Obama in Boston, Fundraiser Bound - $5,000 Plate Dinner To Support Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee

Obama will spend the day in Boston MA, education and fundraising priority - image chicagodenfender

The Boston Globeis reporting that President Obama will make two stops in Boston today, one at a public school funded by Bill Gates, the other, a fundraiser for the Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee at the at Boston’s Museum of Fine Arts.

The $5,000 a plate fundraiser, in one of the “Bluest States”, is part and parcel of the job the President performs as head of his political party. Normally, a sitting President is seen as the titular head of the political party he or she represents, and Obama is no exception. Massachusetts, according to a recent Gallup Poll,is one of ten states where the President’s approval rating is above 50%, at 52.2% the lowest of the top ten. His highest approval ratings are in DC and Hawaii, rounding out the balance of the ten are: Maryland, New York, Delaware, Rhode Island, California, Connecticut and Illinois.

These were based on 2010 job approval ratings, prior to the surge of gasoline prices at the pump and the crisis in the Middle East.

In the last mid-term elections, the Massachusetts Democrat Congressional Delegation, managed to maintain their district seats, but not without the need to campaign for the first time in decades, some of those with considerable war chests, were kept busy on the home front defending their turf against first-time runners – including Barney Frank (MA4) and Richard Neal (MA2). With redistricting about to take place in Massachusetts, where one Congressional Seat will be lost, speculation regarding which Congressional Representative will be “retired” is ongoing.

2012 Update: Gallup Sees No Front Runner, Boston Globe on Romney in New Hampshire

Gallup Dismayed - GOP Field is Tied! Huckabee, Palin Romney - photo credit: freedomslighthouse.net

Gallup, in a study of GOP Frontrunners from 1952 forward, finds that the 2012 “potential candidates” offer no clear frontrunner, in what Gallup terms as an “anomaly” this late in the game. However, in 2008, McCain was paired with Rudy Giuliani, who bested McCain at this stage of the “campaign”, with McCain emerging after Giuliani dropped out of the race, and the New Hampshire and Iowa contests were past. It was the South Carolina primary that gave McCain the green light he needed in order to emerge as a front-runner in the eventual field that included both Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee.

As of the last Gallup Survey taken in February, Huckabee led both Romney and Palin by 2 points, in other words, a statistical tie. Herein lies the conundrum faced by pollsters, there are three strong contenders for the 2012 GOP nomination, none of which have formally announced. Palin has hinted at running, and has made a staff change to her PAC that indicates she may most likely run. Huckabee, with the release of a book and subsequent book tour across early caucus states, as well as the South Carolina battleground, will decide late (in terms of an actual announcement), in June or July of 2011. Romney is declared in all but making the statement official, the former MA Govenor came out this past week with the declaration that he was the most qualified GOP candidate. Although some politico’s may find this to be a negative for the GOP, the fact of the matter is, that overall, a healthy field of strong candidates (and that does not take into account those who have not yet emerged and maybe just as strong as the current well-known three), offers Conservative and Conservative leaning voters the more options than in previous contests, and delaying a formal announcement while laying groundwork for a campaign, is akin to having money in the bank. What will break or make the eventual nominee (which said person will not necessarily emerge until after the South Carolina primary or later for that matter) will be a cohesive effort on the part of all conservative wings of the GOP party to coalesce behind that person – something that may or may not happen, similar in scope to the 2008, doomed from the get-go, GOP nominee.

In 2008, with the taint of the Republican Brand, it was unlikely that whoever ran on the ticket would win the election. However, since the tide has turned, and it is the Democrat brand that is in that position, there will be little difference in who eventually takes the nominee, even if the matter is not settled until the GOP convention.

Strategically, it makes sense that the nominee be delayed over time, giving President Obama no clear rival until the 11th hour – in this scenario, Obama would have to contrast his policy against three or four (unnamed GOP), which would further waste resources. Additionally, if the President’s approval ratings for 2011 do not improve over 2012, it will not matter which front-runner emerges, that individual will most probably be the next U.S. President. Although, it will be a battle, the Gallup favorability ratings for 2010, show few states that will not fall to the GOP, should those numbers hold (currently 10). Gallup, it should be noted is a conservative polling firm, and by conservative, one is not referring to political ideology rather methodology – taking pains to go neither to the right nor the left.

