Gallup 2012: Palin Ties Or Leads Romney on Majority of Major GOP Issues, Two points within Tie for Lead over Romney. Palin to NH this Weekend

Sarah Palin - On the Road - image New York Sun

A recently released set of Gallup Polls, the first on GOP potential and announced Presidential candidates show’s Sarah Palin within 2 points of Mitt Romney, out of a field of 14, included “other”. Romney leads with 17%, Palin 15%, Ron Paul 10%, Newt Gingrich 9%, Herman Cain 8%, Pawlenty 6%, Bachman 5%, and the following under 5 points: Huntsman, Johnson, Santorum, Huckabee (no longer in the race) and Chris Christie. The biggest percentage went to none/no opinion at 22% with 2% choosing other. Both Palin, Romney and Gingrich have yet to officially announce, while Paul, Cain, Pawlenty are all in the race. (Gallup)

In a second poll, based on major GOP issues (which in any wise should be national issues): Palin and Romney take the lead: in most cases Palin ties or leads Romney on all major issues: one exception: Government Spending and Power: Romney takes that category in a margin of 17% to Palin's 11%, Herman Cain, trumps Newt Gingrich at 13 % and Gingrich takes 12 %. That is a phenomenal showing for Cain, as this is his “debut Gallup poll”. The balance of the questions in this poll however, are dominated by Palin and Romney – On Business and the Economy: Romney 16%, Palin: 14%, On Social and Moral Values: Palin 23% and Romney 18%, and both are tied on National Security and Foreign Policy issues. As of this poll taken end May 2011, GOP issues are ranked in the following order: Government Spending 36%, Business and the Economy 31%, Social Issues 15% and National Security 15%. Business and the Economy has remained second in issues behind Government Spending with most GOP and GOP leaning Independents, with Social Issues and National Security lagging behind by several points.

With Palin closing in on Business and the Economy and besting Romney on Social Issues, with a Tie on Foreign Policy, one sees the credibility of a Palin announcement given the lack of excitement in the current field of candidates. Additionally, although Palin is not, by any stretch of the imagination a media darling. Rather she is the only candidate, to which the media appears to have taken a slash and burn tactic, no holds barred, going not after issues, rather Palin’s appearance, family, personal life – in other words, they are treating Palin like a woman. She also is one of the only candidates to be able to stand the heat, take it and dish it back out – in kind. This is one of her strongest points with those Conservatives who have felt that candidates and elected officials that are GOP tend to do their best to placate a hostile media – Palin takes them head on.

A reminder, it is still too early to make decisions or projections based on the above, however, one cannot resist viewing the top tier “candidates”, in a national primary scenario, which is still over eight months or more away, should this trend continue (Palin, who is beginning a nationwide tour which begins in DC and heads up to New England before moving on to the balance of the nation in what can only be deemed a beginning of her candidacy.), one sees Palin doing well with GOP voters, specifically in the south and Midwest, than say Romney, it would be a race right down to the end, something that would keep the GOP in the limelight and give Palin, who holds nothing back, an opportunity to continue to point out the fact that, yes, President Obama is extremely beatable (see Gallup’s approval rank for the President, versus the electoral college map: he takes 10 states only based on approval.). This is what those conservatives and conservative leaning independents want to hear and they are not getting that from the GOP establishment. This furthers the Palin as non-Washington persona which is so critical to success within today’s’ electorate. Additionally, she has taken all the shots that could have been thrown at her and will obviously continue to do so, should she actually seek the nomination. Therefore, it may be a Palin Romney ticket one sees emerge in 2012.

Palin’s tour begins this Sunday in DC and then heads to New England- more information can be found at www.sarahpac.com. It will be most interesting to see how well Palin is received in New England versus Romney.

