Desperation - Obama Super PAC Ad Uses Man’s Grief to Blame Mitt Romney for Wife’s Death 5 Years After Romney Left Bain Breaks Ground for New Low

Mr.Soptic pictured above in Obama Campaign Ad, appears in Obama Super PAC Tying Romney to Soptic's Wife's Death - Image and article: Foxnews.com

A new ad from a Political Super PAC which backs President Barack Obama’s reelection effort, released on the 7th of August, is just steps from being slanderous, plays upon a man’s grief, and has drawn criticism from CNN as well as the Boston Globe. The Globe’s article: “Ad by pro-Obama super PAC exaggerates link between Mitt Romney and woman’s death from cancer” reveals some facts about the ad: the man in the ad, which the Obama Administration claims to have no prior knowledge was featured in a conference call with reporters two months ago, after the campaign launched two anti-Romney ads – during that call, “Soptic told the story of his wife’s death.” (Boston Globe)

Additionally, there are some flaws in the grief stricken man’s timeline: The plant where Mr. Soptic worked, was closed in 2001, Mitt Romney was busy running the Olympics in Salt Lake City (Denver Post, Feb. 2000). According to Politico, Mr. Soptic’s wife died in 2006, 5 years after the plant was closed leaving Mr. Soptic’s timeline of a wife dying 22 days after being diagnosed with terminal cancer 5 years after he lost a job at a plant which closed in 2001, is somehow tied to Mitt Romney in any way, shape or form, somewhat delusional. For the PAC, and the Campaign with full knowledge of the man’s history, to run the ad, is slanderous. That’s a new low in American politics.

Not for nothing, but the man is obviously grief stricken, it is 2012, his wife passed way six years ago, and he’s blaming a man that had zero connection to his family in this ad, and assuming that Mitt Romney had somehow been aware of his personal circumstances, but does not give a whit about his personal loss! It is human nature to want to cast blame when there is a loss, some people tend to handle grief better than others, therefore, Mr. Soptic has found a way to vent his grief, and mix that with a little politics. The Campaign and the PAC are using this man, in an attempt to smear the opposition and this is apparently just fine with some people.

The Los Angles Time’s, Michael Kinsley’s Op-ed “Kinsley: Hitting Romney below the belt? A pro-Obama attack ad implies that the GOP candidate is responsible for the death of an Indiana woman who lacked health insurance.” , consistently asks the rhetorical “So What?” when referring to falsehoods in the Pro Obama ad.

”Critics say that when her husband was let go, the woman still had health insurance through her own employer, but lost it when she had to quit her own job due to unrelated medical problems. Well, so what?Any story like this is going to involve a series of misfortunes.”……
“By the time the plant was closed, Romney was no longer in charge of day-to-day decisions at Bain. Again, so what?”

The Op-ed, interspersed with screamingly ridiculous assertions regarding Mitt Romney in general, is obvious in its intent to support the President – yet the tactic by the Obama Campaign to attempt to smear Romney by using his former association with Bain Capital have, to date, failed miserably. In late July of 2012 a poll by USA/Gallup found that by a margin of 2 to 1, respondents thought Romney was more capable of handling the economy than the President, in spite of Bain Capital. For the Obama Super PAC to use this particular tactic defies logic.

The nation is politically split, according to polls, however, that belies the fact that those who consider themselves independents, and can and will lean towards a candidate based upon their records to date, if available, and vote regardless of political affiliation of any candidate, and generally make the final decisions in any given election. An ad that is designed to appeal to the fringe elements of a candidate’s base, playing this late in the game, after the tactic has failed, suggests desperation.

Perhaps those polls showing the race as extremely close are not particularly accurate.

Perhaps the campaign is attempting to rattle Romney and PACs that back him to run ads that are similar in nature – thus being able to point to Mitt Romney running a negative campaign. Smartly, he has not taken the bait. Ads by the Romney campaign have been "compare and contrast" in nature. Although, Romney’s PAC’s can be just as vicious and play just as fast and loose with advertisements (review attacks on Gingrich and Santorum during the primary), those ads sunk to lows, gaining “Pinocchio’s” from the Washington Post – but somehow, not quite as low as accusing someone of murder. The Post routinely reviews political ads for falsehoods such as a recent Obama Campaign ad, receiving 4 “Pinocchio's” for falsehoods against Mitt Romney(Washington Post)

New Obama Campaign Tactic – Compare Romney to Bush – Negative Campaign Continues - Amnesia: "Miss Me Yet?" New Scientific Polling - Analysis

