2012 GOP 10-18 CNN Debate - Battle of the All-Stars – Cain Stands Ground, Romney-Perry Chew Up Time, Bachmann, Gingrich Benefit – Opinion

The CNN-Western Republican Leadership Conference GOP Debate held last evening in Las Vegas was a debate worthy of two bags of popcorn and a front row seat – Anderson Cooper’s CNN appeared to have lost control of the candidates at several points – and Cain and Romney were targeted, with Cain coming out no worse for the wear, and Romney with some explaining to do as Rick Perry consistently hammered home barbs on both immigrations issues and the Massachusetts Mandated Health Care Plan.

The entire video is below via www.rightscoop.com worth watching as it beats the “sound bite” videos that don’t always tell the full story (and leave off an important point or two being made by one candidate or another).

In brief, and from this perspective, the biggest winners of last night’s debate were the so-called lower tier candidates, Bachmann, Santorum, Cain and yes, Ron Paul, while Herman Cain held ground, and Mitt Romney and Rick Perry dominated the debate time and appeared to be having their own debate within a debate – Rick Perry shot back at Anderson Cooper at one point: (paraphrased): “You asked the question, I get to answer it any way I want” – then hammered away at Mitt Romney.

What this debate, from a Massachusetts Perspective tell us, is that Mitt Romney is still in denial over the mess that is the Massachusetts Health Care Program, or otherwise known as “Romney’s Albatross”. There were several discrepancies between reality and Romney’s version of how this plan works, and how it has evolved. The fact that the original concept may have been somewhat innovated, is not the end result. Firstly, Romney noted that the his plan allowed only private carriers, not the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to get involved in the insurance game – he must have forgotten Commonwealth Care – which is state run, and which tells individuals that they either buy the right dollar amount of insurance coverage and/or face penalties (the program is tied to the Department of Revenue). If one cannot afford insurance (and that’s a growing percentage of Bay Staters, one is made to pay a fee, to the Commonwealth’s IRS equivalent.) The only way out is if one’s employer does not offer insurance, and if one is an employer, one faces fines if one does not carry enough insurance (standards set by the Commonwealth) for each employee. It is a socialist nightmare, one which has prompted a call to action to remove the program that is the largest line item expense on the State Budget, with additional funds from the Federal Government, all the while unable to cover all uninsured, (those who are assessed fees), and those that are insured through private carriers, realized a minimum of a 30% increase in premiums over the past three years (source: this bloggers health insurance premiums). The move to http://repeal-romneycare.com is building steam across the state.” Romney is, of course, not responsible for all of the problems faced by those left behind in Massachusetts, but he needs to own up to the fact that is it a program that is far from perfect, and should be replaced. (There are options, such as the opening the state up to more than three carriers for instance – thereby dropping premiums and making health insurance more affordable. Tort reform at the state level might not be a bad idea either.

Rick Perry cannot hold his own in a debate – he loses his train of thought, and until and unless he can get enough sleep or get off the one issue answer, he is going to see his poll numbers continue to drop.

Which leads us to the fact that money and politics is, unlike the constant drumbeat of the press, the end all.

Herman Cain came out, although purloined for his 9 9 9 Plan, (which granted may raise a few questions, but it is a plan, one that has extremely good points, and should be read by everyone) unscathed – As a tax conscious blogger, the Cain Plan makes sense, it is not a simple as Cain suggests, however, some of the accusations leveled at Cain over the plan were not correct (Read plan here: at www.hermancain.com/999plan for perspective and questions.) but is any plan perfect? Ask Mitt Romney.

Michelle Bachmann came out confident and also had the most level answers of the evening, and one would have liked to see more of Bachmann’s common sense answers, if, and only if, the two schoolboy could have been controlled by Anderson Cooper long enough to hear responses and give time to both Bachmann and Gingrich – to this mind two underrated candidates that have the potential to rise above the fray. The most insulting part of this debate, the obvious ending where Bachmann, and Gingrich had to fight to give a closing statement – time was up, granted, but the time management of the debate, (with a heavy focus on beating up Cain, and then the Romney – Perry ad nauseum mini-debate,) left the American Public short.

Therefore, from this perspective, one is encouraged to give to the campaigns of the following candidates in order to ensure that their voices are continued to be heard, as they all offer the American public solutions and options that are not currently forthcoming from the White House.

