WCRN 830 AM Western Mass Radio Guestspot 5 21 11

This morning, I was privileged to be a guest on the Saturday Morning, Weston & Wesley Review, on 830 AM, WCRN, in Worcester MA. This early morning show is a fantastic edition to the Conservative Talk line-up in Massachusetts - Saturday 6am to 7 am - live streaming available. For video archives and Tom Wesley's weekly essay visit http://tomwesley.com

Unions Expected To Pull Cash from Union Dues from Democrats Who Don’t “Do Enough To Support Labor” - The Economic Impact May Play a Factor.

From the AP: The AFLCIOmay be about to pull financial support to Democrat members of Congress who “don’t do enough” to support labor:

In prepared remarks, Trumka says the role of unions is not to build the power of one political party but to improve the lives of working families.
The AFL-CIO's executive council is considering a plan that could spend less on congressional races and more on fighting state battles, like those in Wisconsin and Ohio, where lawmakers want to weaken collective bargaining rights.

The articles goes on to say that one of the largest firefighters unions stated it would no longer financially support Congressional Reps who showed a lack of support for labor unions.

The Bigger question, can unions continue to support individual candidates?

In most instances, National Unions have been a cash cow for the Democrat Party, however, one has to be realistic about how far the members’ union dues can stretch in an economy where membership is decreasing due to hiring freezes and lost jobs. When one joins a Union (most often there is no choice), then one pays dues that are ostensibly used to fight for the employees rights and support pensions. The U.S. unions have, for the most part, pushed hard for the Democrat Party, the statistics from Opensecrets.org/” lists top donors in the political cycles from 1989 through 2010 – of the first top 20 donors, 12 are unions, the balance associations and corporations, of which two lean towards donating to Republicans, three give their cash to both parties, the unions lean heavily Democrat, giving either 100% or close to that particular party.

That said, with the economy shedding jobs, and inflation on the rise, union membership is in decline, down to 11.9% nationwide as of January this year. The fact that the Stimulus funds are now disappearing, and states that relied heavily on the funds, (along with the municipalities) will be forced to lay off teachers and support personnel who are union members. The fact that there are fewer individuals employed in the private sector, who’s taxes fund the federal and state governments, puts those unions, specifically Teachers, Firefighters, Government workers, at a bit of a loss, as their livelihood depends upon a robust private sector.

When one expects the government to pay for everything, one does not consider that without taxpayers, the government does not have any income – period. Therefore, as the largest unions are municipal in nature, one can expect the cash to begin to dry up a bit, as ironically it is the working taxpayer, who, for the most part, is non-union, pays for the salaries of the members of those unions, the money then goes to support one political party only. This alone might cause a bit of resentment by those working in the "private sector".

There should be a law in place that allows unions to only use cash for pensions and to support workers rights through lobbying both parties for legislation that protects life and limb - but is it entirely necessary? Agencies like OSHA, which regulates all businesses to ensure safety compliance in the workplace is one example of the lower need for union intervention on safety issues. In fact, the United States has laws on the books regulating child labor, work safety, and almost everything a union could ostensibly fight for, except one thing: more money. On the corrupt side, some unions even benefit from donating to one political party – the United Auto Workers now own a share in General Motors, the car manufacturer which was “bailed out” by Congress and the current administration (i.e. with Taxpayers dollars); the reports of percentage of ownership in GM vary in new reports, with 55% UAW ownership about average.

Therefore, as the economy declines further, and a lack of an income to certain unions, which is directly tied to the private sector, also declines due to lost jobs, where best for those unions to use the cash? The answer, direct assaults on entire state legislatures as recently seen in Wisconsin where collective bargaining (the Holy Grail of Unions allowing them to get “more money” from State and Local governments), was on the line. The bigger issue may have been the option for state and local employees in Wisconsin to opt out of joining a union at all, further eradicating opportunities for cash and clout. Therefore, the union decision to pull cash from individual candidates is most likely based on economic trends, rather than lack of vigorous support – but the threat alone (i.e. term “union thugs”), may be enough to push Congressional Democrats, and those seeking office, to be more “union friendly” when considering which legislation the Unions feel they should support or not. Lobbyist, regardless of whether they are unions or associations, or banks or larger corporations, should be entirely banned from the ability to influence the individual elected official, or candidate by way of contributions to the same. Individuals, alone, should be allowed to give to the political candidate and/or party of their choice, regardless of which occupation one enjoys, thus ensuring that anyone organization, has little influence on the public sector. The PAC’s however, that are formed for political purposes, may be subject to less scrutiny as their individual members are not required to join, rather opt in on a free will basis.

