who have been wagging their fingers at conservatives and the Tea Party for not being more moderate in their views about abortion, illegal immigration and adding more crushing debt to the nation’s families.

In fact, conservatives did not lose this election, because in the end, they demonstrated to the nation that America does have a truly bona fide conservative movement in this country. This conservative movement is made up of the 57,588,360 plus voters who on November 6th did not compromise its values to meet the president’s liberal agenda. It will not support a president who engages in solutions which strip the nation of its sovereignty and diminish the founding conservative values and biblical principles.

What occurred in America on November 6th was the drawing of a true line in the sand. This line’s firmness is based upon conservatives and Tea Party supporters who categorically refuse to let themselves be swept away in a tidal wave of false security. These are patriots who will not accept deception from a president who believes that it is better to place a lie before the truth, and embrace character assassination instead of displaying presidential integrity.

What the nation and the world witnessed is quite clear. A community organizer from Chicago armed with the street tools he perfected from socialist Saul Alinsky’s teachings could manipulate the media and obscure the truth. This same president could even cover up the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya and lie with the full cooperation of CBS’s 60 Minutes. Worse yet, the media let him get away with it until Election Day.

So did Obama and the millions of Americans who believe that fictional accomplishments will somehow magically prevent the crushing debt from destroying their lives and their children’s future really not happen? Will the soul wrenching unemployment rate of 15 percent and more for black Americans and close to 50 percent among black teens suddenly disappear?

What about the Hispanic voters, who decided that a supporting more jobs and legal immigration was less important than supporting illegal aliens who are breaking the immigration laws of this nation. Did they embrace sticking their hands out for government handouts is an acceptable path to becoming an American?

The truth is simple. Liberals Americans believe that hope and change means that they hope that conservatives will change to adopt and embrace their failed presidential candidate’s principles. Liberal media pundits and reporters believe that conservatives should just morph into valueless citizens who are willing to embrace incompetence in Obama’s governance as the best Americans should expect.

This nation is only as great and as enduring as its people neither is unwilling to witness nor permit the undoing of those sacred principles that America’s fore fathers held dear. Conservatives did not lose an election. The 57.8 million plus voters represent 57.8 million starting points for protecting the lives of millions of unborn babies from becoming victims of abortion.

The 57.8 million conservative voters are a beginning rally point to reach out and find one more patriot. This is a starting point to put aside any disappointment over and election and instead recognize this is a war for the nation’s future. A battle was lost, but not the war to protect children from a president Obama, from increasing his goal of taxing as a moral mandate and spending away America’ future. Conservatives can help Obama from continuing to redefine America into becoming a socialist state of America.

Election night, President Obama gave another telling statement about what he considers an olive branch to the conservative side of the political divide. He said, “We are in this together. That’s how we campaigned and that is who we are?”

Mr. President, conservatives, Tea Party Patriots did not campaign to fortify an administration that plunged the country’s financial ratings into the fiscal toilet. Conservatives are not part of your simplistic “that is who we are” ideal of America.

No, Mr. President, “we” are not in this mess that you created together. You created more joblessness, you handed out more food stamps, and you demonized Republicans, and Mitt Romney, because you could, and because the mainstream media willingly cooperated.

Now, Mr. President Obama, let’s see how well your Chicago thuggish tactics actually help Americans to survive in a nation adrift from its founding values. Will you create 12 million jobs and a debt-free future which your lack of job creation experience and ability has saddled the nation with?

Conservative America, this point in history shall too pass, but today marks the beginning of a newer more firm change in America. With the hand of the Creator which guided the nation’s fore fathers, America will begin again. An election will not unravel the will of America’s founding values. Nor can a narcissist leader and administration cause those of faith to bend to his delusional edicts.

As Alexander Hamilton, a founding father of America eloquently pointed out,
“The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the Hand of Divinity itself, and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.”

Obama’s win was a win for a mortal man who believes his “rock star status” elevates him among all mortals. But he is still mortal, despite his belief. What happened in America on Election Day, makes November 7th day one for a stronger more determined conservative movement. Each day, will bring conservatives and America to a more vital and more perfect union that is one nation under God.                   (  Click – Let me know what you think )

Conservatives- It’s Time to Stand Up

There are a lot of different factions being blamed for Mitt Romney’s loss last night- the media, voter intimidation, fraud, the Tea Party.

None of these is the real reason. The right wing continues to lose because we continue to care about what other people think about our identity. Pundits say we’re racists, we push Marco Rubio and Mia Love to the front of the party. Pundits say we’re too extreme, we run a moderate in an attempt to assuage independent voters.

When are we on the right going to stop worrying about public opinion? As long as we allow others to define our party’s image and message, and focus on identity politics and not message, we are going to lose. And deserve to.

Time after time, we run moderate candidate after moderate candidate, arguing we’ll appeal to more people.

And does it work?

No. Not only did Mitt Romney lose last night, but nearly every conservative running for Congress, except for Michele Bachmann, was defeated.

People had a hard time believing Romney as a person? No wonder. He was running as a conservative, a moderate, and a centrist. He can’t really hold all of those positions. Of course he’s going to come off as fake.

And the idea that conservatives can’t win because of their religious social positions is absurd.

Exactly how is making no exception for rape or incest any more extreme than believing in partial birth abortion, or late term abortion? It’s not. They’re both legitimate arguments. Yet, Barack Obama supports third trimester abortions, and no one screams about how evil he is.

The only reason this is an issue is because of fear mongering from the media.

As Barack Obama stated in his race against John McCain, when you can’t run on a record, you make issues out of nonissues. Sound familiar?

And yet, the main stream media is continuing to spin the race. MSNBC started talking about how the evil right wing gun nuts were going to rise up against Obama even before the results had finished coming in.

Enough of the rhetoric. Our silence, and our willingness to let these pundits frame political talking points, is only making this worse. It’s also helping us lose elections. How much time did we spend talking about social issues instead of the economy?

Conservatives- it’s time to stand up and say enough. It’s time to stop letting others define our values. It’s time to stop being distracted by racial, gender and class politics.

It’s the only way we can win.

 

 

Virginia Black Pastors target Romney with racist religious brochure for Obama

Mitt Romney greets workers at call center on November 6, 2012 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Just when you think that you may have seen it all, this time it is black racism which rears its ugly head to target Romney’s religion with hate literature. It has been reported that a group of African American pastors in Virginia have aligned themselves with the same politics of hate and revenge that Obama called for on Friday in a campaign stop in Ohio.

The pastors, who have formed a group called, “Greater Hampton Roads Christian Leadership Conference,” have decided to use deception and racism to scare their parishioners to vote for president Obama.  They developed a brochure to compare Obama’s alleged religious practices with their lies and misconception of what Mitt Romney’s Mormon beliefs are.

The lies and innuendos are obviously false on their face, but the true point is that these pastors and their leader Rev. Lin Hill had no intention on presenting the truth.  In fact, if they had done the same amount of research that a fifth grader would have been expected to do, the truth would have been easy to find.

Rev. Lin’s purpose was apparently darker, more sinister in design, because by waiting until the last minute to circulate 100,000 copies of  his amateurish literature, he hoped to push black voters to the polls through hate. So this religious leader of the 2,500 member Bethany Baptist Church in Chesapeake, Va., circulated a lie, which is against his own Christian faith.

The only reasonable conclusion that can be conferred on his conduct is that he studied his theology of hate and lies from the same gospel book of Obama’s own religious mentor Rev. Jeremiah Wright who told his congregation in 2003,  “God Bless America.’ No, no, no, God damn America!”

