2012 Round-up: Gallup Obama at 44% Approval, 58% Republican’s Have no Favorite for 2012 – Perry and Palin Decisions Pending

Palin and Perry, once announced, field will tighten - image TexasGOPVote.com

Gallup Polling, perhaps one of the most conservative pollsters in the nation (Definition: Conservative: cautious number crunching that goes neither right nor left) continues to see a stagnant job approval rating for the President. He is currently at 44% approval with 49% disapproval, a rating that, in this “late hour” of campaigning for a job one already has, appears rather daunting. In addition, the Gallup “Generic Ballot” projects any Republican bests Obama by a margin of 47 to 39% (with 15% having no opinion – yet). This is considered with all due respect to the Office, a conundrum that is difficult if not impossible to overcome at this late date. Although pooh-poohed away by most Beltway pundits, one need only look at the current state of the economy, the stalemate over raising taxes versus raising a debt ceiling, (which, contrary to the major Democrat pundits and News Agencies of like mind, is not popular with the American Public, in poll after respectable poll), the continuous, almost maniacal support for the President by, what has become to be known as the “mainstream media”, hurts rather than helps both entities, as reports abound regarding high ticket birthday bash in Chicago, and his “expertise” at fundraising for his reelection campaign where USA today reports a “record haul”, meanwhile, the fiddler is playing while the economy burns.

This may be why the generic ballot is tilting more towards “any Republican” by the week, rather than staying stagnant, or declining like the Presidents approval rating. The question remains, however, which Republican? According to the same pollster, Gallup finds that 58% of Republican and Republican Leaning voters simply have not made up their mind as to whom they might support. A poll released July 15th, shows a field of no less than ten GOP Candidates (some of which are unannounced) plus “other” and “no decision”. In that field, Mitt Romney leads with 9%, followed by Michelle Bachmann at 9%, and two yet to announce candidates, Texas Governor Rick Perry (4%) and former Alaska Governor and 2008 VP nominee Sarah Palin (3%) hold the next highest slots in the poll. The pollster finds this puzzling because in prior years, there was a clear favorite or favorites early on, however, in prior years, there were not high profile candidates (Palin) who had yet to announce and not factored is the fact that there were simply fewer candidates for the office at this point.

Both Perry and Palin see August or September of this year as a point where they will either enter the race or no (the latter being unlikely in either case), which, as most conservatives and conservative leaning voters tend to pay attention to their choices, and what may come down the proverbial “pipeline” in a few months, would give those 58% (plus the 7% who are considering “Other”, new options that may just fit the ticket). In other words, they are holding out, waiting to see who is really “in”, and who may end up “dropping out” as the summer ends. One can hazard to guess that by October, there will be a top five, with two to four clear front runners. How maddening that Conservatives are enjoying the choices and the opportunity to examine each and every candidate.

Once all the announced candidates are headed into the first caucus and primary states, and the dust settles in February (Super Tuesday), one can then assume there would be a front runner or possibly two going into the spring of 2012. This will keep the Obama campaign on its toes and the media in a frenzy of “which GOP challenger to the President” need be attacked next. In other words this political season will be a circus for some and a joy for others – the others being those Republicans and Republican leaning voters who have choices.

Looking at the poll as it now stands, with the two not yet announced (meaning not yet committed to the race by most standards) polling at the top, just under Bachmann and Romney, suggests that once announced, those four would be the top tier candidates going into the primaries. As to the focus on fundraising that has gripped the media (Washington Post candidates expense reports), one finds Mitt Romney in the same place as 2008, with the most cash. What is most interesting is that several candidates have more cash on hand in 2012 that Romney’s nemesis, former Governor of Arkansas, Mike Huckabee did in 2008. Huckabee went on to stay in the race, while Romney dropped out in February of 2008, citing his need to “stand aside” for the “party”, while McCain took the evident lead, and Huckabee stayed in the race to keep the spotlight on the GOP and give primary voters in states beyond “Super Tuesday” a “choice” on the ballot. Therefore, money in the campaign, although important, need not be as excessive as say Mitt Romney’s cache, or for that matter, the billions in the President’s re-election purse.

Logistically speaking, the candidate that does emerge (or candidates in this case) will need to resonate with the rank and file (not the beltway or national party), in addition, that candidate must be able to carry the south and the west, most notably those states that have gained significantly in population – Texas for example. The eventual nominee will have to move through the south, and the Midwest with a significant lead(s) in order to cinch the nomination. At this point, were the election held today, one thing is certain, one of the aforementioned would be the next President and should the trend continue (and it is probable despite the pundits and cheerleaders), by August or September one will have a clear notion of who would be able to be the nations CEO. It will be in October that Gallup should be able to breathe a little easier as the field will have narrowed and those 58% will, for the most part, choose. There is no doubt that at least 18% (approx.) will remain undecided up until the bitter end. (Historical trending), choosing only in the final days prior to the actual primary or caucus.