Suffolk Poll – Romney Leads Republican Pack, Within Margin of Error with Obama – Majority Satisfied with Republican Field

Romney & Palin, most likely front runners 2012, as of May: image New York Daily News

Although the Wall Street Journal bloggedon a recent Suffolk University 2012 Poll, the article suggested that Obama was not beatable if the election were “held today”, and that Mitt Romney benefited the most from Governor Mike Huckabee and businessman Donald Trump’s decisions to forgo the 2012 campaigns.
However, when one reviews the marginal’s here at www.suffolk.edu/images/content/FINAL.Suffolk.University.Naitonal.Survey.Marginals.May.17.2011.pdf, a slightly different perspective is gained.

As to the President’s overall chances of reelection: 48% to 43% (8% undecided) believe it’s time for someone new to take the helm. More telling: 63% of respondents intend to vote in the Republican primaries, while only 34% of the respondents were Registered Republicans. In addition the Republican Field is considered by 46 to 40% (14% undecided) to be satisfactory. However, when looking at the candidates included in the field, (even with Trump and Huckabee Removed), most are, to say the least, unexpected to run: The following were included in the questions regarding the GOP Primary (including the percentage of interest and undecided’s): Michele Bachmann, 2%, Herman Cain,2%, Mitch Daniels, 2%, Newt Gingrich, 2%, Rudy Giuliani, 10%, John Huntsman, 0%, Gary Johnson, O%, Sarah Palin 16%, Ron Paul, 4%, Tim Pawlenty 8%, Buddy Roemer, 0%, Mitt Romney 29%, Rick Santorum, 6%, and undecided 20%.

Considering that Michele Bachman, Mitch Daniels, Rudy Giuliani, Sarah Palin, and Rick Santorum have not officially announced, with some candidates unlikely to even enter the race (Giuliani), the poll skews away from Romney using Giuliani as an example by 10%. This is given the fact that both Romney and Giuliani are considered “moderate” by those who are “extremely conservative”. That said, an additional 20% are yet undecided, as the field such as this, with some candidates clearly not viable due to having not indicated even an interest in the race. Therefore, the poll confuses the actual outcome attributed to Romney. In addition in a head to head matchup with the “unbeatable Obama”, Romney fares quite well. On Question 15 (which appears to have been taken prior to the exits of Mr.’s. Trump and Huckabee – only the “GOP Field questions were callbacks according to the pollster’s marginal’s – not the lead questions on the GOP individual candidates and matchups). Obama garners 46% to Romney’s 43%, 1% indicated “other” and 10% were “undecided”. When on views the respondent data: out of 1070 polled, the political affiliation was as follows: 39% Democrat, 34% Republican, 22% Unenrolled or Independent and 5% other. Given that Obama Received 46% with 39% of the Respondents Democrat, the remaining 7% may have been Independent or other, that leaves Romney, with 9% of his support coming from independent or other, or with a slightly better edge with the “independent voter than the President.

Given the fact that both campaigns have yet to pick up any real steam, other than media drumbeat, Romney is, this far out in the game, fairly well positioned for the run at the White House, this is contrary to the WSJ report, which begs the questions: did the author consider reading the marginals? As with any poll, the marginals are more telling that the editorial on the polls release. The data serves to give an overview of the demographic that the pollster employed, and one can determine if it accurately reflects the voting public (in this case, most likely). In addition, one can see where those polled contradict the headlines vis a vis, the Republican Field and general dissatisfaction with the current “crop” of candidates, by merely looking at the marginals.

Therefore, Romney, even with imaginary candidates, polls highest in the field, and against Obama is within the Margin of error on the poll, therefore, it is a statistical tie- and not as headlined, a huge win for the President. Of course, all this before all candidates named (or even some unnamed such as Rick Perry, Governor of Texas who is toying with the idea of running for the GOP nod) have committed or not, before any firm field has been established. Therefore, should Romney continue his current path of high fundraising, keep up his visits to the all important early primary states, he should be well positioned, even with the promise of a “dark horse” candidate, which has yet to emerge. What the fled lost with the decisions of both Huckabee and Trump was an excitement factor that was due mostly to entertainment factor (on Trumps part) and the “celebrity” of both candidates, which clearly gave them a temporary edge. Romney, for his perfect hair, his stiff upper lip, and his penchant for being down the middle, does not sit well with most social conservatives, however, one cannot imagine that even the most stalwart of those right of right, would forgoes the opportunity to remove Obama from office, and vote for Romney even if they disliked the man.