The Obama2012 Campaign is running a new ad in Colorado - which compares 2012 GOP Candidate, former MA Governor, Mitt Romney to former President George W. Bush(Politico) The video is available here on the Obama Campaign’s YouTube Channel. It may be tactic that works with the base, however, the target should be the Independent – especially if the polls (and internal polls) suggest a close race – and one has to wonder if this tactic will work as well as intended. The fact that, on several occasion, former President Bill Clinton has endorsed and/or stood by President Barack Obama, hardly suggests a comparison between the two men. In fact, President Clinton, the most popular American President in recent history – has made very flattering comments regarding President Obama’s opponent – the most recent in June, ”praising Romney’s sterling business career” (ABC News, June 1, 2012) Therefore, when one is in the same political party, one generally is endorsed, heartily or half-heartedly by the political party leaders, both past and present. Additionally, Romney’s governance of Massachusetts (which, indeed, he does have a governing record going into the campaign, rather than a legislative record), could in no wise be compared to Bush’s style, on both fiscal and social issue levels, no more than President Obama can compare his style of governing the nation to President William Jefferson Clinton’s.

Furthermore, as much as former President, George W. Bush, is still loathed by the left, there are those darned ” Miss Me Yet” billboards and the popularity of the “Miss Me Yet” t-shirts”that come into play.

If, the polls are correct and every vote counts, the constant negative drumbeat, coming from the Obama Campaign and the press, specifically regarding Mitt Romney, (pick a topic) can’t help. This was true of the attacks on Romney and his association with Bain Capital which, according to a USA Today Poll, had no affect on the preference of potential voters, who 2 to1 chose Mitt Romney on the economy.

Further, fundraising has been on the slow side, with the exception of Hollywood – as Politico stunningly reports that the President is donating to his own campaign, a commonplace event amongst Politicians’, however, one might not want to announce that to one’s potential donors – even as a “scare tactic”. A smart campaign has PAC’s running negative ads, allowing the campaign to either run positive messages or compare and contrast ads. A compare and contrast ad is one which compares a specific vision or issue or record of one candidate to another – with a bit of detail. The ad running in Colorado compares Romney’s vision to George Bush’s (perhaps not completely accurately), to President Obama’s vision - one which notes a $250,000 as the tax-cut (Bush era tax cuts and the $250,000 threshold) – as “wealthy” (not by small business standards), and reiterates the “rich can afford to pay more” message that generates class warfare.

Perhaps President Obama’s Campaign plans on running to the center after the election, but then they would be counting on the very short-term memory of the electorate and a massive economic turn-around. Negative messaging worked successfully for the Romney Campaign during the brutal 2012 GOP primary, but, and the big but, then Candidate Romney could point to a PAC rather than his campaign as the culprit. The latest Romney Campaign ad “Believe in Our Future” (watch here on the Romney Campaign You Tube Channel) speaks to Governor Romney’s experience in business and governing, and how he will apply those experiences to the Office of the Presidency.
The difference at this point is that Romney has run to the center, the way he governed in Massachusetts – which, can at times annoy the hard right – but at the same time, attract the moderate, the independent and yes, the Democrat. (Note: The Romney Campaign uses President Bill Clinton’s quote in the ad referenced above.). The negative advertising coming directly from a campaign makes one wonder what the internal polling shows – perhaps a race that is not quite as close as the polls currently suggest.

Note on polling: There is an interesting article from Reuter’s India entitled “Analysis: Scientists go beyond the polls to forecast U.S. election” in which analytics are applied to forecast the outcome of elections – not unlike actual polls, where samples can and do vary, the polls by U.S. academics, suggest a close election, including a quantifier that uses “racial bias” in the equation.

Three years after emerging from a deep recession, the economy has not recovered. The unemployment rate has been stuck above 8 percent for 41 months -- nearly Obama's entire time in office.
For his model, University of Iowa professor Michael Lewis-Beck looks at decades of data on job creation and presidential approval. His preliminary forecast, made with Charles Tien of the City University of New York, gives Obama 46.9 percent of the vote and Romney 53.1 percent.

(in.Reuters.com - reference link in above para)

The balance with modifications, have the two candidates within points of each other – (based on popularity and trends), - they have been as accurate as other posters – on the popular vote, which, in races that are within hair-breaths – the Electoral College trumps all models.

Yet, one has to ask which forecasters model is correct – the one that uses economic data with trends (shown above) or the models that are consistent with current polling – one might look to the negative ads and the increased vitriol against one candidate over another by the press to make an educated guess.

2012 GOP Update: Gingrich Soars in SC and National Gallup, Romney To Fight Back – First Must Battle Data Dump of MA Computers from 2008

The new Top Tier: Gingrich and Dr. Ron Paul - image mediaite.com


The fact that the Iowa and New Hampshire Caucus and Primary are now four weeks away has current front runner, Newt Gingrich, the target of just about everyone who is connected to Washington or the Romney Campaign. According to Gallup Gingrich leads Romney by 15 points, and the President by continues to hold historically low approval ratings. Rasmussen reports Romney is behind Obama by 2 points, while Gingrich now leads the President by 3 – both within the margin of error. In the GOP Primary, Rasmussen shows Gingrich with a lead of 38 to 17%(Romney), (that data coming from Dec. 1st, while Gallup’s release was on Dec. 6th, with similar results.