To Anderson Coopers’ questions as to which one felt they could best President Obama in 2012, the answer is obvious: any one of those standing on that stage (ok, maybe not Rick Perry – unless he goes to teleprompter school with the President). The fact of the matter is, as Mike Huckabee proved in 2008, money isn’t everything – with Huckabee’s campaign in single digits, he blocked Romney and his millions from moving beyond Super Tuesday. The difference between these “lower tier” candidates of 2012, and Mike Huckabee, is that they all have a willingness to raise funds – whereas, Mike Huckabee, who would have, in this opinion made the best option for 2008, (once they removed Hillary Clinton – who was strongest on defense of all candidates running), is known for his lack of fundraising ability. It is not the millions, but it is the ability to go to donors and ask – not just the grass roots but the bigger donors, many of whom are still not committed. Therefore, in theory the field is complete, but as to calling out one right now who would best the balance of the eight – hard to tell.

Technical winner: Tie: Bachmann, Gingrich, for substantive answers. Losers: Romney and Perry. The one man who will benefit in the national polls: The ever likable Herman Cain. (Despite the fact that Romney will be immediately called the winner, as he is best loved by the Republican Establishment – something this blogger feels is a negative at times.

Best line of the night goes to: Newt Gingrich: (on the budget negotiations currently underway: via NYTimes “Now the idea that you’ll — the idea that you’ll have a bunch historically illiterate politicians who have no sophistication about national security trying to make a numerical decision about the size of the defense budget tells you everything you need to know about the bankruptcy of the current elite in this country — in both parties. (Followed by)… I’m a hawk, but I’m a cheap hawk. But the fact is — (laughter) — the fact is, to say I’m going to put the security of the United States up against some arbitrary budget number is suicidally stupid.”

Therefore, keep the voices of reason and those that hold the entire field accountable and intimately still stand to rise above the fray in business:

Donate:

hermancain.com/donate
michelebachmann.com
http://www.newt.org



Full GOP Debate from www.tehrightscoop.com

CNN Tea Party Debate Review: Overall Winner – The Tea Party – All Candidates Rumble Showcase Ideas and Mettle – Palin If In - Strategy Brilliant

CNN-Tea Party Express Buses - Normalizing the Norm for America - image: humble libertarian.com


In what had begun as a grass roots revolt against higher taxes, the size and scope of the U.S. Government, government regulations run amok and a return to the U.S. Constitution, the Tea Party Movement (Taxed Enough Already), has been characterized as a right-wing, terrorist, crazy group of individuals, who’s raising political voice, terrorized the media and certain members of Congress and the Obama administration. The transition from fringe to mainstream was completed last evening by CNN News who co-hosted with the Tea Party, what has been to date, the best debate forum by any network, at the Tampa Fair Grounds. Wolf Blitzer took questions from both the audience in Tampa and remote location “watch parties” in three states. The size and scope of the Tea Party was made evident, and the questions posed to the GOP candidates were sound, having more to do with policy than frivolous “What would Jesus do?” questions heard in previous years debates. The pace was fast, yet, Blitzer gave time to all candidates insuring that although the alleged “front-runners” rumbled back and forth (Perry and Romney), each candidate was asked to weigh in – repeatedly. One might have expected such a move from FOX News and/or the ratings hungry MSNBC, in order to boost ratings, rather, CNN, has now become the voice of moderation – we have entered the political twilight zone.

As to winners and losers on technical points, Rick Perry held his own, yet appeared to be somewhat shaken by the repeated questions by his peers of his Executive Order mandating vaccination of pre-pubescent girls against the HPV virus, with an opt out, rather than an opt-in for parents. In addition, Perry’s in-state tuition for those on a pathway to citizenship was met with criticism. During both of these incidents, Romney remained silent, coming at Perry over the issue of Social Security. Romney, who became more apparently ruffled, looked on the verge of losing his temper on several occasions during the discourse. Bachmann appears to be still in the game and then some, appearing confident and much stronger than in the previous debate held on MSNBC, and Santorum, Gingrich and Cain offered reasonable options, along with the most moderate of the bunch, Huntsman. The perennial candidate, Congressman Ron Paul, went off the proverbial rails when he began to cite The U.S. as the cause of the attacks on September 11th, citing Osama Bin Laden – he was consequently, booed by those in attendance, and came off sounding less Libertarian than Progressive. Overall best line of the night went to Newt Gingrich: In an exchange between Romney and Perry regarding the disaster of Social Security and Romney assertion that Perry is “scaring the elderly”, Gingrich shot back: (paraphrased) "Obama is scaring everyone."