Democrats Pin 2012 Hopes on One Special Election – Spins Nonexistent Medicare Cuts Into Frenzy – President Bill Clinton Warns In Talk With Paul Ryan

From: the Los Angeles Times: Democrats are exuberant over a win in upstate New York’s 26th District Special Election – seeing this four way marginal win as having been swayed by their distortion on Republican Paul Ryan’s suggestion to revise Medicare Benefits for those age 55 and under. One special election does not a mandate make, it would be wise to note – the GOP, or more to the point, Conservatives in early 2009 through 2010 took consecutive wins in Special Elections for Governor’s offices in Virginia and New Jersey (See Chris Christie), and one Senate seat in, of all places, Massachusetts in January 2010. The Massachustts special election of Scott Brown to “The People’s Seat”, was touted as an anomaly by the press, yet turned into a route of the Democrats in November of 2010. Additionally, this is not the first upstate New York special election to fall to the Democrats in a three way race: The New York 23rd was another Congressional seat in Upstate New York, again “in a traditional Republican District”. This is counting chickens before they hatch – which should be good news for the GOP.

Democrats ran on traditional scare tactics, however, the “win”, in a 4 way race showed the Democrat with a 4 to 6 point lead over the Republican candidate, and a Tea Party candidate pulling “double digits”. Tea Party (or other Conservative Political Party) candidates tend to pull conservatives from the GOP, as was the case in the NY 23rd, where the Conservative Party of New York’s candidate surpassed the GOP candidate and lost by a narrow margin to the Democrat in 2009. Therefore, this was less a referendum support for the Democrats and more a referendum on support for Conservative candidates, should one care to count the results of GOP plus Tea Party, minus the Democrat one would understand that the issue of the deficit remains a priority with voters.

The Press however sees it as some sort of boon for the Democrats: Exhibit A Politico’s “House Republicans cope with NY-26 fallout”. The gist of the report: Republican’s are in trouble due to the win in New York’s special election and the culprit, Paul Ryan’s budget and revisions of Medicare are the reason. The problem with this scenario is one has to look at the numbers in order to understand that it’s not a selling point – no matter how many articles or slogans on Medicare cuts to Seniors that Democrats scream from the rooftops, it will not make, per perhaps, a small difference in the upcoming 2012 election – the main focus will remain the deficit.

The one Democrat who appears to understand the problem is former President Bill Clinton, who, according to ABC news was “overheard” speaking with said Republican Paul Ryan, otherwise known as the budget boogeyman to most Democrats (and yes, the traditional belt-way Republicans”) regarding the fact that the program needs revision and Clinton’s hopes that the Democrats would do something about Medicare – but that they most likely would not.

The fact remains that both Medicare and Social Security are, currently solvent, however, in ten years those who apply for benefits may be shocked to find the till empty – better to rely on a 401K. To send a warning to those under 60 now, that the program may require a revision in age of retirement in order to be able to extend benefits to anyone is fair, however, Democrats apparently live in the moment, and at this moment, are not seeing the consequences of their “win elections at any cost mentality”. They are, in effect grasping at straws – as entitlement programs continue to grow out of hand: specifically: Medicaid who’s growth rate under the Obama administration was approximately 7.4% and with expiring federal stimulus aid to States it may be only a matter of time before those on Medicaid are turned away, or denied services. (See Personal note below, it may be happening now.) Other programs such as Food Stamps (41.8 Million American’s on Food Stamps as of July 2010(Bloomberg), and spending on “Welfare” is up 42% over the 2008 budget(Heritage Foundation)

Therefore, with over half the populace on some sort of Federal Aid, (not factoring those on unemployment and extended unemployment benefits), how long before Bill Clinton and Paul Ryan’s hopes that the Democrats (and Republican’s) “do something about” the problem of entitlements turn into a nightmare for both parties, as well as the general populace?

The Problem with Massachusetts’s and it’s mandated Health Insurance Program: When an entity (the Commonwealth) is subsidizing a huge entitlement program (or many such entitlement programs as is the case in Massachusetts) and there isn’t enough money (see Taxpayers) to cover the bills – those hoping to take advantage of the programs may find themselves out of luck. In fact, The Health Connector (or Massachusetts Commonwealth Coverage) was not accepting new enrollees, and has gone to ”New Limits on Enrollments” In fact, with physician’s leaving the state, along with the taxpayers, the ability to see a doctor even if one has outstanding private insurance, has increased to a minimum of 60 days. Therefore, an entitlement program that costs billions in taxpayers dollars, is basically ineffective and in the long run, detrimental to those lucky enough to live in the Bay State. That's what happens when billions are spent on programs by the Federal and State Govenrements - suggestion: Privitization.