On the Massachusetts versus the U.S Health Care Reform Debate and Romney’s refusal to let go of his legislation and or apologize for conceiving of a plan that was exported nationwide: he’ll more than survive this. One, he did not apologize because the man truly believes he did the right thing for Massachusetts based on the financial aspect and projected costs savings of his model. He stuck to his guns. What he most likely should have done, was bring along his infamous PowerPoint, showing Romney’s version and what became of it once the Massachusetts Democrat controlled legislature got a hold of it, after he left office. One finds two different animal – and one thing that is missing from the conversation: Romney care, as it is now called, actually proved Romney has some compassion mixed with his business sense, something that appeals to those moderate Republicans, moderate Independents and yes, even some moderate Democrats. Other than his perfect hair and the health care issue, there’s little left in Romney’s closet to upset the “conservative base” – Additionally contrary to popular theory, Romney can take the south, and the Midwest and the northeast, with some exceptions: One would expect in a matchup between Romney and the President, that Obama would hold the states of Massachusetts (this is based on data from Obama’s approval being above 50% statewide), Hawaii, California and New York, there were a total of ten states where the President’s approval indicated that he might be re-electable In those states. The rest, falling well below 50% would, in all likelihood go to the Republican nominee. Romney may even pick up states by default, regardless of political ideology. That sums it up as of the latest poll and the way in which, when “pulled apart” one can find a totally different scenario emerge, one that is more likely than “No Republican can Beat Obama” – to which one can say with some authority

“Hog wash!”.

Gallup polling currently shows that Obama has a 3 point advantage (one would say within the margin of error) over any Republican candidate) – the score: Obama 43, unnamed Republican 40 – leaving 17% undecided – or in line with the Suffolk Poll. In addition, Gallup contends there are “no clear front runners”, with Romney and Palin taking the lead out of the following field:
Romney, 20%, Palin, 18%, Gingrich, 11%, Ron Paul, 8%, Michelle Bachman, 5%, Mitch Daniels, 4%, Tim Pawlenty, 4%, Rick Santorum and John Huntsman at 2% respectively, Gary Johnson at 1%, and Herman Cain at 0%. This field is more comprehensive (fewer choices) than the Suffolk poll), however, again, includes candidates that are, for the most part, undeclared as to intent. That includes Sarah Palin, who has yet to enter the fray.

Of interest and back to the Suffolk Poll, given all the aforementioned data, one question stood out like a sore thumb: Question 55 on the Suffolk Marginals asks: Do you think a woman will be elected president in 2012 or 2016? 51% agreed, only 36% said no and 13% were undecided.

Therefore, it is no out of the realm of possibility that a strong, well funded, female candidate could conceivably win the general election, sooner than later. Of the two GOP potential female candidates, Palin and Bachman, Palin is the only candidate that has experience governing, and has a high profile among GOP voters. Michelle Bachman, a congresswoman, has less governing credentials and, although wedded to the Tea Party Movement, more than Palin, is still lacking the litmus governing test. Interestingly, Romney, although polling ahead, and able to beat the President, is followed next in both polls by Palin.

Word of caution, we’ve got a long way to go before November, when, all begins in real earnest ahead of the Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire Primary.

Poll data all sources; Gallup Polling and Suffolk University.

White House Bans Herald from Press Pool for Obama Boston Fund Raiser - Globe Publishes Top Obama Donors, Praises Romney, Covers West’s “Obama .Puppet"

Mitt Romney, center of squabble between Boston Herald and White House Lehrich

The Boston Heralds has been banned from the press pool covering President Obama’s fund raiser in Boston today. The Herald received the following scolding missive :

I tend to consider the degree to which papers have demonstrated to covering the White House regularly and fairly in determining local pool reporters,” White House spokesman Matt Lehrich wrote in response to a Herald request for full access to the presidential visit.
“My point about the op-ed was not that you ran it but that it was the full front page, which excluded any coverage of the visit of a sitting US President to Boston. I think that raises a fair question about whether the paper is unbiased in its coverage of the President’s visits,” Lehrich wrote.