In watching the debate one began to have a sense that almost everyone of those individuals on the stage would bring ideas and leadership skills to the table, regardless of where the current standing is in the polls – the exception being, in this opinion, Ron Paul, who although brilliant, does differ from most Conservatives in regards to the root causes of September 11th, foreign policy overall, and the question of open borders. Moreover, it is clearly too early to call a permanent front-runner, as fortunes in the polls, come and go between September and the Debates of November and December, mere months before the first primary and caucuses in 2012.

This leaves room for additional candidates, a la Ronald Reagan, to enter the fray. Immediately following the debate, Sarah Palin weighed in on the debate and the performance of the current candidates, on Fox New with Greta Van Susteren, (video below). Asked and answered at least a thousand times, Palin continues to hold that her entry (or non-entry) into the 2012 field will be a time of her own choosing, not dictated by the media. However, the run-down on all candidates and the overall impression during her analysis was that she was readying to take to the field, as to timing of an announcement that is for Palin to decide. As a strategy, it may prove to be brilliant: first Mitt Romney lead the field, with his background in economics, and a short stint as Governor of Massachusetts, he was closely followed in the polls by Michelle Bachmann, who won the Iowa Straw Poll, and was within points of Romney. Perry entered the race to much anticipation, and shot past Romney, effectively pointing out to anyone with a grasp on reality that Romney has trouble holding his own in this field, and polls gave the favor to Perry, by double digits over the former Bay State Governor.

However, after last evenings debate, questions are clear as to Rick Perry’s management of the Executive order (and a possible tie to cronyism, which, although down home in style, Perry has been in a political office for the majority of his career – double points), and his immigration stance. This took a bit of shine off the Texas Governor. The points scored against Perry, as noted by the Austin Statesman came from “Second Tier Candidates” not his “chief rival”. One can view this as either Romney taking a break and letting the rest of the “pack” beat up Perry, or Romney preferred not to go where the tables could be turned on Romney.

Therefore, as the front runners so often take so many hits, and then begin to slide in the polls, a late entry not only picks up support from those candidates who no longer can sustain a campaign (too early), and /or those top tier candidates who are less appealing than at first glance. This is especially true, if one is in third place in polls, after several debates, having not announced any intentions. Those that want to ensure the nominees now, based on the current field, may have to wait, till the ides of September, or beyond – however, it is most likely that Palin will make an announcement sooner than later in order, in her words (paraphrased) to be fair to her supporters.

Fox Post Debate Palin Video Below

or linkVideo Foxnews.com/Palin vs.crony capitalism

In CNN’s post debate analysis, Bachmann scored the most points – suggest reading the transcript at www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/09/13/gop-debate-analysts/index.htm, for a take on the proceedings from the network who has, as of last evening (and possibly before as the CNN Express travels with the Tea Party Express), most accurately portrayed the Tea Party and its members as viable to the U.S., the World, the Military and Latino’s as it simulcast the debate on all of its channels.

Note: tips being what they are in the world of bloggers previous to the debate, from three different sources - “She will not appear at the debate (referring to Palin) or announce this evening” – “She’s not in Tampa….” When, may or may not be speculation at this point, but out of respect for the Governor, and in light of speculation being just that, one might hold off in noting a specific date mentioned. (In the event that this is not shear speculation) The pre-debate “intel” had Palin in Tampa, about to participate, (from a variety of forums/sites) and or weigh in at some point, which she did, from Alaska.

2012 Roundup Palin Heads to NH & IA Labor Day, To Speak at World Conference in Korea, Obama Fumbles Job Speech, Rick Perry - Trojan Horse?

Will Palin Announce in Time to Join the Debate? image newsrealblog

As the President’s job speech and the timing thereof, appear to have caused a bit of consternation amongst all politicos, the appearance of lack of control over a simple speech, further indicates an administration in a campaign that is imploding. First, the President had schedule his “Jobs creation” speech at the same time as the September 7th Republican Convention. After some kickback from within the Republican ranks, as well as pundits such as James Carville, Democrat Strategist, who termed the timing out-of-bounds, noting that the preference of viewers, including himself, would be the Republican Debate, Team Obama decided that a better time would be might be during the NFL Opening game, until there was more dissent, and the final time choice became the pre-game warm-up.