Cuts to entitlement programs (along with a hefty reduction in State and Federal Corporate taxes – job creation) therefore, with a limit that would force individuals to seek employment, would thus increase the State’s coffers allowing for those in need, to receive some sort of benefit. The way it stands now, it is apparent that time and money are running out.

On a personal note:

In New York, those in need of assistance from Medicaid may find that critical surgeries, such as surgery in the early stage of cancer, are not considered critical from the perspective of the New York Medicaid office - the decision on whether or not to fund said surgery takes anywhere from six to eight weeks. Therefore, someone who is in the early stages of a cancer (Stage 1), may be beyond treatment by the time the New York State Medicaid office is able to “process” the approval. A personal note: a very dear friend of mine is experiencing this at this very moment, and as the weeks progress since a diagnosis of a cancer known to be aggressive, and as the physical symptoms worsen, the State of New York continues to dawdle. This individual is not seeking the attention of a mention, they are waiting for New York State’s Medicaid office, as patiently as they can, unfortunately, that wait may result in either a larger bill for the State of New York should a later surgery be approved, as well as the chances for a cure be greatly reduced, or, simply stated, my friend will die. As hard economic times have hit millions of American’s, those who are no longer able to afford insurance, are often forced to seek help, and when those who have never asked, do so, they are told they must wait and wait. Therefore, to those Democrats who use promises of Medicaid and Welfare to troll for votes, and to those who use cuts in services to the elderly which do not exist to do the same, real lives, are affected. In this case, they may end of losing a vote, as my friend is most clearly a Democrat. What makes our country great, the ability to take care of those who are less fortunate, what makes the system weak, those that abuse, and are encouraged to do so by a political party, for political gain, which results in the worst case scenario. Should I have permission, from this shy and retiring individual, to publish more in-depth personal information I most certainly will, to date, they wait. Personal appeal: anyone reading this who may have some clout in the New York State’s Medicaid system, and would be able to help in reviewing this case (as well as others that may be just as severe), please use the contact information on this blogs profile. In any case, I humbly ask for the prayers of those readers that this amazing individual and others who are in the same circumstances be spared by the State of New York.

New Hampshire House Seeks to Override Bill Allowing Unions to Collect Fees from Non-Union Members: Right To Work in New Hampshire

New Hampshire State Motto: on Licence Plate: Live Free or Die - image Moonbattery.com

From the Boston Globe: The New Hampshire Legislature will be voting to override a veto by the Democrat Governor John Lynch, on a bill that would bar unions from “collecting a share of bargaining and administrative costs from non-members.” NPR notes that the “Right to Work” law was approved by the Republican controlled legislature, then vetoed by the Democrat Governor.

The fact that the Governor of New Hampshire believes it is “fair” that unions are able to charge non-members for bargaining and “administrative” costs is plainly put – ridiculous. Union membership has been on the decline, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics: at 11.3 percent in 2010 almost a full point lower than the previous year. Of specific interest is that public employee’s union membership was up 36% over the private sector unions at approximately 7%. Therefore, the fate of funds for the New Hampshire Public Employee Unions is most likely on the line.
With the “Stimulus” funds, which created mainly government jobs versus private sector jobs, those funds also had a “shelf life”, and are about to expire. States and their respective municipalities, that used these funds to “create and save” public employee jobs, are now scrambling to come to a solution and most often, the Unions are in histrionics over the results. In nearby Massachusetts, even the bluest state, has been seeking way in which to curb collective bargaining when it comes to health and pensions, a bill, passed by the Democrat controlled Commonwealth Legislature did just that in April of this year. (Boston Globe).