Apparently, Lehrich left an opening for the Herald noting that the paper may be “allowed” to cover the fundraiser portion of the President’s visit. The Herald article went on to point out a disagreement (or threat) made by the Administration to Hearst’s’ property, the San Francisco Chronicle, for covering a protest at an Obama California fundraiser, as proof that the White House might be selective in which press organizations are allowed near the President – those that cover him “fairly” or those that might highlight a 2012 GOP candidate’s Op-ed, or report on an incident at a fundraiser that reflects negatively on the President.

They should have seen this coming. In his speech in Chicago, immediately following the election results in 2008, then President Elect Obama noted his favorite President was Abraham Lincoln. Those who view history as somewhat predictive of the future, understood that there may have been several reasons a Progressive Democrat would view Abraham Lincoln favorably: the most notable: his suspension of the constitution and the fact that he jailed newspapers editors who published less than complementary articles. Of course, in the case of Obama, and his almost eerie inclination to follow in Jimmy Carters’ footsteps, one can understand that the choice of Lincoln may have been more populist than devious, given the history of the Carter administration is fairly accessible and no real digging is required – therefore, one might be on the fence about the President’s ability to govern from an historical context, or lack thereof, ruling out the academic theory. The most likely indication that this sort of incident might happen, is the administrations choice of staff – and the almost petulant display by some staff members when the President is cast in a bad light (criticized for something that has been done or said, either fairly or unfairly), lacking the experience or the ability to react as an adult.

The fact of the matter is that the Herald did place a Mitt Romney op-ed ahead of the President’s visit to Boston, his second in a short period, the point of the visit to raise funds for the Democrat Party, of which, as sitting President he is the Head of said Political Party – another subject that should raise eyebrows, but somehow does not, when it comes to politics. The sitting President is generally the head of his political party, and the Chairperson of the DNC or RNC takes a back seat – the theory being the President would be the “star” fundraiser, regardless of Party. It’s bad practice for government in general, again, regardless of party.
Therefore, the President is not coming to Massachusetts today to make any grand policy speeches, or to visit the state to stump for re-election but to ask Massachusetts Democrats for money. One has to ask if that is really front page news, or worth a mere mention, when an organization has an op-ed criticizing the President, from a potential 2012 GOP candidate – the Herald chose the Romney op-ed, and is now, apparently being “punished” by the Administration.

The Globe appears to have no such problems, yet. The Globe is covering the President’s visit today, however, some of the articles that are placed on the Home page of the Globe site and the Politics page of the same, might be construed as somewhat Heraldesque.

1. An article entitled: ” West: Obama 'a black mascot' and 'black puppet':

“Cornel West, a Princeton University professor and leading black intellectual, is harshly criticizing President Obama; a candidate he once supported but now calls “a black mascot of Wall Street oligarchs and a black puppet of corporate plutocrats.”
West, a former Harvard University professor, said during an interview with the website Truthdig posted yesterday that the president has not been true to his race.”

Seriously, the man is somewhat of an academic “crank” to put it kindly. The President, whether Black, White, Purple, Yellow or Brown, is the President of all citizens, and should not be labeled as belonging to one group or the other, unless of course, it is a political party. One has to ask is this relevant to the President’s visit?

2. From the Globe’s Politics page ” Leading Democratic contributors from Massachusetts since 2007” the Globe names the top six Massachusetts residents who have heavily contributed to the President; their names, biographies and amount given. From Internet “watchdog” companies, to layers specializing in asbestos suits, to pharmaceuticals, one understands that big business does not always trend Republican, rather, it is the individual who decides whom to support based on ideology, and perhaps the hope of a fair lobbying position.

3. Finally, the icing on the cake: the Globe has praised Mitt Romney with : “A Romney We Can Respect”. The article does not, however, appear on the front page (as does the “Obama is a Puppet “article, rather under local news.) The Globe has finally found something Romney has done that apparently agrees with Globe editorial thought. He defended his position on the Massachusetts Health Care Reform, and he did so with gusto. The Globe could not agree more, however, one had to wade through the usual tirade of Mitt “wrongs” before one got to the Globe’s perception of a Mitt “right”. The wrongs were Romney’s propensity to use PowerPoint, the fact that he calls Massachusetts his ‘home state”, (He may still have a townhouse in Boston, among other real estate holdings scattered about the country, as say, anyone with scads of money may), and pretty much took a shot at Romney’s perfect hair.