Sarah Palin Documentary “Undefeated” Opens in Theatres this Weekend – The Left and the Right of Reviews Shows Duplicity – Time Outright Lies

Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann - Media Targets - image Minn. Post

The documentary, “The Undefeated”, with a focus on the early political career of Sarah Palin, former Governor of the State of Alaska and 2012 Anticipated GOP Presidential Candidate, opened in select cities this weekend. The reviews by all critics of “movies” were, as anticipated, harsh (nicely put), and whereas they compared a documentary film to the block buster released the same weekend - the epic Harry Potter Series. There is, to someone living in the real world, no possible way to compare the two film genres, however, in a fit of partisan displeasure, the critics had at the film as if it were trying to compete with the Potter series, which it wasn’t, as any sane person would note.

The film was said to be sold out on opening night in all cities, from reports by the AP on Dallas’s opening to the Orange California show to Atlanta (Source: Associated Content), however, that did not stop Time Magazine from printing, what can only be deemed a childish and totally incorrect rant on the documentary and it’s opening:
The article: The Undefeated Fails to Defeat the Box Office Sarah Palin Movie Debuts to Empty Audience relies on one Internet article from the Atlantic Blog – to make assumption after assumption, all of which are false. Time Magazine. Repeat: Time Magazine.

Several of their most ardent 60 or so readers, left comments in kind for the Internet version of the news weekly, with one or two dissenters pointing out either YouTube videos of the Orange California Showing in question (which said You Tube Video appears to show a packed house), and others just left links to the AP and other articles.

That said, a dose of reality is in order: the International Business Times projected $4 million in weekend sales, which for a 10 city opening of a Conservative Documentary speaks volumes.

Meanwhile, as the left unravels, the more that both Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann climb in polls and/or visibility, comedian and commentator, Bill Maher, with his very own show on HBO, went on what was coined by “Gawker” as a “Tirade” against Bachmann and Palin, to include sexual innuendos. One must not wait long for the reviews by the New York Times, or Times Magazine on Maher’s “Brilliant Tirade” – and the beat goes on.

Those that vote, those in the middle that are caught up in rising unemployment, increasing inflation on food and fuel and the usual threat of higher and higher taxes, are viewing, with skepticism every printed or broadcast piece of drivel being pumped out of the “machine” that our once news media industry puts forth as “gospel”. Consumers, used to cutting back now, and seeking the best bang for their buck, are including newscasts (broadcast, print and the web), into the bargain of what is worth the read, the listen. The last gasp of the current news media occurred in 2008 after which, the weekly “surprisingly high unemployment”, etc., etc., etc., ad naseum, began to wear thin – thus the historic upheaval in the House in 2010, and with no ability to fault themselves, one can almost with certainty predict that 2012 will either compare or overshadow 2010.
Those that live in the bubble of protected “think”, and never step foot out of the Beltway of the Mind (journalists, pundits on the DC to NY talk circuit, and entrenched politicians) (one John McCain comes to mind, in his warning to Michelle Bachmann on her stance on the Debt Ceiling), do not for a moment understand that as a whole, the nation is watching, listening and soundly rejecting their prattle and in some instances outright lies and smears.

Disclaimer: This blog has not viewed the “Undefeated” and yet, with the hoopla that is being created by the endless hysteria (for that is what it is), one can bet that as soon as able, it will be viewed, either in a theater, or in a living room. A documentary, is what it is, an opportunity to learn something new (although having researched the former Governor extensively, prior to her debut on the national stage, it may not be an eye opener). What a documentary is not: entertainment by the standards of the critics, (who should and do know better). It may even be the Road to the White House 2012, but chances are, Sarah Palin needs no documentary to take that road, as the economic climate becomes more challenging, as the Republican’s in the Senate go out of their way to compromise, and as the never ending spending and raising of the debt ceiling, implementation of new taxes and total misery of those on the lowest rung to the middle are pinched into obscurity, the options of Politician’s as usual, will be off the table. The people no longer want a “holier than though”, “smarter than the teleprompter”, “Beltway minded” “leader” – the people, the taxpayers are seeking an individual who will identify and, stand up for themselves and the rest of the nation, specifically someone who will prove to be impervious to the barbs from both the right and the left – that brings two to mind at present, and only two – one who has announced and one who is yet to announce. One also has to wonder if the vitriol from the Press would be less disgusting were the two not women? Is it the fact that Conservative Women are standing up and making waves (and if it were a Liberal Woman doing the same, the critiques would be there (a la Clinton) - with two Conservative women however, one can imagine that this will be more than a fair fight - as they will call out the base so called journalists and newscasters for what they are.

