Bill Clinton thinks he understands why Sarah Palin is so popular in the Heartland. On Monday, he shared his thoughts with reporters prior to a meeting (Clinton Global Initiative): "I come from Arkansas, I get why she's hot out there," Clinton said. "Why she's doing well." He went on to explain that her appeal centered on her motherhood, a larger family that those in the “Heartland” could relate to, as well the fact that her husband is the kind of guy Clinton can “relate to”. He went on to decry the never-ending Obama campaign attacks by stressing that Palin should be celebrated for her elevation on the ticket, ending with the question: “And just say that she was a good choice for him and we disagree with them?"
Where President Clinton may have erred is that location doesn’t matter when it comes to Palin – women, whether they live in the Heartland or the West, or the Northeast or the South or Florida, if they are working mothers, relate to Palin. There are a few who, bedeviled by partisan blindness, one too many Huffington Post updates, and a firm belief that Obama is the next Messiah, believe Sarah Palin should be subject to Photoshop, hacked emails, and the comments of their favorite undereducated starlets and comediennes – but they are not the norm.
What is a working Mom? - Women who have one or two or more children, work 40 hours, act as a taxi-service and feel that they have been ignored, let down and left out by politician’s because there is no way Nancy Pelosi could ever relate to the rest of “us”. Nancy Pelosi and Company (Obama, Kerry and the rest of her Henchmen), are only interested in “Reproductive Rights” (yet another term for abortion), and that message is loud and clear ringing not in the heartland only, but in the suburbs and yes, even in urban centers. The gig is up – and Bill Clinton gave a great assessment as to why Palin has personal appeal. Women are paying attention, working mothers that are not only interested in the fact taht Palin manages just like they do, but that she also had to manage her family and govern and she did so effectively. She’s a reformer and there is nothing a mom likes more than reform – especially when it comes to education and a call for transparency in government. (- A government that is sucking the life out of every family in the country through a never ending array of taxes.)
Just how many working women are there who relate to positively relate to Palin? Both campaigns need to figure this out because those are the women who may play a larger roll in deciding this election. One of them most likely new when he chose her as his running mate (giving him points with that same group), the other most likely has because of the level and baseness of the attacks.
Bill Clinton knows first had what it is to work with and stand by a strong and capable woman, and he also knows what the best strategy would be, if the match up were between Sarah and Hillary. He also sees the writing on the wall, and "race" doesn't enter into the picture. Educated guess based on Rasmussen polling and Vegas lines: he’s laying the groundwork for a 2012 match-up between Hillary and Palin.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Monday, September 22, 2008
1980 Revisited – The McCain and Reagan Comparison
If one looks to historical voter demographics to predict outcomes; then the likely outcomes, despite polling to the contrary, will place John McCain in the White House.
How they Voted 1980 – the keys: Regan won 53% of the male vote and 49% of the female vote, 52% aged 30-49 and 54% age 60 plus, 86% of the Republican vote and 26% of the Democrat vote.
Today, the issue of Race has become more prominent in the campaign – in the 1980 Voters by Groups – 10% of non-whites cast their vote for Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, retaining 90% of that group. However a stunning AP/Yahoo poll suggests that that one-third of all white Democrats still have an unfavorable view based on race. additionally, the Democrats have lost a share of Democrat women (no polling percentages), unable to bring voters who were firmly in the Clinton camp back into the fold. Groups include PUMA a PAC that was formed to return the Democrat Party back to its roots.
The Catholic Church has become more aggressive, noting that those who support abortion are “disqualified” – a YouTube video used by Catholic.org was pulled from that website. Recent Obama Rallies have been interrupted by a group called “Blacks Against Obama, their main theme has been the abortion issue. Although Reagan did not carry an overwhelming amount of the Catholic vote, McCain may make up ground as the churches are now more vocal and parishioners more engaged.
The Republican Base is no longer a wild card: Now that Sarah Palin, a strong, pro-life, conservative with a reform record is running with McCain, the base is solid and growing: The San Francisco Chronicle is reporting that state Democrats “are freaking out” because Palin has energized the California Republican Party. Although downplayed by most of the media, Palin has attracted crowds of up to 60,000 at an event in Florida, the attendees: seniors. Compared to recent crowds of 8,000 for Obama, the top of the ticket. McCain already has the mighty Republican base behind him, to the extent not seen since the 1980 election of Ronald Reagan, he appeals to Independents, and most importantly disenfranchised Democrats. Should 10% of the Democrats (conservative figure) cast their vote for the McCain-Palin ticket; the electoral map will mirror that of 1980.
Finally, the biggest McCain-Palin boost is from the media. A Rasmussen poll suggests that 51% of the respondents felt that the media was “out to hurt” Sarah Palin, one sore point for the Republican Base and PUMA. It is no wonder then, that as the polls continue to tighten and the Republican base is shown as energized that the Democrats have little left but despair and derision? Although pundits are cautiously calling this a close race, Rasmussen, whose track record is a bit better than most pollsters, is already showing Palin-Clinton match-ups. As of September 3,Palin is leading Clinton 52/41 among women. Therein lays the rub: Is this particular polling designed to predict the outcome of the 2008 race? Or is it 2012?