Has Matt Lehrich read the Globe today? That’s the question. The fact of the matter is that the slight to the Herald and the way in which the White House missive denying press credentials (or limited credentials) was childish – not what one would expect from a staff member of the President of the United States. In Beantown, where one has the option of choosing one or both daily papers, both should be given access when a sitting President comes to visit, regardless of whether they place the man on the front page, or cover a rival, it is just plain bad politics, and will be perceived as such by those Herald Readers. Instead of granting access and perhaps getting a fair article from the Herald, the choice was made to scold and turn to the Globe – one of the “elite” publications in Massachusetts and as noted above: one that covers the President with “gusto”.

In the end, the local news across the Bay State will be in a tizzy over the President’s visit, as it is rare that a President visits Massachusetts for any reason, unless that President or Candidate is passing through to New Hampshire to camping for an upcoming election, the Bay States now nine electoral votes and late primaries are apparently not enough incentive for anyone to pay too much attention, except for the occasional fund-raiser.

Does it matter that one publication is excluded, one that is a major paper not only in Boston, but across the Baystate – it does on several levels, especially when the President’s poll numbers according to the most fair pollster, Gallup, are dropping daily. In that case, one can ill afford to shut out any news organization when one is literally campaigning for reelection. The theory that Massachusetts is already going to vote to reelect Obama may be the reason, and it may also be flawed. Again, looking at the historical context of this brouhaha between the Press and the President - the only time that Massachusetts, twice in a row, voted for a Republican President, the Commonwealth voted against Jimmy Carter and his economic policies, voting for Reagan, not once, but twice. Romney, it appears understands history and is staying close to the Baystate, where the independents, not the overtly conservative nor the overtly Progressive appear to decide outcomes. (Of course, this assumes that Mitt Romney wins the GOP nomination and goes on to challenge Obama in 2012)

2012 Update: Gallup – Obama Approval Dips – Again – Trump Out, Romney In – Raises 10.25 Million in Vegas - The All Too Perfect Romney

Romney works the phone banks in Vegas - He Wants the Job! Either Crazy or a Patriot - photo Politico

Gallup’s “Daily Tracking” of President Obama’s Job Approval showed a drop of 2 points to 46% on Monday. The President enjoyed a brief hike in his job approval ranking after he gave the order for Osama Bin Laden’s demise, to a high of 52%, however, once the daily grind set in for those American’s that are either out of work or burdened by high taxes, uncertainty about job futures and high prices at both the pump and the grocery store – the economy “trumped” all else. With Donald Trump’s announcement yesterday that he was out of the race for the GOP 2012 Presidential nomination; something odd happened, those who were looking for alternatives that were “not typical Washington”, (someone who spoke their mind with abandon, echoing thoughts that were shared by many and spoken by few, and appeared to have the will to want the job), suddenly found a huge hole in the media sphere – literally sucking the oxygen out of the speculators and those who were hoping for “more” than the mere promise of hope and change.

An article, by one Marc J. Rauch, editor of the Autochannel.com, entitled “With Trump out of the Running for President, Expect the Worst to Happen” sums up the desperation those working American’s feel. First, Mike Huckabee passed on the race on Sunday, demoralizing his political supporters, some of whom considered Trump at least a possible light at the end of the tunnel of – political boredom – and the disappointment and speculation by the press only furthered that – in a word, despair for lack of a candidate that truly motivates, excites, is the combination of fiscal and social conservative that, truly, does not exist. If such a candidate did exist, would they honestly want the job and or the beating by a press that, put it simply, hates (that is not too strong a word in this instance), anyone who is not a socialist progressive – no Republican or Independent leaning Republican that is even briefly taken seriously, can expect the media to embrace them, even if, for a moment, they walked on water.

Which, no matter how strong a person might appear, the weight of the press, network and print, blogs and cable, in concert against one individual is almost as intimidating as cleaning up the mess that is now our America: of course, that is the economy, a war on several fronts, porous borders, lack of quality education, and a group of stuffed shirts and skirts in DC that appear clueless. Is it really any wonder that both Huckabee and Trump got out early?

It would take an individual of unshakeable faith in the American way of life, someone who is not afraid of the media, someone who feels they have the wherewithal to both run the nation economically as well as keep it safe from all, while raising to at least a standard that was set in the 1950’s of exceptionalism, which still exists, although dampened down by all this apologizing for things that men and women who were not our founders, may have done, over 100 years ago, or not, as the case may be, this nation is still the one that people are a) either trying to destroy or b) trying to get into by any means possible.