Simply put the states, and cities can no longer afford to function with high priced public employee unions. Unfortunately, there are unions that should be considered “untouchable” by any government and those are the unions that cover our public service employees who put life and limb on the line for the protection of the individual – Fire and Police. Unfortunately, other unions with a great deal of clout, that cover teachers, and administrative personnel, or those who hold high degrees and are in no wise, in fear of losing life and limb, make up the majority of the public employee unions (Bureau of Labor Statistics) – Would those types of positions be treated as private sector, it would serve two purposes: one allowing incompetent workers to get the boot, and two, allowing successful professionals to achieve more in salary and status through results. (Refer to study on Teachers Unions and the decline of U.S. Education since inception here ”Study concludes teachers should be laid off based on Low Student Test Scores not Seniority”)

The New Hampshire Unions that are seeking to fleece non-members for administrative costs, and are given a green light by the Governor to do just that, screams clout of unions when it comes to control over the Democrat Party. In a recent decision by AFLCIO union contributions to Democrat Candidates will be based on the level of support for same, which which speaks to the need for unions to grab dollars where-ever they can, even from non-union members, in order to continue to contribute to their chosen political party on a national level.
Therefore high marks go to the New Hampshire Legislature for attempting to override the Governor’s veto.

Trump – Is He Back In the 2012 GOP Race? - Don’t Rule Him Out!!

It began yesterday with the observations at The Wrap.com on an interview on Fox and Friends with Donald Trump – (video below), where Trump said, he’s not ruling out a run at the 2012 GOP race - and, as of today it has gone Hollywood, literally The Hollywood Reporter also picked up on Trumps reversal. In the interview, Trump views the current field as lacking – Trump does not see those individuals beating Obama – The interview, below, is telling, Trump continues to site the fact that one gives up so much, personally when one runs, but he leaves the door open for a return to the GOP field. It’s been incredibly boring since Donald Trump left the race, and those that would have voted Trump (Democrats and Independents), are having a difficult time viewing the balance of the field seriously.

Suffolk Poll - Trust in News Sources Shows Network News Loss to Cable Outlets – Fox Trumps Field

Two questions at the end of the May 18th Suffolk National 2012 Presidential Election poll, #58 and #59, posed questions on the news outlets as well as “reporters” who are most trusted as sources for political news – the strong favorite was Fox News, with a fairly hefty percentage of those respondents choosing “undecided”, “don’t know”, “other” or “none”. (See Marginals here .) Question 58, on News Outlets was most stunning; the field included CNN 18%, MSNBC 7%, Fox 28%, ABC 6%, NBC 10%, CBS 6%, C-Span 3, with “Other” 10% and “Undecided” 12%. This finding supports the Gallup’s last “Trust in Institutions” Poll where Television News sources are ranked trustworthy by merely 11% of the Respondents. With the inability to tell the difference between an actual news report or an editorial on most newscasts, the general public has been left disenfranchised as the news media’s “take” on any given political event clearly offers a point of view rather than stating actual facts, and includes personal attacks on candidates and their families. It is the lack of what can be termed as “straight news” which is pushing those who are even remotely interested in what occurs in the political realm to find other trusted sources. Out of all networks, FOX, with the tagline: Fair and Balanced, does not editorialize the news, rather offers opinion programs which are designed to discuss political and social events. The other networks, somehow manage to avoid a distinction between the two, which has become more transparent over the past several years. That said one cannot rely on one source alone, if one wants to understand the overall consensus of a political figure and or incident, one must view the take of, at a minimum, 3 or 4 networks. It is this comparative that gives FOX the edge – although most view FOX as a “conservative” news outlet, it is more aptly a news outlet that will report, without the added bells and whistles on all candidates, or situations. That said, when one moves to the opinion programming, there the difference is evident - specifically with the Sean Hannity Program. Hannity, who is a blatant conservative, features panels that include those who are furthest from his political think, with lively, often explosive debate. This type of programming allows viewers the opportunity to hear the passion expressed by all sides of the political spectrum, and to make a distinction, between the various points of views as those individuals opinions. It is not, as is the case with Reporters from other news organizaitons, who, during a newscast, will prop up one candidate or incumbent over another in a manner which leaves no doubt in the viewers mind that the news source is “tainted”, whether they tend to like or agree with the article or not. The lack of clarity in reporting and those stories chosen, even down to the network blogs, are, in a word, mind-boggling. In particular, refer to this blogs article of Monday which follows the path a “news item” on Sarah Palin, took – beginning with an Arizona State Democrat Party website fundraiser, to the fringe blogs of the left (press) to what can be termed a “main newspaper” to the News Networks – all insisting a situation occurred, without a grain of “fact” to back it up – news has become innuendo. It took all of 15 minutes to find the source of the Palin “story” using simple Google Search, yet someone the details that emerged were not a) either found, or b) ignored by the Network News Blog that posted the item.