The Boston Globe’s article on Mitt Romney in New Hampshire declares Govenor Romney a “novice no more”, by virtue of his previous run, and offers that he is in a better position to define himself more so than in 2008, as the issues then were less to his abilities (war in Iraq) than now, where the issue is the economy. That said, the article goes on to describe him as more comfortable, rather than “stiff”, as in 2008, but rightly suggests that his greatest hurdle will be his institution of mandated health care (Commonwealth Care) that was morphed into Obama Care on the national level.

There are, of course, differences, however, should Romney emerge as the nominee, it would take the debate over Mandated Health Care off the table, so to speak. Lastly, the subject of Romney’s religion comes into play – the Globe sees his Mormon faith as a deterrent in early states such as Iowa and South Carolina – that said, a quick review of recent (less than 50 years), proves that when the opposition is viewed as not desirable for the nation, and the frontrunner is a Mormon, that faith has little or nothing to do with electability. In 1972, one Richard Nixon, Mormon was elected to the Presidency taking every state with the exception of Massachusetts.

The aforementioned belies the Globes perception that the candidates electability may hinge on religion, whereby, history proves otherwise. In addition, as this nations laws demands a separation of church and state, with freedom of religion the root of the of the formation of the colonies which eventually became these United States, one must understand that, try and the opposition might, regardless of a Presidential Candidates personal choice of religion is concerned, it is that persons perceived ability of governing, that will rule the day. In this opinion, when one has a defined religion, it bodes well for the candidate, rather than detracts, going to personal character and conviction of a named faith. Those that would put labels on Catholics (Kennedy), Mormons (Nixon), and George W. Bush) (Methodist), may have done so but to little avail. ( source adherents.com)

In 2011 (to date), we have Obama (Christian), Romney (Mormon), Huckabee (Baptist), and Palin (Non-Declared Christian – (lack of sources offering a clear definition). In the end run, it will not be a candidate’s religious preference, it will be based on the state of the national electorate and the candidates perceived ability to govern effectively.

Romney Comes Out Gunning for the Nomination – Remarks from the Granite State

Mitt Romney Charges Ahead - GOP 2012 - Photo Politico

In what Politico is calling an “unofficial kickoff” of former Massachusetts Governors, Mitt Romney’s “Granite State Campaign, Romney came out speaking of the President and pulled no punches – from saying it was time for a New President, to pulling down “Obama Care”, to using the “misery Index” term most associated with Former President Jimmy Carter, and attaching Obama’s name (justifiably so), Romney began his “unofficial campaign” hard in the State that gave him the nod in the 2008 GOP campaign.

Of interest is the defense of Massachusetts Health Care System, one which was exported nationally and is now one of the main hot button conservative issues with the President. Romney noted is was a states issue, however, the plan put into motion by the former Governor Romney, and then handed to a tax and spend Mass. Legislature and new Governor Deval Patrick, is not the same plan Romney had in mind originally – although mandates were a part of the original proposal.

The Boston Herald, came in with comments regarding the fact that being first in the first primary in the nation, does not always bode well for a candidate, choosing several recent races where a candidate won New Hampshire and went on to lose the nomination.
It would be hard to fathom Romney not being a front runner in his own state, he should have the support of the Massachusetts Republican Party, that said, rank and file, and independent leaning Republicans, may make other choices, and upend him in his own back yard – note to Huckabee, Gingrich, The Donald, Palin and anyone else thinking they might want to take a shot at Romney in some way shape or form – Massachusetts is not, repeat not, a winner take all state, and it takes more than three weeks to get an organization up and running to get the 15% necessary to put ones name on the ballot.
Since the majority of the front runners do have books in the marketplace, add a few stops to the Bay State, and the results may surprise you (we’re down the road from New Hampshire).