Over at Public Policy Polling: Gingrich Leads in both South Carolina and Colorado by 51 to 14 in SC and 37-18 in SC (PPP).

Romney is not going to take this surge by Newt Gingrich sitting up straight and playing nice: Lately, Romney has met with the Republican Royalty, the Bushes CBS, and most recently Romney received the backing of Dan Qualye, former V.P. under President George H.W. Bush.

Further, according to the blog TPM a track on Karl Rove (former Advisor to George W. Bush, also known as the “Architect” of the Bush campaign’s has been less than kind to every candidate but Romney. Although, one has to take all of this as a given, as Romney has been considered by the Republican Establishment as a “given” for the nomination since 2008. Even with all that help from his friends, Romney feels the need to target Gingrich who, at this point in time, and with a 10 plus point lead over Romney in both state and national polling, may be difficult to remove from his perch.

Gingrich appears to have the lone distinction of being disliked by almost everyone in Washington, from the Post, to key Democrats such as Nancy Pelosi, but more importantly to the a small number of Republican’s in the Senate and Congress, who have a lot to say about leadership, and organization, or in their words, a lack thereof. Of course, that may play well with other Congressional Representatives, Karl Rove, the Bushes, and or a variety of RNC operatives, but how well does that play in the heartland? One might refer to the polls.

Before Mitt Romney can go on his mission to destroy Newt Gingrich (by rehashing old records, and repeating Rovian slurs, (and perhaps a pointer or two from the Bushes and Dan Quayle), he has to deal with the fact that his administration dumped all email correspondence just prior to his abandonment of the Massachusetts Governors office for a run at the White House. The story, which has been bubbling below the surface since November 18, 2010, speaks to Romney’s spending over $100,000 in Massachusetts State Taxpayers Dollars (a mere drop in the bucket considering Massachusetts and waste of Tax Payers Dollars), to buy staff computers, and then wipe the hard drives clean of any electronic communication that then Governor Romney or his staff may have written or received in the three years he acted as Governor (campaign for President in the 4th year) The move to do so was considered unusual by former Governors: Cellucci, Weld and Swift, and the entire revelation of the sale and wipe of the Romney computers leak to the press - was blamed on the Obama administration. Apparently the spin is Deval Patrick (D-MA), current governor, and pal to President Barack Obama, was so filled with angst over Romney (who has not led in polls since anyone but Romney entered the race), that the administrations lawyer leaked the facts to the Boston Globe. (First Amendment Center)

Romney should have realized the Governorship he held was in Massachusetts, where, if one were to read The Blues State by Jon Keller, available on Amazon for a pittance one would understand that dirty politics rule Beacon Hill, and although the dominant political party is Democrat, those Republican’s in position of power, tend to tread similar waters. The book is a real eye-opener and well documented.

The balance of the world media has run with the story as of this morning: December 7th and the tale of Romney ridding history of emails during his tenure can be read from Canada, or one might catch it on the morning news. However, it is apparently the norm for the systems to purge outgoing governors records automatically (according to the Boston Globe), but that does not explain the physical purchase and wipe of the drives Secretary of State, Democrat William Galvin will be releasing the paper trail from the Romney administration soon. From an historical pespecxtive it is unfortunate that the emails were lost. However,from the Romney campaign’s perspective wiping these electronic documents and selling the computers to staff members was completely legal under Massachusetts law (again read that book “The Bluest State”).

Side note: although to this mind it is of little consequence given the fact that the release of Sara Palin’s emails during her tenure as Govenor of Alaska revealed that she did her job, while the bulk of the emails were so mundane, that those news outlets that paid a pretty penny to gain access, were sorely disappointed. That may have been the case with the Romney emails, but the fact that theses emails were specifically erased, legal or no, raises questions.

Ron Paul, who is now second in most polling to Gingrich, essentially replacing Romney, has gone negative in his campaign ads, and as Romney plans to do the same thing (given the LA Times report), one can anticipate a backlash against both the Romney and Paul campaign. The reason Gingrich is known as the “smartest guy in the room” is simply because he has kept a civil tone throughout, focused on the nation, rather on tearing down his peers, and that, from past elections, both state and national is the smartest move one can make. Negative advertising gives no advantage – therefore, the suggestion to Dr. Paul’s campaign abandon the attacks and play up one’s ideas and one’s own record. As a resident of the State of Massachusetts who lived under the Romney administration – the message to that Campaign - don’t change a thing.

In closing the latest Gingrich ad that is running in Iowa is shown below.