One has to ask, is this the shepherd of God that Rev. Lin is following and wants to emulate?  If so, it is indeed tragic that he and his fellow ministers would denigrate their hallowed office of the church.  How can their parishioners seriously consider these fallen men of the cloth true followers of the teachings of Christ, when they find solace in spreading rumors of hate and racism against another human being?  Is their commitment to hate and division so important to their politics of supporting  Obama, to throw their commitment to God under the bus?

America has come to expect this type of behavior from president Obama.  His campaign has been riddled with advertisements which bombarded the nation’s living rooms with character assassination attack ads against Mitt Romney.  Last Friday, America witnessed Obama calling out in frustration and desperation to rally his supporters to go to the polls with revenge and hate in their hearts.  Gold star from Satan for Obama.

But, why did Rev. Lin and the others sink to the Chicago-style gutter level of Obama’s brand of politics?  It appears that it was easy, it was convenient and Rev. Lin, like Obama, did not care to present the truth, when a lie would serve their purpose.

What are the parishioners of his church and the black 100,000 voters in the Chesapeake, Va., suppose to think?  Do they feel it is perfectly acceptable to accept the practices of vile deceit instead of religious truth from their leaders of faith?  One would think and hope not.  Truth is the only acceptable behavior that must be presented to their flocks of God.  Only followers of Satan would embrace a lie over the truth and deceit over honesty.

The outcome of the presidential race shall soon be a memory in the annuals of political campaigns, but the callous deceitful practices of this collection of misguided pastors should be resolved.  The Mormon Church and Mitt Romney deserve better from these alleged pastors of faith.

They should have taken a cue from the highly admired international evangelist Rev. Billy Graham.  He does not regard Romney’s faith a cult, because it is not.  In fact, the majority of the evangelical leaders and members of the Christian faith have followed Rev. Graham’s lead.

The deceptive practices of  the likes of Rev. Lin and his circle of pastor supporters should serve as a warning sign for America.  Nearly, fifty years ago, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. offered the nation a universal teaching based upon the religious foundation of brotherhood, love, fellowship and mutual honesty.

Fifty years ago, Mitt Romney’s father, then Governor of Michigan worked with religious leaders and civil rights leaders to stand up for freedom for all of God’s people.  He walked in civil rights marches with Rev. King.  Yes, he was a Mormon and he was a follower of Jesus Christ.  And yes, Rev. Lin you could have been more of a leader of the church in standing up for truth, but you chose a darker path.

Now it is up to the leaders of your congregation and of the community that your church resides in to determine if they would rather keep a follower of  Satan-type deception or choose a true leader of faith.

This election and its results will melt into history but If America is to be a great nation that is built on the solid rock of religious brotherhood, then its religious  leaders must have impeccable character. Unfortunately, Rev. Lin and his fallen fellow pastors have shown that there religious character is a deplorable disappointment.  They owe their flocks and God an apology, before they resign.

( Click – Let me know what you think )

Good News Out of PA

Screen Shot 2012-11-06 at 6.28.29 PM

After casting my ballot for Mitt Romney, I tuned into Julie Mason’s The Press Pool on Sirius XM during my three hour trek back to Maryland.  Mason’s guest was Pittsburgh-Tribune Review staff writer and editorial page columnist Salena Zito, who detailed how Romney could win Pennsylvania tonight.  One indicator was Romney’s rally in Bucks County, which drew 30,000 people.  She aptly noted how this doesn’t happen in the collar counties around Philadelphia – especially for a Republican candidate.  Furthermore, out of 1200 Democratic voters polled across the county, Zito found that they feel disillusioned, abandoned, and condescended to by their fellow party members making the decisions in Washington.  Thus, they’re leaning for Romney.

While the Tea Party insurgency and women helped Republicans capture the most House seats since 1948 during the 2010 elections – Zito noted that disenchanted Democrats also played an integral role in the GOP retaking the House two years ago.

Bucks County is the most populous of the collar counties a strong lead could determine how PA will go tonight.

 

Presidential Election Results 2012 [Live Blog and Map]

election results map

After billions of dollars, months of campaigning and a deluge of campaign advertising, election day is here and CDN will be keeping up with voting totals and exit polls.

Next Polls Close: %CODE%

Electoral Results Map

 

Electoral Count (270 needed to win) – Obama Wins

President Obama: 303

Governor Romney: 206

Results (called states will be highlighted red for Romney – Blue for Obama)

Alabama: Obama: 38% || Romney 61% (99% precincts reporting)

Alaska: Romney: 55% || Obama: 42% (67% precincts reporting)

Arizona: Romney: 55% || Obama: 43% (68% precincts reporting)

ArkansasRomney: 60% || Obama: 37% (97% precincts reporting)

California: Romney: 38% || Obama: 58% (69% precincts reporting)

Colorado: Romney: 47% || Obama: 51% (90% precincts reporting)

Connecticut: Obama: 58% || Romney 41% (87% precincts reporting)

Delaware: Obama: 59% || Romney 40% (99% precincts reporting)

Florida: Romney: 49% || Obama: 50% (97% precincts reporting)

GeorgiaRomney: 53% || Obama: 45% (98% precincts reporting)

Hawaii: Romney: 28% || Obama: 71% (97% precincts reporting)

Idaho: Romney: 65% || Obama: 33% (95% precincts reporting)

Illinios: Obama: 57% || Romney 41% (93% precincts reporting)

Indiana: Romney: 54% || Obama: 44% (94% precincts reporting)

Iowa: Romney: 46% || Obama: 52% (96% precincts reporting)

Kansas: Romney: 60% || Obama: 38% (94% precincts reporting)

Kentucky: Romney: 61% || Obama: 38% (98% precincts reporting)

Lousiana: Romney: 59% || Obama: 40% (98% precincts reporting)

Maine: Obama: 56% || Romney 40% (77% precincts reporting)

Maryland: Obama: 61% || Romney 37% (91% precincts reporting)

Massachussetts: Obama: 61% || Romney 37% (96% precincts reporting)

Michigan: Romney: 45% || Obama: 54% (90% precincts reporting)

Minnesota: Obama: 53% || Romney 45% (98% precincts reporting)

Mississippi: Obama: 44% || Romney 55% (92% precincts reporting)

Missouri: Obama: 54% || Romney 44% (94% precincts reporting)

Montana: Romney: 55% || Obama: 42% (82% precincts reporting)

Nebraska: Romney: 61% || Obama: 38% (93% precincts reporting)

Nevada: Romney: 46% || Obama: 52% (93% precincts reporting)

New Hampshire: Obama: 52% || Romney 47% (87% precincts reporting)

New Jersey: Obama: 58% || Romney 41% (94% precincts reporting)

New Mexico: Romney: 43% || Obama: 53% (91% precincts reporting)

New York: Obama: 63% || Romney 36% (85% precincts reporting)

North Carolina: Romney: 51% || Obama: 48% (97% precincts reporting)

North Dakota: Romney: 59% || Obama: 39% (94% precincts reporting)

Ohio: Obama: 50% || Romney 48% (90% precincts reporting)

Oklahoma: Obama: 33% || Romney 67% (93% precincts reporting)

Oregon: Romney: 44% || Obama: 53% (75% precincts reporting)

Pennsylvania: Obama: 52% || Romney 47% (98% precincts reporting)

Rhode Island: Obama: 63% || Romney 35% (88% precincts reporting)

South Carolina: Romney: 55% || Obama: 44% (93% precincts reporting)

South Dakota: Romney: 58% || Obama: 40% (94% precincts reporting)

Tennessee: Obama: 39% || Romney 59% (94% precincts reporting)

Texas: Romney: 57% || Obama: 41% (96% precincts reporting)

Utah: Romney: 73% || Obama: 25% (88% precincts reporting)

VermontRomney: 31% || Obama: 67% (87% precincts reporting)

Virginia: Romney: 48% || Obama: 51% (97% precincts reporting)

Washington: Romney: 43% || Obama: 55% (55% precincts reporting)

Washington D.C: Obama: 91% || Romney 7% (89% precincts reporting)

West Virginia: Obama: 36% || Romney 62% (93% precincts reporting)

Wisconsin: Obama: 53% || Romney 46% (98% precincts reporting)

Wyoming: Romney: 69% || Obama: 28% (98% precincts reporting)

Live Blog

12:44p Romney to make speech within the hour

12:13a Obama wins. The people lose. We have to re-energize to fight for the Senate in 2014.