Meanwhile, Sarah Palin is headed to New Hampshire and Iowa to speak at Tea Party Events over Labor Day Weekend. On Monday September 5th, Palin will be in Manchester New Hampshire, following an appearance in Iowa on the 3rd, where she will be a keynote speaker at a Tea Party Rally in Indianola. Speculation has grown as to when the former Alaska Governor and 2008 GOP VP Nominee might announce her intent to run for the Presidency – or not as the case may be – the latest date being the end of September. However, it appears to some news outlets that former GOP Front-runner Mitt Romney, will be in both places at the same time, obviously overshadowed by Palin and or a Palin announcment.

Further, speculation that the announcement must come fairly soon is evidenced (according to some pundits) by Palin’s appearance at the South Korean World Knowledge Forum 2011 which features multiple speakers including Heads of State and Global Business Leaders. One would think that this type of forum might be a place where a prestigious U.S. Presidential Candidate would fare quite well, setting the foreign policy, global business bar fairly high for other candidates. The conference is also scheduled during a GOP debate, which begs the question: will Palin announce her intent to run, or will she be a cheerleader for the eventual nominee? Smart money is on the announcement, the timing of which no one but Palin and her family are privy.

Although asked and answered a million times about an Iowa Tea Party announcement, not one question has been brought to bear about a New Hampshire Tea Party announcement. Therefore, it behooves one to speculate on that particular aspect of a possible announcement in New Hampshire post Labor Day Weekend. The reasoning: timing and taking the sails out of the pundit’s winds, such as Karl Rove who had chosen Iowa. In addition the New Hampshire landscape will be chock full of politicians, including the aforementioned Mitt Romney. Of special interest, her New Hampshire speech is schedule right before the Presidential Debate on the 7th, giving Palin time to possibly join the party at the Reagan Presidential Library. The Debate is hosted by Politico and NBC News. Why would Palin be able to attend at this late date? She may have received an invitation from

Former first lady Nancy Reagan (who) sent an invitation to the presidential hopefuls who meet the eligibility standards, which require that a candidacy be formally announced and that a candidate captures at least 4 percent in one of eight national polls.

(Politico)

This insertion into the Debate Schedule which also is Rick Perry’s debut, would turn this debate from a “barn-burner” (quoted: James Carville) into possibly one of the highest rated debates in history. Other candidates included are Romney, Cain, Bachmann and Paul (all of whom have done well in one or more of the eight polls In addition, it would be a coup for Palin to knock out one debate ball park before heading off to Korea’s World Knowledge Forum as a bona fide Candidate for the U.S. Presidency. Again that’s speculation and her announcement may come simply via You Tube (or a quick press conference) from her home in Wasilla, Alasak sometime before the end of October. That said the former (although speculation) would place Palin in a key position to upend the pundits, dominate a debate and hit the world stage running.

What of the current front-runner, Governor Rick Perry? An interesting op-ed piece at Politico by Paul Goldman and Mark Rozell puts forth the theory that Perry’s candidacy actually may help Michelle Bachmann. The scenario is laid out in such a manner that should Bachmann best Perry in the Iowa Caucus, she may go onto take the nomination, not unlike Obama, Carter and Clinton. However, there is another point of view vis a vis the relationship between Perry and Palin that bears some scrutiny. Perry, who is billed as a Tea Party Candidate, and has bona fides in that respect, is also known in Texas as a career politicians and aggressive campaigner. Moreover when Perry appeared to be on the verge of losing the governorship to Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Palin stepped in and rallied the base – which put Perry in the position for this run. Perry is viewed on the national (media) stage (by independents and Democrats) as someone who is far right of the mainstream, mixing religion with state politics (true or not, the Prayer rally for rain may have given that impression), his views on seceding from the Union, his views on Social Security as a Ponzi scheme (although he may have hit the nail on the head), all lead to a candidate as frontrunner who is just not acceptable to the all important independent voter.

Additionally, front runners lose that status as new challengers emerge, especially one that would, by virtue of Rick Perry being Rick Perry, appear to be the middle ground candidate, one who has the peoples interest in mind, one who has governed effectively, one who has succeeded in ridding her state of corrupt politicians, from both parties – one Sarah Palin. Perry, in his extreme right state of appearance, gives Palin the appearance of moderation. In addition, Perry has taken the wind out of Romney’s sails, so to speak, and should Palin announce, there would be the potential for Perry to drop in the polls. Should this occur, Romney would also decline, in theory, following suit, giving Palin, with the highest name recognition of any candidate, the lead. (The same can be said vis a vis Bachmann and Perry.)