The last question on Trusted Reporters (Suffolk Question 59), is odd in that the majority of those cited as Reporters, are Editorialist, granted some do report news, however, the bulk of the body of work is, again, opinion oriented. Included: Wolf Blitzer, Anderson Cooper, Fareed Zakarai, John King, Howard Kurtz, Candy Crowley, Bill O’Reilly, Shepard Smith, Sean Hannity, Mike Huckabee, Megyn Kelly, Rachael Maddow, Chris Matthews, Ellitot Spitzer, Ed Shutlz, Campbell Brown, Keith Olbermann, Jose Scarborough, David Gregory, Brian Williams, Tom Brokaw, George Stephanopoulos, Christiane Amapour, Diane Sawyer, Katie Couris, Bob Schieffer, John Stewart and Glenn Beck – Seriously – is it any wonder the Public views new somewhat skeptically? Out of the 1070 Respondents, 294 either chose “other”, “none” or “don’t know”. This is most likely due to the fact that the aforementioned “sources” are either straight opinion programming, with the anchors (most likely to be a source); Brian Williams, David Gregory, Tom Brokaw, Anderson Cooper, Shepard Smith faring much worse than the #1 choice, one Bill O’Reilly, who took 9% of the vote, with Anderson Cooper taking 2nd place with 6% - the balance of the aforementioned all fell between 4 and 0%. 42% of those polled did not know, chose other or were clearly undecided as to whom to choose. (Source all references to Suffolk Polling: Suffolk University.).

The problem: one should not report on an event and or person, noting A occurred, (or in most cases insinuating), when there exists on the Internet, or on other programming, what amounts to 8 X 10 Color Glossies (Arlo Guthrie, Alice's Restaurant), with live audio or video, that clearly is – what is it, and not what the “reporter” has stated (or insinuated).

The solution: Read the news, if one is about to editorialize, run with a disclaimer: I am about to report, but will inject my own political opinion into this story. This may be the only way that the “trust” will return to those once lofty #1 sources, as the millions of viewers abandon the evening news in search of – news!

The President’s off to Ireland – Archives from Irish Church Show ties to the Emerald Isle - Obama is Now Irish!

Obama as Irish - image from Chicago Machine.org

CBC News is reporting that the President is Irish, through is material grandfather. The ever evolving biography of the 44th President of the United States, underscores the melting pot that is the United States. This revelation has been noted as being timely considering that Irish Catholics have a substantial voting bloc within these United Sates, and Ireland could use a boost to its economy.

Barack Obama, whose father was a Kenyon (British) National, and a mother from Kansas, has been viewed as a of mystery” vis a vis his edibility for the Presidency, including a new book released by Jerome Corsi, “Where’s the Birth Certificate”(Amazon.com) a tome that asks questions ranging from the long form birth certificate (answered and released by the White House), as well as others that one might find more troubling.

The fact that our President is of multinational and multi-cultural heritage highlights the best of the nation that is these United States; that regardless of one’s ethnic or other background, one can still be voted into office by a majority of the American People. Will being a new found Irishman help his chances for re-election? No more and no less than any books written on his eligibility may aid in ensuring he is not re-elected. His ability to govern, his foreign policy stance, and the economy will all factor into whether or not the President will be reelected to a second term. With the GOP field under constant attack by the media, (see media trouncing of any candidate or anyone contemplating a candidacy on the GOP general election Presidential ticket), the “transparency of the media” (not in a good way), and the political climate in the late summer and fall of 2008, should the present trends continue, whoever the GOP nominee may be, from this point of view, stands a better than average chance of becoming the 45th President of the United States. That said, our current President is one fascinating man vis a vis his ever evolving heritage.