11:57p No tweets or FB posts from Romney campaign for awhile…

11:56p Things are looking bleak for Ohio, but it’s not over yet.

11:47p Gave Nevada to Obama as expected.. Florida and Ohio are the open issues

11:38p Florida and Ohio are all that remain. Everything else is either decided or too small to change the outcome.

11:26p Only 911 votes separate Obama and Romney in Ohio. We still think Fox called Ohio too fast.

11:23p Although the MSM is calling Ohio for Obama, we’re not there yet.

10:51p Florida, Colorado, Ohio….

10:07p Wisconsin still too close to call. I know the big boys have given it to Obama, but I’m waiting for 4 precincts to report.

9:55p Colorado not showing as strong for Romney as I had expected. I hope I was not as wrong in CO as I think I was in NV

9:53p CDN is calling the Senate to remain in control of Democrats with Brown loss in Mass. 2 more years of Sen. Harry Reid.

9:35p Senate race in trouble unless Brown can pull off Mass.

9:22p Early good news is that the House of Representatives will stay Republican – Senate still up-in-the-air, but likely to remain Democrat-controlled

9:11p Fleischer tells us how VA results are looking good for Romney – I only need a few more precincts to call VA

9:09p Florida much closer than I expected.

8:57p Sean Spicer tells us that the GOP picked up a house seat in Kentucky

8:36p Fleischer thinks exit polls oversample Dems

8:20p Exit polling in Ohio showing near 2008 black vote turnout – could be a problem in that swing state for Romney

7:51p Ari Fleischer talks about exit polling data and young vote in NC

7:50p Wisconsin and Minnesota close next – 10 mins to go

7:38p Vermont exit poll data showing strong liberal Democrat turnout – calling it for Obama

7:29 Ohio, NC and West Virginia just closed

7:23p Florida razor-thin with 8% in

7:09p Paul Ryan tweets about Indiana call

7:08p Florida reports that southern district votes may not be tabulated until tomorrow morning due to high turnout

7:06p Virginia exit polls show close race, but Romney doing well with middle-class and only 8 points down with women

6:50p Polls to close in Georgia, South Carolina, Vermont, Virginia, parts of Florida, New Hampshire at 7pm

6:49 Exit polls show most voters knew who they would vote for before October

6:42p Continuing to peruse the exit polling data: 34% Conservative, 22% Liberal, 44% Moderate – center-right nation?

6:30p Obama takes 60% of urban vote while Romney takes 60% of rural vote (exit polling data)

6:25 Kentucky going as expected, strong for Romney

6:19p Romney: “I only wrote one speech” – victory or bust for the Romney campaign!

6:17p Ohio voters: Things getting better 37%, things getting worse 33%, things not changing 29% – not good news for an incumbent if voters want change.

6:05p Exit polls showing more Republican electorate than in 2008 – Gallup was right – the D+7 turnout model looks flawed – looks good for Romney-Ryan

6:02p National exit polls 46% say we are heading in the right direction, 52% wrong. Ohio: working class white voters going for Romney, government workers for Romney 51%-48%

5:59p As we approach the first poll closings, thought I’d share my predictions for the electoral map ( so you can all laugh when I’m wrong): http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2012/11/even-losing-ohio-romney-wins-election-prediction-map/

5:52p Obama campaign staff in panic mode. Throwing out campaign videos and begging people to vote:

5:48p Romney Press Secretary Andrea Saul tweets that exit polls showing that voters care about what Romney is strong on – the economy:

5:44p RNC Communication Director Sean Spicer tweets about encouraging voter turnout in Colorado – a state CDN predicted Romney would win

5:37p KatlainSmith89 tweets this pic of Virginia Beach, VA polling location line (heavy R district): http://instagram.com/p/Rs9EzEMw1i/

5:18p CDNs prediction for Indiana and Kentucky was for Romney to take both. That would give Romney a 19-0 electoral lead in the first two states to have statewide polls close.

5:07p Redstate reporting that GOP poll watchers are being denied access on a technicality: http://www.redstate.com/2012/11/06/gop-poll-observers-being-blocked-in-north-carolina/

5:04 Ari Fleischer tweets that things are looking good for Romney in Ohio

5:00p One hour to polls closing in Indiana and Kentucky. Romney campaign posts image of “War Stadium”: https://twitter.com/Timodc/status/265926597884932097/photo/1

Early indications in Florida, Iowa, Ohio, Colorado look good for Romney-Ryan

Former Whitehouse Press Secretary Ari Fleischer tweeted that early turnout numbers looked promising for the Romney-Ryan ticket.

All morning, reports of much heavier than expected turnout in Florida was overwhelming polling places. Now, Bay County Supervisor of Elections Mark Anderson is adding staff to two precincts to help with the long lines.

In Ohio, similar reports are surfacing. Executive Editor of The Hotline Josh Kraushaar tweeted that things are promising for the challengers among early voters.

And Jack Healy of the New York Times tweeted that Republicans turned out better in early voting than Democrats.

Deputy Communications Dir. at Republican National Committee Tim Miller tweeted that Dem turnout in Colorado looks muted

And CDN’s Richard Mitchell tweeted about turnout in Lyon County, Iowa.

It’s early and the statistics being quoted may or may not be indicative of the result, but they are certainly more promising that news reports in past days had led Republicans to believe.

 

My Prediction: Romney Wins Comfortably

Screen Shot 2012-11-05 at 11.37.45 PM

The day has arrived.  In about twenty-four hours, the stains of Barack Obama will be wiped clean and honor and dignity will be restored to The White House under President-elect Mitt Romney.  It hasn’t been an easy road.  Conservatives waged a brutal primary battle that left us with a scarred nominee – Romney – coming out of the gate to take on President Obama in the general.  However, he licked his wounds, redeployed his campaign assets, and was laser focused on Barack Obama’s miserable record of debt, deficits, and high unemployment.  As a result, he’s polling slightly ahead of the President on Election Eve, and I’m confident Governor Romney will be the next President of the United States.

Granted there were some bumps in the road.  The last week of August and the whole month of September were especially lackluster – but his resounding and decisive victory in the first, and most important, presidential debate altered the electoral map in a way liberals couldn’t imagine.  His surge in the polls with women decimated Obama’s double-digit lead amongst women, and Romney’s double-digit lead amongst independents will prove valuable in the generals, as well as the down ticket races in the House and Senate.  Right now, I have Gov. Romney winning the 2012 Election with 289 electoral votes to Obama’s 249.  Some pundits, like George Will, predict a 321 Electoral landslide for Mitt Romney, but I’m more reserved.