What is certain, the incumbent will be a one-term president, the poll numbers continue to decline, and Democrats are praying that Hillary Clinton resigns tomorrow and mounts a challenge. From Vermont’s Sander’s to the Los Angeles Times looking for clues in a recent White House Press briefing, all eyes are on the former first lady, to take a stab at saving the brand and the White House. That said, it is doubtful that, with her close association with Obama (be it forced or a case of “keeping ones enemies closer”), it would allow the GOP opponent to cast Clinton in an Obama light, which regardless of her popularity, would render her unelectable – perhaps.

Palin’s Alaskan Politics leads to AAA Credit Rating for State – Shock - NOW Defends Bachmann over Newsweek Despicable Cover

Newsweek Cover - the epitome of bad taste - image Newsweek



Not for nothing, but Sarah Palin, the fiscally conservative, aisle crossing, whistle blowing regardless of Political Party, former Govenor of the State of Alaska, has another point in her favor, according to the Atlantic Blog – Palin’s policies, in place now in Alaska, contributed to the states AAA rating, which is slightly better than the one the current administration managed to achieve for the nation.

Palin in a post to Facebook (using Social Media to the Best Possible Advantage) ”lashed” out at Obama for his handling of the nations’ debt. She can do that with some authority given her prior experience – the fact that she called the President “clueless” is interesting, as that has been bandied about by Donald Trump as well (Palin met with Trump in NY on her bus tour) – as well as, alarmingly ad apparently correct. The President, for perhaps all his good intentions, has no idea of when to throw in the towel, and stop blaming everyone from the Tea Party to S&P and his family dogs (made that up- but, let’s face it, they may be next), for policies he has continued, policies he has put into place in order to bring us past the Jimmy Carter precipice. Worth repeating: Run, Palin, Run!!

Michelle Bachmann, the only other member of the GOP with any gumption (jury out on Rick Perry), and GOP Presidential Candidate currently leading Mitten’s Romney in the Iowa Straw Poll, was recently depicted on the cover of Time Magazine, al la Sarah Palin, or as one would put it more reasonably, in a sexist display of abject hate for the Conservative Female politician – this from a weekly paper that has been sold for $1.00, which, from this perspective that may have been a bad investment.

The cover, with headlines “The Queen of Rage”, is a less than complementary, obviously over photo shopped headshot of the GOP 2012 Iowa Frontrunner. It is blatant in its sexism and it is blatant in plain bad taste. Set aside this blogs conservative leanings, the covers of Newsweek, have had a history of painting women who dare to aspire to higher office than say, typing pool, are all of the same ilk. If it were my buck, I’d demand my money back.

What is most amazing in this particular bad taste story, is the Los Angeles Times Report

But even the National Organization for Women chimed in:

"It's sexist," NOW president Terry O'Neill told conservative news site the Daily Caller. "Casting her in that expression and then adding 'The Queen of Rage,' I think [it is]. Gloria Steinem has a very simple test: If this were done to a man or would it ever be done to a man – has it ever been done to a man? Surely this has never been done to a man."

Knock me over with a feather.

Of course the LA Times appeared to have been in agreement with the Times and could not understand why Conservatives would be offended – seriously. The Palin documentary, “The Undefeated”, exposes the media and the professional lefts’ attacks on Conservatives (granted Palin), therefore, although the documentary sets the record straight on Palin, what it also does is show the disparity in reporting, the twisting and ability to outright lie, when it comes to favoring one political party over the other – and generally either teaches or reinforces an extreme distrust of any “mainstream” media. Newsweek just adds another nail in the proverbial coffin.

This is not to say that other women have not take a beating by those whose agenda’s don’t allow for a female to have power, and also apply for higher political office: Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton were both skewered by the media, however, the collective mind of the aforementioned has risen to new heights when it comes to Conservative women running for higher office. This blog, putting feminism aside, and placing events into historical perspective, believes that it is time for the nation to elect a woman to higher office, as historically strong female leaders have led their nations into prosperity (even when they had to disguise themselves as men to do so.) However, as the historian’s in the past (and perhaps today) tend to be male-centered, one finds that even the most outstanding monarch, tribal leader, President, if they were female, were spoken of in terms one could only describe as sexist and derogatory, overlooking the resounding themes of accomplishments. One would think as a people in this particular nation founded on liberty that one would be able to take the individual as a hole, instead of by gender or race or religion, and determine a vote and or an article based on policy differences, while giving credit where credit is due.