Sarah Palin Home Purchase – Arizona Democrat Party Fundraiser Attempt Fuels Speculation and becomes “News”

Sarah Palin Arizona? - image from AZ Democrat Party Website

Not for nothing, but one has to ask the question: “Is a rumor started by a Democrat State Party in order to raise funds, really news?” The rampant speculation that former Alaska Governor and 2008 GOP Vice Presidential Candidate Sarah Palin has purchased a home in Arizona in order to a) based a 2012 GOP Presidential bid, or b) run for an open Senate Seat in that state, began with a fundraising attempt by the Arizona Democrat Party Fundraiser:

Dear Friend,
Politico reported earlier today that Sarah Palin is eyeing Scottsdale to launch her bid for the White House.
"But I'm told Palin's camp is, at least, holding preliminary talks about how a campaign would look if she decides to run. One early decision, a source says: It would be based in Scottsdale, Arizona, where Bristol Palin recently bought a house in nearby Maricopa." - Politico, March 9, 2011.
There is even political chatter of her looking at Arizona's open Senate seat.
The Politico article summed it up: "Arizona carries its own significance: […] It's also the core of the politically contested, fast-growing new West."
Help us send a strong message that Arizona should not be a stepping stone for extremist politicians and their radical agendas. Contribute to the Arizona Democratic Party.
2012 will be an important year for Arizona, and it starts now.
On Sunday, The Washington Post reported that President Obama's 2012 campaign manager, Jim Messina, "has his eye on states like Arizona, where he argues that McCain's absence from the ballot will give the president a better chance this time around."
Please give $5, $10, $20 today to help the Arizona Democratic Party become the "big-tent" home to not just Democrats, but Independents and Republicans disillusioned with the direction of our state.
The big secret is out: Arizona is ripe for a sea change to elect leaders who represent mainstream Arizona values like a strong economy, safe streets, and better schools.

The fact that Politico reported on Bristol Palin’s home purchase in March which was used by the Arizona Democrat Party as a Fundraiser, with zero proof of a Palin move, should have ended with the fundraiser letter, but it was enough for the Arizona Republic to post the question to readers: “Sarah Palin Buys a House in North Scottsdale?” The article begins by noting that speculation was the root of the story – an apparent “tip” from a Democrat State Rep and the Democrat Party Website Fundraiser letter noted above, demanded investigative reporting. The finding – a real estate deal that took place in Arizona by a firm that shields the identity of “a high profile buyer”, followed by calls by the Republic to both the firm’s lawyer and anyone remotely connected to Palin produced one “no comment” (the firm) and the mention that the reporter(s) were “unable to reach” (Palin, her aides and her PAC) (Arizona Republic).

When a firm is specifically hired to protect the identity of a purchase by any party, and then asked who that party might be from several sources, a “no comment” hardly constitutes a “yes, absolutely”. The buyer of this property could be anyone; it could even be The President, if one wanted to speculate on a “high profile” individual. However, rumors in this case, turn to “gossip – new” from the Arizona Republic to the Huffington Post, a month passed and the networks are now reporting on the Home Purchase by Sarah Palin – Seriously.

ABC News today: “Sarah Palin Buys Arizona Mansion: Reports”: rehashes the speculation noted in the original Arizona Republic Story (sans the fact that the AZ Democrat Party used a snippet from an article from Politico regarding Bristol Palin, took that and turned it into Sarah Palin, which then resulted in finding a real estate deal which is “sealed” for all intents and purposes.) by contacting the same Real Estate firm, with – the same results.