First, to even begin to contemplate such a mandate, Romney needs to win Pennsylvania – a state that hasn’t gone Republican since 1988.  While some polls show that the races is tied (Romney is shown trailing by 2-4 points on D+8 polls) – I’m just not ready to bet the mortgage on a state we have failed to lock up for almost a quarter century.  Granted, the 2011 county courthouse races were indicative that Democrats in the western part of the state – the bitter clingers who are mostly pro-life and pro-gun rights – were getting sick of liberal policies.  Republicans took Westmoreland County for the first time in fifty years.  Now, Republicans control 51 of the 67 counties in PA, with most of the inroads being in the western part of the state.  Republican media consultant Michael  Hudome wrote on The Daily Caller on Nov. 2 that “half of the NRA membership in the entire country is within a four-hour drive of Pittsburgh.”

Recent electoral results signal a Republican surge in the Commonwealth. Conservative Pat Toomey was elected to the Senate in 2010 despite the best efforts of the White House.

Republicans control 12 of Pennsylvania’s 18 congressional seats. In the crucial Philadelphia suburbs, Democrats were only able to offer token opposition to Congressmen Mike Fitzpatrick and Patrick Meehan this year. In those critical counties near Philly, Governor Romney is a perfect fit for Independent and Republican women. Polls suggest there is no gender gap.

This election, voter intensity favors Republicans. Senator Bob Casey (of the Potted Plant Party) has his hands full with a challenge from businessman Tom Smith. Recent polls show that race is a toss-up.Given all these factors, it’s no wonder Romney and his allies have started an air war. In fact, Republicans have spent enough money on ads in Pennsylvania in the past week to fund a solid, month-long ad campaign in the state.

Furthermore, “semi-defrocked” Republican strategist Mike Murphy recently tweeted that if Romney is trailing by two in the PA polls – he wins Ohio.

In the end, it’ll all be about turnout, but I’m cautiously pessimistic about the Keystone State.  I think Obama will eek out a win here.  However, I will bet that  Tom Smith, the Republican Senate candidate, will defeat incumbent Democrat Bob Casey, Jr.  He made up a deficit of almost twenty points in the polls, and flooded the state with ads to hammer at Casey.  It has worked.  The race is a virtual tie. With Casey’s nonexistent campaign and low enthusiasm from Democratic voters, I think Smith will win.

Now, concerning the Buckeye State, Obama is trying to over-perform in the auto/industrial areas of Toledo and Akron.  However, in an election where Democratic enthusiasm isn’t nearly as high as Republicans, it’ll be an uphill struggle.  Whereas Mitt Romney is taking a page from George W. Bush in ’04 centering on the southeast portion of the state – coal country – and the swing suburbs around Cincinnati.  As of now, the race is tied – but The American Spectator’s Robert Stacy McCain has been on the Romney campaign crawl and posted this on Election Eve.

[ Ali] Akbar [Republican operative] stayed up all night Saturday poring over Ohio early-voting totals, comparing them to previous elections, studying recent Buckeye State polls, and crunching the numbers before waking me up before 8 a.m. Sunday to declare, “We’ve got Ohio.” His analysis of the early-vote numbers and his interpretation of the latest Columbus Dispatch poll as bad news for Obama quickly inspired an online buzz among Republicans who have been worried sick over Ohio. Even at the mid-October apex of Romney’s surge, the Republican never led the Real Clear Politics average of polls in this crucial battleground state. Although Obama’s lead has never been large — as of Sunday, he led the RCP Ohio average by 2.8 points — it has been remarkably persistent, prompting much theorizing about the factors behind it. The economy in Ohio hasn’t been quite as hard-hit as some other states; unemployment is only 7 percent. Ads from the Obama campaign have hit Romney hard for his opposition to the GM and Chrysler bailout, a reasonably popular measure in Ohio, where auto manufacturing jobs are a vital part of the state’s economy.

However, it’s a false narrative considering that Mr. Romney’s plan would have also saved the auto industry, which was reaffirmed in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal by auto expert Edward Niedermeyer.  However, the trend with overall early voting doesn’t favor Obama.  Gallup stated that 15% of the electorate has already voted and they’re splitting 52%-46% in Romney’s favor.


Given the Obama administration’s ‘War on Coal,’ I will hedge my bets that there will be a high turnout from these counties adjacent to the Appalachian Trail, but if Hamilton County swings Republican, we can all breath a sigh of relief.

In Wisconsin, I didn’t give this to Romney because it’s Paul Ryan’s home state, and therefore, a safe win.  As George Will aptly noted back in April:

 …in the 16 elections since World War II, 10 presidential candidates have failed to carry the home state of their vice presidential running mates. Gov. Earl Warren could not carry California for Tom Dewey in 1948; Sen. Estes Kefauver could not carry Tennessee for Adlai Stevenson in 1956; former senator Henry Cabot Lodge could not carry Massachusetts for Richard Nixon in 1960; Rep. Bill Miller could not carry New York for Barry Goldwater in 1964; Gov. Spiro Agnew could not carry Maryland for Nixon in 1968; Sargent Shriver could not carry Maryland for George McGovern in 1972; Rep. Geraldine Ferraro could not carry New York (or women, or even her congressional district) for Walter Mondale in 1984; Sen. Lloyd Bentsen could not carry Texas for Michael Dukakis in 1988; Jack Kemp could not carry New York for Bob Dole in 1996; Sen. John Edwards could not carry North Carolina for John Kerry in 2004.

No, it’s because no state has swung more to the right in the Midwest than Wisconsin.  They booted incumbent Democratic Senator Russ Feingold for Ron Johnson, elected Gov. Scott Walker, and took tow formerly Democratic congressional districts that covers most of the northern part of the state in 2010. Additionally, Republicans took control of both chambers of the state legislature as well.  Furthermore, Gov. Scott Walker became the only governor in American history to survive a recall attempt last June receiving more votes than he did in the 2010 gubernatorial race.  Wisconsin State Senate Republicans also faced a recall of their own on two separate occasions.  The first salvo being fired in August of 2011, where Republicans maintained the majority. The second occurred in 2012, where Democrats gained control, but turned out to be a useless exercise since the the general session will not begin until after November 2012, when the seats will be contested again.

While the race is tied, given the reaffirmation of Walker’s policies, the infrastructure Walker has built to successfully maintain his residency in the Governor’s Mansion, and the conservative swing of the state’s electorate – suffice to say that a Romney victory here is likely. Disrupting the pattern where Wisconsin has gone Democratic in nine of the last ten presidential races.

In Indiana, Romney is ahead – on average – by 9.5 points.  Safe state.

In North Carolina, Romney is up by 3.  Given that the State Democratic Party of NC was distracted by a sex scandal and was saddled with an unpopular Democratic Governor, Bev Purdue, Romney should win the state. And Republicans will take the Governor’s mansion for Pat McCrory – the Mayor of Charlotte.  When he’s elected, McCrory will be the third Republican in the past thirty-nine years.

In Florida, it looks as if “Romney has pretty much nailed [it] down,” according to Guy Benson.  Ed Morrissey at Hot Air added to this sentiment noting a poll from the Tampa Bay Times and Miami Herald showing Gov. Romney with a comfortable six point lead.

Florida continues to look good for Mitt Romney. The Republican holds a 6-point lead in the state essential to his hopes of defeating President Barack Obama, according to a new Tampa Bay Times/Bay News 9/Miami Herald poll.

The poll shows slight tightening, with Romney’s 51-45 lead down 1 percentage point from the Times’ statewide poll a month ago. …

Still, nearly every key indicator in theTimes’ pre-Election Day poll reveals Romney’s advantage in a state Obama won four years ago.