Report Lays Financial Meltdown Firmly On Barney Frank (D-MA4) and Chris Dodd (D-CT Retired) – Takes Blame Away from Private Sector

A report in the Richmond Times Dispatchplaces the blame for the “financial meltdown” on the government sponsored institution backed by both Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, Fannie Mae. An excerpt follows:

With the publication of "Reckless Endangerment," a new book about the causes of the crisis, this story is beginning to unravel. The authors — Gretchen Morgenson, a business reporter and commentator for the New York Times, and Josh Rosner, a financial analyst — make clear that it was Fannie Mae and the government housing policies it supported, pursued and exploited that brought the financial system to a halt in 2008.
After James A. Johnson, a Democratic political operative and former aide to Walter Mondale, became chairman of Fannie Mae in 1991, they note, it became a political powerhouse, intimidating and suborning Congress and tying itself closely to the Clinton administration's support for the low-income lending program called "affordable housing."
This program required subprime and other risky lending, but it solidified Fannie's support among Democrats and some Republicans in Congress, and enabled the agency to resist privatization or significant regulation until 2008.
"Under Johnson," write Morgenson and Rosner, "Fannie Mae led the way in encouraging loose lending practices among banks whose loans the company bought. . . . Johnson led both the private and public sectors down a path that led directly to the financial crisis of 2008."
The authors are correct. Far from being a marginal player, Fannie Mae was the source of the decline in mortgage underwriting standards that eventually brought down the financial system. It led rather than followed Wall Street into risky lending.

What is surprising is that this school of thought, based on Barney Frank’s defense of plain, old fashioned, mismanagement of a government sponsored entity (Fannie and Freddie), coupled with restraints on private banks, literally forcing them to make risky loans to individuals, taking a place not over years, but decades, was allowed to go on for so long without either a banker, or Republican, or fellow Democrat screaming from the rooftops that the sky was falling. Therefore, laying the blame on incompetent Progressive ideologist, Barney Frank, is a bit of a stretch, as there were so many hands in the pie of stupidity that Frank, although central to the whole nightmare, was, in essence a bit player.

Dodd, the former Senator from Connecticut, retired just prior to the 2010 midterm elections, his role in the fiasco among other issues related to sweetheart deals and mortgages, would have placed him firmly in retirement either way, Frank ran again and was reelected by a less than stellar margin in the highly gerrymandered Democrat controlled 4th district of Massachusetts. The more that reads into the length and breadth of the debacle, the more one has to question why these bozo’s were allowed to continue unabated, a practice that would eventually crash the housing market and the economy? There were Republican’s that asked, and received answers from Frank and Company that all was well, nothing to see here, move along. Apparently, satisfied, they did just that. That is a failing of the inner DC beltway politics that is akin to someone setting fire to the capitol and having one ask the guy across the aisle if perhaps they should evacuate - upon learning no, they both stay to perish.

It is noteworthy that the Dispatch published the article in the first place, considering that most press is firmly in the Progressive mindset of spreading the wealth, even if it takes down (or perhaps especially if) the financial system. The idea that banks were forced to make loans that were clearly risky, and allowed to make loans which were, in a word, predatory, makes one wonder why those mortgage lenders weren’t more vocal about the destruction of their industry – housing bubble or no – aren’t bankers more likely to be conservative when it comes to saving for the long-haul (their institution, jobs and economy), rather than risking all for a quick buck, at the say so of one Barney Frank?
The whole debacle could have been easily avoided, had there been follow-through from all corners, and a review made that clearly showed incompetence, bad legislation and a ton of bad loans to consumers who could not pay – an immediate halt would have meant no need for bailouts (TARP), and no need for taxpayers to pick up the slack, for decades. It would not have changed the outcome of the election, however, it will impact the next election, as the hole that has been dug, and dug so deep, is now squarely in the hands of progressives, who clearly believe that higher taxes and continued spending will, somehow, right the ship – it did not work in the past, therefore, there is no reason why a failed economic policy would work in the future – as nothing in our nations makeup has changed.

With the Bush Tax Cuts expiring, and the Health Care Act taxes beginning to kick in, those taxpayers still standing, especially in states such as Massachusetts, New York, California, Illinois, will most likely see incises in state taxes as well, and this is across the board, from the very minimal earners to those considered “wealthy” by Obama standards (couple making $250,000 annually). This lack of relief to both the individual taxpayer as well as private sector business will show a drop in retail, as well as a drop in hiring and or continued layoffs through the next year. The end result, “The Buck Stops Here”, will place the blame on one man and one man alone, the President.

Therefore, when one is considering just how bad Barney Frank’s management might be, one must also considering thanking him for eventually ridding the government of certain like-minded Progressives, come 2012. Barney Frank, will, of course, be up for reelection in 2012, along with cohort, Nancy Pelosi, the former Speaker of the House. It is simply the fact that Progressives truly believe that the masses (otherwise known as “we the people”) are too ignorant or busy working three jobs, if one can find a job at all, to pay attention to all of their accomplishments. Therefore, as the general election begins to take shape, and the field narrows in the spring of 2012, to challengers for the White House, Senate Seats and all Congressional Seats (they are all up for reelection), one has to suspect that there just may be changes in the beltway a la 2010.