So, who wants the job? Mitt Romney does. Romney even mentioned it yesterday saying to supporters: “'We're activating our campaign today', but his statement was somewhat lost in the furor over Trumps decision to leave the race. Further, while no one was looking, Romney went on to raise, in all places, Las Vegas, 10.2 million dollars during an eight hour tele-thon - which is no mean feat, considering the economy, and its present state of “uncertainty”.

The Massachusetts Factor and what’s wrong with Romney

Although one would think that Romney is the recycled 2008 GOP candidate that is somehow “crowned” by the national GOP to be the next GOP Presidential candidate, and has more money that Midas, is a shoe-in, think again. Money in politics means very little when it comes to the early caucus states that will either make or break a candidate, and what happened in 2008 could certainly happen again in 2012, except – perhaps it has nothing to do with the concept of Republican royalty, or for that matter, the money at all, perhaps, just perhaps, Mitt Romney is one of the few capable individuals who actually want the job – he even said so – in a reserved manner – no excitement, nothing to see here, move along, it’s just the guy everybody appears to – dislike.

Here’s what’s wrong with Mitt Romney – nothing. He’s the guy in high school or college that was the perfect geek, the guy who had perfect hair and got straight A’s and the cheerleader to boot. His hair, unlike Trumps or any of the other announced candidates so far, (Gingrich, Paul, Pawlenty for example) is perfect. He appears to be slick or arrogant to some, especially some who live in Massachusetts and that’s all due to Romney’s ability to parse words – (paraphrasing here – I did not raise taxes, I raised fees.) His plan for Massachustts residents to access health care has morphed into a mission by those who hate Romney’s hair, to get the man to apologize for Obama Care – the question is why? Romney’s vision of health care for all, granted mandated, was not the plan that the Democrat controlled Legislature in Massachustts turned it into once Romney was on the campaign trail. That’s where Romney went wrong. He trusted Democrats to actually do the right thing – in of all places – Massachusetts. Perhaps they should be asking him if he is still as naive as he was when putting that plan into place – at least there those detractors would have a valid question. Then again was it naiveté or was it his willingness to trust a “peer” in order to do what was good for those who were without? No one really knows – The Man just doesn’t get enough bad press –yet.

Read the Politico article about Mitt Romney here regarding his Vegas Fund Raiser and look for the complements. Find any? Although not as much fun as say Trump or Huckabee, rest assured that Mitt Romney will come under more scrutiny than one may feel comfortable with –and a lot of what is written will be, in a word, pure hooey. One has to believe that Romney will take it in stride, while all of he world is secretly hoping he actually comes out and says something Trump, Palin or Huckabee would say and make life interesting. The likelihood is slim in that regard.

Romney, not for nothing, has led or been at the top of every poll to date, being bested only by Huckabee and Trump (briefly), the arguments that Romney cannot win in the south or Midwest, have left the building with Trump and Huckabee – with the economy in desperate straits, the guy that looks too perfect, even with Massachusetts Care, starts to look good, because, he has a record of being able to fix things and raise money. He has actually managed something.

What about national defense? It’s hard to tell, but shortly after 9/11 a visiting Al Queda proponent was on his way to Cambridge and demanding protection – which Romney most vehemently and vocally declined to offer, which gives those of us sitting on the sidelines at least a glimpse of the fact that he will stand up for us, should the going get rough.

Again, he wants the job when it appears very few do – a major plus.

Is he truly perfect? Absolutely not – there are no perfect people, one has to admit that, but perhaps perfect appearing people who excite the populace are not what is best for the nation, not now. Perhaps it’s time to look at the guy with the perfect hair, besides, there may be more interesting characters to enter the fray – Michele Bachman for one, has been bandied about over the past day or so as perhaps running. (Media savage alert). Back to Romney for a moment, his biggest failing was his attempt to Govern Massachusetts with a Legislature that had been, was during his tenure, and still is – so left of center that it is unmanageable, for the most part corrupt (count the indicted former Speakers of the Massachusetts House), and actually get something done. He did, which was above expectations – however, if the man goes to Washington to govern, and has a Congress or Senate, or both, on the same page, perhaps, just perhaps, we’ll get what we didn’t expect: vast improvement to the economy, and a President with perfect hair.