Suddenly, hundreds of references to this “story” from left, right and center news organizations are to be found under “Google News” search. What boggles the mind is the acceptable process for news has now become akin to the journalistic skills of National Enquirer reporters circa 1977. (The National Enquirer of that time, based out of Lantana Florida employed bad pre-photo-shopped distorted photo’s, and articles that begged lawsuits.) It is amazing the amount of time and effort that goes into the rumor mill that is allegedly reporting by sound news organizations today – and what is considered to be a “story”. One must note that the word “speculation” is used frequently by most “reports”, however, the intent to make something out of what may be nothing is amazing.

Is begs the question, does anyone with an ability to read and decipher the written word (or “news” report) buy this as news? Is it no wonder that in Gallup’s Confidence in Institution Poll released annually, shows that both newspapers and television news as of July 8, 2010, ranked out of 16 institutions, with the Congress listed as dead last: 10th (Newspapers), and 12th (Television News)? Those that are supposed to keep the public informed with impeccable facts and reporting are trusted just as much as HMO’s, Big Businesses, Banks and Organized Labor.
The multitude of articles that have been written on the subject, specifically those from allegedly “trusted sources” should have led with the Fundraiser that was fueled by an article on the daughter, and based on a purchase that no-one, besides the firm, has a clue of whom the owner may be - that’s the story.

2012 Update: Mitch Daniels Bows Out – Trump Continues to Receive Requests Asking Him to Reconsider and Run for the GOP Nomination

Trump - Deluged by Requests to Return to the GOP 2012 Race

The Wall Street Journal is reportingthat Indiana Governor, Mitch Daniels, will not be seeking the GOP 2012 Presidential Nomination. As the field narrowed, with the decisions of Mike Huckabee and Donald Trump to forgo a run in 2012, some Conservatives are still hoping for a “dark horse” candidate. Daniels was one of those they had hoped would run, along with New Jersey Governor, Chris Christie, who has, to date, not announced any intention other than being the Governor of New Jersey.

That said, Donald Trump, is still being “deluged” by calls, emails and the like, to reconsider his withdrawal and run for the nomination. The source, Newsmax, has appeared to be a fan of Donald Trump’s run since the beginning, however, they most accurately point to the 1990 general election where Ross Perot had withdrawn and then was pressured by the business community to reconsider (as is the case with Trump according to the articled.) Perot, however, ended up leaving the race in the end. Should Trump reconsider, it would please those conservative who he “spoke to” through his “take no prisoners” approach to all issues – he also had Democrats who would have gladly gone over to Trump as a Republican. Those looking forward to debates that included Trump (and Huckabee), now view the field as rather boring, even if Palin enters the race, it appears as if Mitt Romney, may be too “perfect” a candidate for some to support wholeheartedly – one comment: “He is a younger, more prefect version of John McCain.” That particular comment came from an individual who, for the most part, leans left, but would have thrown his full support behind Donald Trump.

It is, however, doubtful that Trump would change his mind, given the beating that he Press gave him, vis a vis his running against the President. Trump may have received more negative Press and attacks than Sarah Palin, who is still in the race, and has not announced any intent to either run or withdraw. Palin, who has survived perhaps the worst that the “mainstream” media could give, appears to be able to brush it off – One wonders if Trump’s main reason, (although many have concluded his run was a ruse to build ratings, and that he declined due to the offer of (at the time reported) 60 million dollars – a theory that one might consider rather ridiculous, as Trump’s need for 60 million dollars is simply an oxymoron, and secondly he appeared to be sincere in his pronouncements – to the average voter, Trump appeared patriotic, and one that was willing to and able to take the reins and right the course of the nation from a businessman’s perspective. That said, Trump, one must understand, is also human, and it is not without some reservation after the scathing attacks by the press, that he might not be as thick skinned as, say, a Sarah Palin. He is, after all, used to the adoration of the media, with occasional barbs about his hair, but these attacks were both personal and vicious, possibly leading him to reconsider the bid.

The fact that in today’s elections in the U.S., the media does not report, rather editorializes, on a candidate, and extends that editorial to the candidate’s family, from a personal, not political policy, perspective. If Trump were to reconsider, it would be a breath of fresh air that would be injected into the race. All of those looking for “excitement” and a candidate that resonates with the average voter are praying that Trump reconsiders.