Florida voters trust Romney more to fix the economy and give him an edge, 50 percent to 48 percent, on who will look out more for the middle class — a stark turn from past months when Obama and his allies unleashed a barrage of TV ads portraying Romney as an out-of-touch corporate raider.

Romney even has a slight advantage on foreign policy, with 2 percent more voters saying they trust him over Obama, who has faced criticism over the fatal attack on a U.S. consulate in Libya.

The Herald has an interesting analysis, one that confounds the national media narrative.  Romney now gets more crossover votes than Obama, contra to the common assumption that independents are proto-Republicans and Romney has trouble with his base:

Romney’s strengths: independent voters and more crossover support from Democrats relative to the Republicans who back Obama, according to the survey conducted by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research.

Real Clear Politics Average has Romney with a 1.5 point advantage over the president going into Election Day.

 

Virginia will be a squeaker, but given the coal counties to the far western parts of the state, especially around the town of Grundy, I think Mitt will have success.   Ed Morrissey, who along with Allahpundit and most of the full-time staff, have been doing an excellent job detailing the recent polls and debunking the liberal drivel.  He wrote that:

Mitt Romney still earns 50% support in Virginia just before Election Day.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Virginia Voters shows Romney with 50% of the vote to President Obama’s 48%. One percent (1%) likes another candidate, and another one percent (1%) is undecided.

This is unchanged from two weeks ago and the week before that when it was Romney 50%, Obama 47%.

This one’s tight enough to look at the internals, which are somewhat surprising given the closeness of the toplines.  Obama actually loses the overall gender gap by three points (-7 among men, +4 among women), but he’s also losing independents in Virginia by 21 points, 58/37.  In 2008, Obama had a +11 in the gender gap and won independents by one point, 49/48.  The D/R/I in this sample is D+2 at 38/36/25; in 2008 it was 39/33/27 but in 2009′s gubernatorial election it was 33/37/30.

Romney wins the economic argument by six points, 51/45 over Obama.  There’s a significant gender gap on this question as well, but it also favors Romney (+10 among men, +1 among women).  Romney has a 25-point lead among independents on this question, 58/33.  On the other hand, Obama does have a positive job-approval rating at 51/49, which is probably why the toplines look as close as they do.  I’d guess, though, that Virginia’s going to break significantly for Romney

Lastly, New Hampshire is a bet.  Obama is ahead of Romney by two points, but I will take a gamble, and say  that Romney will take the “Live Free or Die” state due to depressed turnout and a little luck.  It’s my wild card.  Either way, it doesn’t matter.  It’s for fun.

Right now, it’s all about turnout.  Republicans are more enthused to vote this cycle.The Huffington Post posted about Chuck Todd’s breakdown of  Republican voter enthusiasm.  Here’s what he said on Meet The Press on October 7, which was the Sunday after the first presidential debate.

CHUCK TODD: Well, it’s simply an enthusiasm gap. And we’re seeing it across the board. Look at here in this first one. 79% of Republicans call themselves extremely interested in this election. On a scale of one to ten, that means they said they’re a nine or a ten on interest in the election. 73% of Democrats.

Look at four years ago. It was a 13 point gap in favor of the Democrats. Let me go through some various voting groups. This is an important voting group. Seniors are an important voting group to Mitt Romney now. He leads them by about 10 points in our NBC Wall Street Journal poll. Look at this in engagement in the election. Four years ago was 81%, pretty higher. Even higher this time at 87%. And Romney’s doing better among seniors than McCain did.

Let me go to an important voting group for the president, young voters. Look at this engagement level: 52% now they call themselves, voters 18 to 34, call themselves extremely interested in this election. Four years ago it was 72%. That 20 gap. The president wins young voters by huge margins. He’s winning them by some 20-plus points. But if you don’t have this kind of enthusiasm, they’re not going to show up to the polls.

And then let me give you this last one here, because this is, I think, the most important one. And that’s Hispanics. The President’s winning Hispanics by 50 points. He hit the 70% mark. However, look at this in terms of interest in the election. 59% now, it was 77%. What does that mean? President got 65%, I believe, of Hispanics four years ago.

So even though he’s going to get more Hispanics, if less of them turn out, it’s a net zero. And yet, you look at Republican enthusiasm, up, senior enthusiasm, up. It’s a huge problem. And by the way, all of this, pre-debate.

Furthermore, liberals are citing polls based on 2008 turnout levels that oversample Democratic voters.  A D+13 poll isn’t an accurate gauge in this election.  We’ve had an unemployment rate above 8% for over forty consecutive months – with the rate being over 9% for twenty-six of those months.  We have $6 trillion in new debt, 23 million unemployed, and a litany of new regulations.  What has Obama shown for this investment in trickle down government?   

We have seen an anemic economic recovery, with our third quarter growth at an insipid 2%.  President Obama is the personification of the dependency agenda.  A pernicious crusade to establish a hyper-regulatory progressive state and break all institutions within our nation to the will of Washington.  More women have lost their jobs under the Obama administration, and with women more on the economic frontlines, they’ve seen that the president may not be the best choice for their checkbook.

Granted, tonight will be a LONG night. So, make sure those coffee mugs are filled, Red Bulls are plentiful, and champagne fully stocked – because Republicans should be optimistic that Gov. Romney will soon be called ‘President Romney’ fairly soon.

 

 

Will you vote against Obama’s War on America’s Religious Freedom

Religious freedom in America is at stake with November 6th presidential election

Will you vote against Obama’s war on The Soul of America and its religious freedom on Tuesday, November 6th? In President Barack Obama’s first term he took advantage of the 340,000 social conservative who did not show up at the polls in 2008’s presidential election. Armed with this free pass given to him, Obama has riddled America’s landscape with executive orders and legislation that abandoned congressional law on gay marriage, abortion, religious choice and many other issues.

Now, four years later in battle ground states like Ohio, Florida, Nevada, and Virginia he wants to complete his anti-religious assault on religious freedoms which are America’s bedrock. So one has to ask, what it will take to motivate social and religious conservatives to vote to preserve and to save America’s freedoms.

Understand this, that the race for the presidency is as close as it could ever be in swing states all over the nation. Gallup just released its final pre-election survey of likely voters on Monday, November 05, 2012 and Mitt Romney is holding onto a bare one percent difference over Obama. Romney’s 49% to Obama’s 48% truly means that ever religious and social conservative voter holds the keys to religious freedom in his or her hands.

What’s at stake is more serious than one might imagine.

Do you believe that your child’s right to be protected from being assaulted with pro-abortion literature in school or gay rights seminars in elementary school against your protests will be listened to, your wrong. School systems have already begun to implement this in schools across the nation.

The Catholic universities and colleges across America are under assault daily from the Obamacare edicts that mandate they obey the Obama pro-contraception insurance mandates. They are being forced to disregard their constitutional right to their religious freedom, or risk the legal wrath of Obama’s federal government.

In fact in Ohio, in May of 2012, Catholic University, in Steubenville, Ohio, decided to fight back against the attempt by the Obama Administration to strip their institution of its religious freedom. Catholic University refused to implement the Obama administration mandates that require a school use their health care plan to provide sterilization, contraceptives or other pregnancy prevention drugs to students.

Michael Hernon, the VP of Advancement at the University, stressed to Fox News in May that Obama Care’s mandates amounted to “moral and economic injustice.” This is clearly a deliberate and intentional act of war on America’s religious freedom!

What more evidence do you need than the very dismissive conduct portrayed at the August Democratic National Convention, where God was booed and denied on the convention floor. Democrat convention organizers under supervision from White House political operatives removed God from the convention platform. When it was discovered, Obama quickly moved to cover up the exclusion with denials from convention handlers. Soon after, Obama’s convention handlers brought it to a vote and God was booed and voted down several times by convention attendees.