Things we don’t know about Mitt Romney:

How are his dogs? Do they pall around with him when he’s not campaigning? (When was the last time one saw the current occupant of the White House being followed by his pup? – Dogs know people.)

Although this was written, for the most part, as a quasi-satirical piece, there is much to be said for the boring field of candidates, the guy that may be too perfect, may also be the safe bet that the American people need – money and hair aside. It is, again, at this point, as it was a month ago, too soon to tell, but one has to start taking a hard look soon as what candidates are available and do due diligence because one of the Republican candidates will, most likely, be the next President of these United States. Anyone reading this blog understands that an independent minded Conservative who loves the nation, has not always been a fan of the aforementioned 2008 and now 2012 candidate, however, being a realist, it is a fact that one needs to weigh the pros versus the cons of all candidates, and should that Perfectly boring guy be the last man standing, so be it. Maybe that candidate is exactly what this nation needs.

Those who have yet to commit or announce one way or the other: Mitch Daniels, Governor of Indiana, Sarah Palin, former Govenor of Alaska and Michelle Bachman, Congresswoman from Minnesota.

Trump Expected To Announce Today – Under Pressure by NBC – Network Calling Trump on the Hour – Offers $60Million. Huckabee Endorses.

Trump to Announce Presidential Run Decision Today, According to the NY Post(Photo: impeachmentofobama.com

Donald Trump - Is he in, or is he out for 2012? That’s the question that the New York Post headlines will be answered soon: “Big Trump News Today”

Donald Trump plans to announce today whether he'll fire himself from "Celebrity Apprentice," a source told The Post last night.
The billionaire businessman, who has been mulling a run for the White House, has been trying to decide whether to trade his TV show for politics.
He is scheduled to meet with NBC's bosses early this morning to give them his final decision -- just hours before they are supposed to present their plans for the new fall season to advertisers.

Apparently, this is supposed to take place this morning, when NBC unveils its fall lineup – but, according to the UK’s “Daily Mail” the line-up has already been released, and it includes the “Celebrity Apprentice”, however, it is with or without Trump. NBCs, Greenblatt, apparently had no clear answer as to Trumps decision, however - “Asked if this meant NBC had a commitment from Mr. Trump that he wouldn't run for president, he said: 'We're putting a pin in that for the next 24 hours or so. Things will become clearer soon.” (Daily Mail)
However, The Mail went on to speculate about Trumps future plans, citing the announcement from Trump on Fox News’ “Huckabee”, immediately following the Governors decision not to enter the race, and Trumps response, that it was not “bad news’ for him that Huckabee had bowed out, rather, that although Huckabee would make a great president (paraphrased), other candidates are well pleased.

Governor Huckabee returned the Trump compliment by endorsing Trump’s candidacy.(State Column)

When Huckabee made his decision public, Trump apparently, must have been one of the few individuals who actually knew Huckabee’s decision, with the exception of family; Huckabee held his cards close until the final moments. With the immediate appearance of the Trump segment, which was obviously pre-recorded, it brings up the question as to just how close Trump has become to the former Governor, and Huckabee supporters, though Face book and other social network sites are now asking if there might not be a Trump-Huckabee ticket in the works – It all remains to be seen, however, for months Huckabee has spoken publicly and positively about a Trump candidacy.

As to NBC’s courtship of Trump “not to run”, Politico, on Friday reported that the network was calling Trump “hourly” and that the offer for Trump to stay on was $60 million.

One has to take into consideration several factors, one of which, although $60 Million may sound like a great deal to the average citizen and even some new members of Congress, it is a drop in the proverbial hat to Trump, who is estimated to be worth billions. Trump has noted several times that he would rather not run for the Presidency, but feels he has little choice as he feels he can right the nation economically - No matter how one slices it, that type of commitment comes from a moral perspective – which would appeal to Mike Huckabee, as well as the millions (twenty plus) of Evangelicals that would cast their vote for man. As well as moderate democrats who are disenfranchised from the current administration, republicans who, contrary to the popular media theory and certain polls by Public Policy Polling, suggesting that Trump is only relevant to the “birther issue”, independents, and surprising, the upcoming “youth vote”. That would be the new generation of voters eligible to go to the polls for the first time in 2012. With a certain segment of the electorate, they may not be able to pass a U.S. Citizenship test (which subject was brought up on Mike Huckabee’s show this weekend), but they do know celebrities, and to the average student voter, Trump, trumps Obama for name recognition – they also listen to him – not the birther issue, they give that a pass, it is the issue of securing our border, and bringing jobs back to the U.S.. The unemployment rate about teens and those new college graduates is higher than the national average by some estimates as much as 3 to 1.