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Obama Lies to Seniors - What else is new?
One can always tell when a Democrat is seeking office – there are few key issues for the party: abortion, Supreme Court judges (so that they can continue abortion unfettered), and little else. For the past few weeks, the nation has been given insight as to how critical abortion is for the party – the Obama Campaign, and their surrogates have gone above and beyond any previous lows, by attacking Republican Vice Presidential Candidate, Sarah Palin – simply because the Democrat Ideal of a true Feminist, is a woman whose sole criteria in life is to make sure that Abortion on demand is available. Palin, who is pro-life and against abortion, has been the target of every conceivable insult, invasion of privacy and sexist remark that one could envision. They aren’t convinced these lines of attack are working, so they’ve reached into their tired bag of tricks and pulled out the Social Security – When all else fails – scare the seniors.
New York Times”Senator Barack Obama delivered an ominous warning to Florida voters on Saturday, suggesting that Senator John McCain would “gamble with your life savings” by investing Social Security money in private accounts that could be affected by the roiling financial markets.”
Obama is technically lying through his teeth, so much so that even Newsweek entitled their article on this campaign spin: “Obama’s Social Security Whopper”
At issue, George W. Bush’s 2004 push to privatize some, not all, of social security in an attempt to shore up reserves. This plan allowed participants to opt into private self-investments, just like the Government currently offers to every single one of its retirees. It is an identical plan, with one exception: Those who do not wish to participate – don’t’ have to. That measure was killed by the House Democrats through filibuster after filibuster (in other words, House and Senate Democrats have done nothing constructive for the American people even before they gained control of both houses, fighting to make sure that no progress whatsoever was made – Democrats in action).
Obama, of course, did his part in the “scare a senior, retain power” plan and included a racist overtone. On March 11, 2005, the Chicago Tribune reported that “Sen. Barack Obama on Thursday called President Bush's suggestion that African-Americans could reap greater rewards from overhauling Social Security a "stunning" argument that ignored the true health issues facing blacks in this country.
As the president launched a two-day tour through the South to build support for his controversial plan to revamp Social Security, Democrats challenged a White House assertion that blacks would particularly gain from Bush's proposed private retirement accounts because they have fewer years to collect benefits considering they die younger. “(Full article available at: Chicago Tribune archives – fee based
What is the difference between the 2006 and 2008 races? Very little, and as the writing on the wall becomes increasingly clear, the Democrats go back into the same bag of tricks in the hope that someday it will work. Someday will not be 2008. Someone neglected to tell those who proudly wear the symbol of the Donkey that 70 is the new 30 – that seniors are more likely to be working at 72, and or beyond, and already understand that those who have government retirement plan (congress, every single government employee, civilian or otherwise), are not considered incapable of opting for self-directed retirement investments, that is clearly not a race issue, and that once again, someone is up for election.
New York Times”Senator Barack Obama delivered an ominous warning to Florida voters on Saturday, suggesting that Senator John McCain would “gamble with your life savings” by investing Social Security money in private accounts that could be affected by the roiling financial markets.”
Obama is technically lying through his teeth, so much so that even Newsweek entitled their article on this campaign spin: “Obama’s Social Security Whopper”
At issue, George W. Bush’s 2004 push to privatize some, not all, of social security in an attempt to shore up reserves. This plan allowed participants to opt into private self-investments, just like the Government currently offers to every single one of its retirees. It is an identical plan, with one exception: Those who do not wish to participate – don’t’ have to. That measure was killed by the House Democrats through filibuster after filibuster (in other words, House and Senate Democrats have done nothing constructive for the American people even before they gained control of both houses, fighting to make sure that no progress whatsoever was made – Democrats in action).
Obama, of course, did his part in the “scare a senior, retain power” plan and included a racist overtone. On March 11, 2005, the Chicago Tribune reported that “Sen. Barack Obama on Thursday called President Bush's suggestion that African-Americans could reap greater rewards from overhauling Social Security a "stunning" argument that ignored the true health issues facing blacks in this country.
As the president launched a two-day tour through the South to build support for his controversial plan to revamp Social Security, Democrats challenged a White House assertion that blacks would particularly gain from Bush's proposed private retirement accounts because they have fewer years to collect benefits considering they die younger. “(Full article available at: Chicago Tribune archives – fee based
What is the difference between the 2006 and 2008 races? Very little, and as the writing on the wall becomes increasingly clear, the Democrats go back into the same bag of tricks in the hope that someday it will work. Someday will not be 2008. Someone neglected to tell those who proudly wear the symbol of the Donkey that 70 is the new 30 – that seniors are more likely to be working at 72, and or beyond, and already understand that those who have government retirement plan (congress, every single government employee, civilian or otherwise), are not considered incapable of opting for self-directed retirement investments, that is clearly not a race issue, and that once again, someone is up for election.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