The rejection of God in the original Democrat Platform which is a statement of the position of the Democrat Party and its President going into the fall election should serve as a true call to arms by America’s religious community. The move to remove God from the Pledge of Allegiance, abandonment of religious prayer in public schools, at public meetings and at football and other games is just the beginning.

The religious freedom that children in America and their children will inherit can only be guaranteed and protected by preventing Obama and his congressional and local elected cadre from winning November 6th!

On Tuesday, will you be able to look into your children’s eyes or grandchildren’s eyes and affirm you did what you could to protect their right to religious freedom that you enjoyed in your youth. This is a war that America cannot afford to lose.

President Reagan saw the dangers that were on the horizon for America’s religious freedoms when he spoke January 31, 1981 to the National Religious Broadcasters. He warned:

“To those who would crush religious freedom, our message is plain: you may jail your believers. You may close their churches, confiscate their Bibles, and harass their rabbis and priests, but you will never destroy the love of God and freedom that burns in their hearts. They will triumph over you.”

On November 6th, let every vote in America’s religious community be a vote of triumph over the forces that support a second term for Obama. Show Obama that America’s religious community will not be threatened, nor allow its religious freedom to be crushed. America will continue to remain yesterday, today and tomorrow, one nation under God!

( Click  – Let me know what you think )

Romney Wins! Predicts Novel That Also Predicted Ryan as Running Mate

HINESVILLE, Ga., Nov. 5, 2012 —The White House Games (https://www.libboo.com/read/the-white-house-games), the novel that accurately predicted the choice of Paul Ryan as a vice presidential candidate, has done it again.

The novel predicts that Romney will win this election, and more.

Author Say Dozeman made his predictions using computational mathematics. “I used a statistical technique known as the Bayesian Information Criterion,” he explained. “It is, as far as I’m concerned, a headachy piece of mathematics, but one that yields almost unerring predictive results if one is willing to traumatize oneself enough with the effort.”

All the data showed that Paul Ryan was the best fit as Romney’s vice-presidential pick. So, in his novel, Dozeman named a character holding a similar position, Paul-Mark Rubyan, a minor alteration of the actual candidate’s name.

“If anyone thinks that I changed the character’s name after Ryan had been selected, they’re welcome to check my novel’s date of registration with the Library of Congress,” Dozeman stated. “I registered it months before Ryan was selected, when even the closest associates of Romney had no idea who would be chosen, and at a time when I suspect that even Romney himself wasn’t sure.”

Dozeman firmly believes that his calculations have also revealed the identity of the winner of this presidential election: Mitt Romney.

Dozeman states that he’s willing to reveal these two predictions from his novel because according to him, these are the most trivial predictions in the novel. He states that the biggest bombshell predictions in the book will shake America to its core, that they involve rebuilding a new version of America in a way that even the Founding Fathers had not foreseen, but would be happy to endorse.

“You’ll have to read the book to find out what those bombshells are,” he said.

The first in a planned series of political novels, The White House Games tells the story of a group of former Navy SEALs who fight to change the direction of American politics. Taking a leaf from the Arab Spring movement of 2011, the SEALs embark on a once-in-a-lifetime mission. Using special-forces tactics and social-media power, the SEALs launch a battle against the powers-that-be in a high-stakes game to create America version 2.0.

“The story is a combination of The Hunger Games, Survivor and Celebrity Apprentice, in a political context,” said Dozeman.

The White House Games is available through www.Libboo.com, a digital platform for discovering hot new authors such as A. B. Bourne (The First Secret of Edwin Hoff), Steve Berkowitz (CHOCROTES and the World Without Question), and Say Dozeman (The White House Games).

The White House Games is also available for download at Amazon.com (http://www.amazon.com/The-White-House-Games-ebook/dp/B009EWQX4W/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1351972504&sr=1-1&keywords=the+white+house+games) and at Barnes and Noble (http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-white-house-games-say-dozeman/1111590376?ean=2940015604290)

Dozeman has also created a game called “The White House Ops.” Downloadable for free from the Apple App Store, the game features a fast-paced race combined with a fight for survival as players steer major characters from the novel through a dangerous experience in the Amazon jungle, followed by Hell Week at the Navy SEALs training facility in Coronado, California, and culminating in an MMA tournament in Las Vegas.

AN UNREDEEMED PRESIDENCY

As election day draws near and the presidential campaigns execute their final strategies the winds of success appear to be at the backs of the Romney/Ryan team, and it’s not too imperious to envisage a Romney/Ryan victory. It appears that a significant part of the electorate agrees with the title of Niall Ferguson’s cogent essay entitled “Obama’s Gotta Go”. As we eagerly await their promising triumph on November 6th and, risking impetuousness, we deign to contemplate what a Romney presidency will resemble in its maiden year.

From any perspective, looking forward, President Romney will undoubtedly have to play the part of America’s master repairman.  He has the unenviable task of repaving America’s avenue of exceptionalism, a road rendered potholed and fractured by the Obama administration. There are considerable fixes Romney the new renovator-in-chief must undertake, and if anyone is deserved of a “blame Obama” free pass it will be the new Chief Executive. But leaders don’t blame, they take responsibility for their actions, so it’s doubtful President Romney will exhibit behavior beneath his character and the office of the presidency.

President Romney will have to refurbish America’s ruptured domestic economic environment laden with Obama’s absurdist wealth redistribution policies and profligate spending sprees. He will have to remake a hegemonic America in decline due to President Obama’s feckless appeasement of America’s enemies and indifference and disregard towards its allies. But perhaps President Romney’s most daunting task for renovating America’s path of exceptionalism will be to restore a united America torn asunder by an Obama-led class warfare crusade. A crusade pitting American against American to assuage his personal disdain for a hallmark of Americanism embodied by the freedom loving rugged individualist who takes personal responsibility for their successes and failures. These are the very Americans President Obama fears and derides because he cannot control their independent spirit, intimidate their freedom of thought, nor render insecure their confident natures.

While a Romney presidency is committed to a renewal of American exceptionalism, the Obama presidency is only a remembrance of unfulfilled promise. The 2008 Obama pledges are legendary for their hollowness and now have the status of a parlor joke, to wit, “how is that hope and change working out for you?” Space does not permit the entire smorgasbord of utopias (over 500 by some accounts) offered up by candidate and President Obama. But because of their far-reaching consequences a few warrant call outs to capture the essence of his disappointing term. Candidate Obama professed he would revolutionize American governance by replacing backroom political cronyism with a presidency that would be “the most transparent administration in the history of our country”. It was candidate Obama who swore that he would reduce the national deficit in half by the end of his first term. In 2009 President Obama guaranteed that unemployment would be at 5.2% at the end of his first term and there would be 3% to 4% GDP growth in the final three years of his first term. There were the President’s infamous assurances that his ObamaCare legislation would be budget neutral, reduce premium costs and allow individuals to keep their existing coverage. The President avowed he would commence a “new beginning” between America and the Arab world through his policies of appeasement toward America’s enemies. These and the preponderance of other hopeful pieces of paradise promised by an Obama presidency are relegated to a wasteland of deceit and deception.