Those that would hope Trump is finished (and not having a crystal ball, the announcement today, may include Trump’s bowing out of a race), and point to his big dollar contracts with NBC and ratings as the reason he would not run, apparently missed a recent interview where Trump opined on the attacks he’s suffered by just suggesting a run, let alone what will take place if he does run for the GOP nomination – his response was that he was “thick-skinned”. Trump, even if one only knows the man from a perspective of Reality Television, must understand that he is not to be taken lightly and insults, being what they are, even from those he knows in the media and entertainment business as “friends”, will only spur on Trump, and be one of the factors that contribute to a Trump run.

Therefore, should an announcement from Trump come today – (or rumors of a decision from the Post and or elsewhere) – it will either cement the GOP field a bit more firmly and or leave it wide open for those so called “lower-tiered” candidates to actually have a shot of winning the GOP nomination: the list includes: Newt Gingrich, Governor Tim Pawlenty, former Senator Rick Santorum, businessman Herman Cain and Ron Paul. Note: Massachusetts’ former Governor, Mitt Romney, has not formally announced, but has begun an “exploratory committee”, and continues to have difficulty with his version of Universal Health Care, which was used as the model for the national plan. In addition, when one looks at Public Policy Polling, or other pollsters, state by state polls, Romney is only competitive in certain states, which suggests a re-run of 2008. To view State by State polls and commentary by the Democrat leaning, but in the end stages of any political contest, accurate, pollster Public Policy Polling go to: www.publicpolicypolling.com/surveys.asp

The landscape, however, is subject to major change should Trump be a go today (or when he is ready to announce), as the media, blogs and pundits have indicated that Trump is only it for show ratings, leaving many who might choose Trump to back, hesitant to say the least. Should Trump announce in the affirmative to a run, that potential voter hesitation will no longer exist and the result will be more accurate polling vis a vis the entire “announced” field is subject to change. Additionally, one might find one Mitt Romney no longer sitting on the fence, but making an announcement to run (or he may also make an announcement similar to Huckabee’s).
One has to face the facts, the individuals who have put themselves forth, regardless of the media’s take on them, or their qualifications as defined by the media (all of them are qualified by virtue of the U.S. Constitution), will be the choices for those who would prefer to see a new President in the White House. With Gallup latest poll showing the Presidents’ approval rating down again; as of last Thursday, 48 approved, with 43 disapproving, down from a high during the Bin Laden announcement of 52. This leaves the President in a precarious position; when approval ratings do not break 50%, suggests, this “close” to a general election, that the position is up for grabs and any race would be close. Should the numbers move lower, into the 40’s, and then it would be, historically similar to the 1980’s Carter-Reagan scenario. Note: Gallup is one conservative pollster, and by conservative, one is not speaking of political ideology rather a very careful approach, therefore, these results should be used when making any “predictions”, which, as anyone is aware, at this point, over a year away from the actual election and without a firm GOP candidate or leader in the field, for that matter (with Huckabee out of the race, one should note), everything is subject to change.
What will be interesting is how Romney begins to poll, within the next 2 to 3 months as the field does become firm, specifically in the south and Midwest, which are critical to any GOP nomination. The last two major names from the 2008 Presidential race that have not confirmed: Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney (even though Romney has committed to exploring the possibility).

Many pundits have suggested that the field is weak, more due to a lack of interest in “perceived minor players” with so many “big names” still undecided, but one must recall the 2008 cycle, when one unknown Governor from Arkansas, upset the media’s predictions of a Romney Rule, and beat him soundly in the caucus state.
Not for nothing, both Trump and Ron Paul have been in Romney back yard in the past few weeks, Trump speaking back to back in New Hampshire (on the street, greeting people, and one to the chamber), and Paul in Massachusetts. One final note about Trump: In speaking with one who has a better insight into the Trump phenomena than this blogger, noted that if Trump was on the ground in New Hampshire shaking hands, then he is definitely serious about a run. The world, the media, and the rest of us regular voters, will find out soon enough, be it today, or in Trumps own time – one only wonders will Huckabee make a video appearance after Trumps decision?