Obama partisans are chock full of excuses for the president’s fiascos.  Some justify President Obama’s failures due to his executive inexperience, so perhaps Mr. Obama ran afoul of one of the cardinal rules of business, which is to never over promise and under deliver. But his devotees also plead that now since that he has gotten his feet wet give him four more years. But, to quote one of Vice-President Joe Biden’s few lucid remarks, “…the presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training.” Some of the president’s acolytes have chalked up his failures as a consequence of his predecessor’s policies igniting the “blame Bush” strategy. If that is at play, and since every president inherits some undesirable policies and unfavorable domestic and geo-political environments, then it is reason enough to man the Oval office with someone who can live up to the challenges of the presidency. Finally, in keeping with the Obama finger-pointing presidency, the President’s disciples accuse the republicans in congress of partisanship and obstruction. This is mendacious and preposterous given that the Obama policies, which laid the groundwork for America’s current decline, were undertaken in the President’s first two years in office, a period in which the democrats controlled both the Senate and the House of Representatives.

The Obama presidency was unique for both it’s promise and it’s fortification. Without any notable experience to speak of on the part of candidate Obama an adoring mainstream media colluded with an ingenious presidential campaign to successfully fabricate the illusion of a candidate that was infallible and omnipotent. Candidate Obama was lauded and praised as the savior for the woes of the American Republic and he would right the injustices of the past with a wave of his majestic hand. From the failed, pork ridden stimulus to the Benghazi tragedy with flyovers to ObamaCare, Solyndra and his Middle East “American Apology Tour” the media’s coddling continued into his presidency while President Obama’s advisers strove feverishly to enable, defend and rationalize his failures. But the President’s aura of entitlement and enablement were ironically the causes of his failures and disappointments.

However it was how he failed that signifies the tragedy of his presidency. America’s post-modern presidential version of the “emperor with no clothes” luxuriated in praise and fumed at criticism. Handed every opportunity to succeed he stubbornly ignored the obvious manifestations of his failed socialist ideologies. He dug in his heels insisting on an economic agenda that wreaked havoc and misery on the middle class, the very group he claimed to champion in his class warfare campaign. His lethargic foreign engagement characterized as “leading from behind” emboldened America’s enemies resulting in a much more dangerous and tumultuous world for America than when he took office.

In spite of the dangers to America’s economic and international well being, the future of the Republic and his disregard for his oath of office the President was obdurate in his single mindedness. The Constitution is clear as to the president’s responsibilities and President Obama disregarded his solemn oath which was “to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Perhaps it is his ability that is at issue.

But the time for entertaining excuses or conjecture is over. In the parlance of the President’s many “let me be clear” moments it is now history’s time to write the Obama epitaph. Historians, unlike the President’s sycophants, will not justify his failures nor inoculate his shortcomings. As with all Presidents Mr. Obama’s presidency will be reviewed and recollected historically on the merits of his accomplishments. He was dealt a hand that he willingly accepted and he failed to deliver. It was President Obama’s personal decision to selfishly satiate his personal dogmata at the expense of his sworn responsibility to act as steward of America’s welfare. For that reason he shall not be forgiven, and for that reason the Obama presidency’s epitaph will forever be known as an unredeemed presidency.

Slate Writer: White Guys Voting for Romney ‘In Defiance of Normal Americans’

Screen Shot 2012-11-04 at 3.16.48 PM

Remember when liberals scoffed at the fact that Romney could win more than 60% of the white vote? Not only has Romney successfully tackled that hurdle, and liberals are apparently mad about it. Tom Scocca of Slate Magazine wrote on November 2 about the “tribal appeal” that Mitt Romney has with whites and why “white people think” he’ll be a better president. I’ll give you a hint: It’s R _ C I S M.

After proudly declaring his support for President Obama (and how Slate will traditionally list all its staffers’ votes for the Democrats), Scocca insists they are not in a liberal bubble. He channels the insufferable and dismissive tone American liberalism has successfully monopolized over the past years.  He claims “White men are supporting Mitt Romney to the exclusion of logic or common sense, in defiance of normal Americans.”

“White people don’t like to believe that they practice identity politics. The defining part of being white in America is the assumption that, as a white person, you are a regular, individual human being. Other demographic groups set themselves apart, to pursue their distinctive identities and interests and agendas. Whiteness, to white people, is the American default,” according to Scocca.

He then cited the National Journal piece stating that Obama needs to win 80% of the minority vote to win the election.  Scocca laments “again, why are “minorities” treated as a bloc here? The story mentions no particular plan by the Obama campaign to capture the nonwhite vote. Instead, it discusses how the Romney forces hope to get a bigger share of white voters than John McCain did—by “stressing the increased federal debt” and attacking “Obama’s record on spending and welfare.”  Yes, as if, spending, welfare, and debt are code words for racism.  I wonder if Scocca will share his secret race decoder because Americans don’t have enough time to drink the amount of Ovaltine for a device of their own.

In all, Romney is polling better amongst whites, especially women, which is all due to the racism of the Romney campaign.  This   is based on “the foundation of Republican presidential politics for more than four decades, since Richard Nixon courted and won the votes of Southerners who’d turned against the Democratic Party because of integration and civil rights. The Party of Lincoln became the party of Lincoln’s assassins, leveraging white anger into a regional advantage and eventually a regional monopoly.”  Or, it could be that the economy is bad.  Women are surging in the workplace, therefore, more on the frontlines of the economic decisions in the household – and they don’t like what they see from this president.  It should also be noted that Democrats in the south supported Jim Crow legislation.  Does Gov. Ross Barnett ring a bell?

Nevertheless, Scocca claims there are two races going on right now.

And so we have two elections going on. In one, President Obama is running for re-election after a difficult but largely competent first term, in which the multiple economic and foreign-policy disasters of four years ago have at least settled down into being ongoing economic and foreign-policy problems. A national health care reform bill got passed, and two reasonable justices were appointed to the Supreme Court. Presidents have done worse in their first terms. In my lifetime—which began under the first term of an outright thug and war criminal—I’m not sure any presidents have done better. (The senile demagogue? The craven panderer? The ex-CIA director?)

In the other election, the election scripted for white voters—honestly, I’m not entirely sure what the story is. Republican campaigns have been using dog-whistle signals for so long that they seem to have forgotten how to make sounds in normal human hearing range. Mitt Romney appears to be running on the message that first of all, Obama hasn’t accomplished anything, and second of all, he’s going to repeal all the bad things that Obama has accomplished. And then Romney himself, as a practical businessman, is going to … something something, small business, something, restore America, growth and jobs, tax cuts, something. It’s a negative campaign in the pictorial sense: a blank space where the objects would go. A white space, if you will.

Granted, racism does exist in the United States, but to construe this as the overall mentality of the white electorate is disingenuous, ignorant, and outright nonsensical.  In the world of Scocca, it’s all due to the alleged race baiting.  He noted how it was racist to partake in the “baiting of Obama, throughout his term, for supposedly being unable to speak without a teleprompter.”

More bizarrely, Scocca says that “Republicans predicted, over and over, that the president would be exposed and humiliated in face-to-face debate with an opponent (Newt Gingrich especially fantasized about being that foe). Eventually this led to Clint Eastwood haranguing the empty chair. And then in the first presidential debate, Obama was slack and ineffectual against a sharp Romney. See? It was true!”  Yes, it was true.  He came unprepared, and even The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank made a citation of the president’s debate performance.  Adding that Obama’s lack of press conferences – his last one was in June – contributed to an insular mindset that produced and insipid showing in Denver.  Is Dana Milbank racist?

Concerning the 47 percent comments, Scocca noted how this was a giant race baiting move to court whites.

Here, Romney is speaking fluent White. In white people’s political English, “personal responsibility” is the opposite of “handouts,” “food stamps,” and particularly “welfare,” all of which are synonyms for “niggers.” This was Ronald Reagan’s rallying cry, and it was the defining issue for traumatized post-Reagan white Democrats. Like George Wallace vowing not to be out-niggered again, the Democratic Leadership Council and the New Republic and Bill Clinton made Ending Welfare as We Know It the policy centerpiece of the 1990s.

The actual policy never mattered. Now the Romney campaign is running ads in Ohio saying that Obama “gutted the work requirement for welfare” and “doubled the number of able-bodied adults without children on food stamps.” In mixed company, Romney glosses the food-stamp lines as concern about the country’s economic status, but that’s not why “work requirement” and “able-bodied” are in there. It’s the rusty old Confederate bugle, blown one more time.

So, is this whole get out the white vote is based on coded racism and dog whistling, or is it that Scocca is so frustrated that his favorite in this race isn’t performing as well as he did in ’08?  It’s petulant.  Forgetting the fact that Democrats haven’t won the so-called “white vote” since 1964, Scocca is saying that the whites who decided to leave the president in 2012 are racists.  Therefore, they’ve lost their credibility and their sanity as well.  They’re not “normal.”

If liberals ever get a chance to look in the mirror and ask themselves why they’re so bad at winning elections, they need to go no further than Tom Scocca’s laughable attempt at ‘white people’s studies’.  It seems the seeds of the bitter narrative liberals will hurl against Republicans in a plausible post-Obama defeat have already been laid.

Originally posted on NewsBusters.

Yes, Nate Silver is a Joke

Screen Shot 2012-11-04 at 11.53.59 PM

If you’ve ever gone on Nate Silver’s 538 Blog for The New York Times, you’ll see where reality ends, and fantasy begins.  It was more vividly displayed after the third and last presidential debate where I wrote, in a previous post, for Hot Air that “the headline for his [Silver’s] October 23 post after the last presidential debate read ‘Obama unlikely to get big debate bounce, but a small one could matter.”  Talk about grasping at straws.

Still, with the contest being so tight, any potential gain for Mr. Obama could matter. Mr. Obama was roughly a 70 percent Electoral College favorite in the FiveThirtyEight forecast in advance of the debate, largely because he has remained slightly ahead in polls of the most important swing states.

If Mr. Obama’s head-to-head polling were 2 percentage points higher right now, he would be a considerably clearer favorite in the forecast, about 85 percent. A 1-point bounce would bring him to 80 percent, and even a half-point bounce would advance his position to being a 75 percent favorite in the forecast.

Still, Mr. Obama should not take even that for granted. There have been some past debates when the instant-reaction polls judged one candidate to be the winner, but the head-to-head polls eventually moved in the opposite direction.

[…]

So, since Obama is ahead of Romney within the margin of error, why does that constitutes a win for the president?  I think most analysts would put a 2-4 point lead, for any candidate, in the toss-up column – especially for a battleground state.  Thus, making his 70% prediction of an Obama victory a nonsensical exercise.   Silver has states listed as toss-ups on the blog, but didn’t reference them here.

Furthermore, Silver’s notion that a half point ounce would increase Obama’s probability of re-election to 75%, a 1 point bounce to 80%, and a 2 point bounce to 85% is abjectly senseless.  He is lying and waiting for a miracle to happen.

However, while we shouldn’t expect much from a former Daily Kos blogger, he seems to be keeping liberal spirits high.  As Rosie Gray at BuzzFeed wrote on October 29:

Here in New York, Silver is very much on the tongue of the media and the left-leaning professional elite: Everyone from photographers to the managing partner of a major law firm cops to hitting refresh every hour to stay sane. And out in the Democratic hinterlands, the reaction is much the same.

“I was at a Halloween party last night and it was just kind of funny because we’re down here in South Carolina and none of these people are media people or DC kind of types,” said Teresa Kopec, a substitute teacher from Spartanburg, South Carolina. “And they were kind of whispering to each other, ‘But Nate Silver says…’”

“If people have heard of him down here in South Carolina that’s kind of amazing,” Kopec said.

Furthermore, Gray noted that “some Democrats, meanwhile, concede that their affection for the wonky analyst is less the details of his model than the consistency of his message.”  That being Obama wins – in every projection he runs.

With Silver catching flak it wasn’t long before his allies at The Washington Post, namely Ezra Klein, decided to jump in front of the train for his liberal colleague. “Before we get too deep in the weeds here, it’s worth being clear about exactly what Silver’s model — and that’s all it is, a model — is showing. As of this writing, Silver thinks Obama has a 75 percent chance of winning the election. That might seem a bit high, but note that the BetFair markets give him a 67.8 percent chance, the InTrade markets give him a 61.7 percent chance and the Iowa Electronic Markets give him a 61.8 percent chance. And we know from past research that political betting markets are biased toward believing elections are more volatile in their final weeks than they actually are. So Silver’s estimate doesn’t sound so off,” says Klein in his October 30 post on the WonkBlog.

Klein then goes on to trivialize the whole matter by saying:

…it’s just as important to be clear about this: If Mitt Romney wins on election day, it doesn’t mean Silver’s model was wrong. After all, the model has been fluctuating between giving Romney a 25 percent and 40 percent chance of winning the election. That’s a pretty good chance! If you told me I had a 35 percent chance of winning a million dollars tomorrow, I’d be excited. And if I won the money, I wouldn’t turn around and tell you your information was wrong. I’d still have no evidence I’d ever had anything more than a 35 percent chance.

There are good criticisms to make of Silver’s model, not the least of which is that, while Silver is almost tediously detailed about what’s going on in the model, he won’t give out the code, and without the code, we can’t say with certainty how the model works. But the model is, at this point, Silver’s livelihood, and so it’s somewhat absurd to assume he’d hand it out to anyone who asks

Here’s the catch.  We know his code.  In fact, anyone of us can replicate Silver’s methodology on Microsoft Office.   As Sean A. Davis, COO of Media Trackers, wrote in The Daily Caller on November 1:

Silver’s key insight was that if you used a simple simulation method known as Monte Carlo, you could take a poll’s topline numbers and its margin of error and come up with a probability forecast based on the poll. The effect of this method was to show that a 50-49 lead in a poll with 1,000 respondents wasn’t really a dead heat at all — in fact, the candidate with 50% would be expected to win two-thirds of the time if the poll’s sample accurately reflected the true voting population.

To a political world unfamiliar with mathematical methods that are normally taught in an introductory statistics course, Silver’s prophecy was nothing short of miraculous.

But was it? To find out, I spent a few hours re-building Nate Silver’s basic Monte Carlo poll simulation model from the ground up. It is a simplified version, lacking fancy pollster weights and economic assumptions and state-by-state covariance factors, but it contains the same foundation of state poll data that supports Nate Silver’s famous FiveThirtyEight model. That is, they are both built upon the same assumption that state polls, on average, are correct.

After running the simulation every day for several weeks, I noticed something odd: the winning probabilities it produced for Obama and Romney were nearly identical to those reported by FiveThirtyEight. Day after day, night after night. For example, based on the polls included in RealClearPolitics’ various state averages as of Tuesday night, the Sean Davis model suggested that Obama had a 73.0% chance of winning the Electoral College. In contrast, Silver’s FiveThirtyEight model as of Tuesday night forecast that Obama had a 77.4% chance of winning the Electoral College.

So what gives? If it’s possible to recreate Silver’s model using just Microsoft Excel, a cheap Monte Carlo plug-in, and poll results that are widely available, then what real predictive value does Silver’s model have?

That’s a very good question.   In the meantime, this is Silver’s Electoral College and Election forecasts, which were updated at 7pm on November 4.  Immerse yourself in the ignorant – or delusional – bliss.

 

« Older Entries Recent Entries »