MSNBC’s Maddow, Matthews and O’Donnell - See Obama Easily Re-Elected – The Press and the Battle Against Conservatives – How it will Backfire

As the 2012 campaign is in the early stages, given the fact that the lazy days of summer have not yet ended, and the GOP field is considered to be fluid at this point, and the primary battles will not begin for another five months, there are no crystal balls available to predict any outcomes at this point, not for one of the GOP candidates who will go on to campaign against President Obama or the outcome of that contest. However, polls can be seen as an indicator of what might take place in the Presidential race of 2012, specifically those that point to a nations view of a sitting President’s job performance, that is unless one factors in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the Press.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has been used by David Axelrod, campaign manager, mentor and political guru for both the State’s Govenor Deval Patrick, but especially, President Obama. To those who view President Obama as unelectable, consider that Massachusetts’s Deval Patrick won re-election with a 39% approval rating, besting the Republican opponent, Charlie Baker, by one point. Axelrod, on the eve of the Massachusetts elections noted that he would be watching the Massachusetts Governors Race, one would think due to his close relationship with Deval Patrick, however, he has been known to repeat strategy – borrowing from Patrick and lending to Obama, right down to the slogans.

The Massachusetts race appeared, on the surface, to be going in the direction of the challenger, however, there was a third party candidate, former Democrat turned Independent, turned Democrat, Tim Cahill, who also ran for the Governor’s race. Cahill, running as an independent, ended up siphoning off enough votes to pull out a “squeaker” for Patrick, this despite the fact that the Northeast in general is known to raid nursing homes, cemeteries and ballot boxes in order to ensure that an incumbent stays in office. Should the need arise, and should one of the Conservative Candidates start polling in double digits against Obama in 2012, watch carefully for an emergence of a third party candidate that suddenly found religion as a moderate conservative. Although the entire nation is not Massachusetts (or so those living here assumed, for years calling the Commonwealth the affectionate moniker “The People’s Republic”), the politics and specifically the strategy has been exported nationwide. Suggested reading running up to 2012: ”The Bluest State: How Democrats Created the Massachusetts Blueprint for American Political Disaster”, by Jon Keller. Although it may appear on the surface, to be partisan, one should understand the Keller provides an interesting perspective on Massachusetts politics which includes both major party and the players involved: in other words, this was written as a warning – one which the rest of the nation did not hear.

Axelrod, being only human, must, therefore, rely on a Progressive Press. MSNBC, which parent company NBC is owned by GE, of Immelt fame, is one of the major “cheerleaders for the President”. Putting aside conspiracy theories regarding Immelt's close ties to the President, and the fact that GE paid no taxes, and exported jobs outside of the U.S. while working as an Advisor to President Obama, it is a stretch that those pundits on the third rated cable news network (MSNBC), are taking cues from anyone, other than their own deep rooted Progressive Ideology. At a recent panel discussion on politicsMSNBC Hosts, Rachael Maddow, Chris Matthews, and O’Donnell predicted that Obama would be reelected the AP story is of itself, not news to anyone who even stops to watch the network for more than 5 minutes, however, it is the fact that the Progressives within the Press, both on air and in print, are of the same mindset. The mindset where one can pick up any daily paper, or listen to any local or national broadcast and find that the “Republican” or “Conservatives” are derided for what-have-you, and the Democrats are held in highest esteem. Should there be a scandal associated with a politician, one finds the word “Republican” inserted before the name of the individual who has an ethics problem, however, if that politician is a Democrat, there is, for the most part, no identification of party. This is nothing new and it has been noticeable by those moderate and independents reading and watching broadcast for the past twenty years. The bias is towards conservatives as well as the State of Israel, read any article watch any political broadcast and that is what one will begin find, the use of subjective adjectives that, inserted carefully deride one party and promote another. The fact that half of the nation (approximately) supports one over the other is apparently lost on those who print and broadcast and they are also gloriously unaware of the fact that this has affected both their ratings as well as their circulation. Just ask the gloating New Corp (they are in trouble, granted, over the whole wire tapping, al la Nixon charge – another bias), who has gained where others have lost, for employing a “balance reporting style”.

Therefore, not one of the candidates in the 2012 GOP field will be given positive press, either in print or otherwise, even if they walked on water, made it rain in Texas, or basically had better, yet much different ideas on how to manage (govern) the nation. From Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin, the two most egregious Conservatives due to the fact that they are also women (and should by Progressive think, be supporting abortion rights against pro-life rights), are consistently derided – it is the adjectives, keep in mind, that tell the story to the greater public. With the aforementioned, and the recent attack from the left on “Tea Party” activism – (basically a movement, not an organization that believes we are Taxed Enough Already”), complete with the Vice President of the United States dubbing them as “Terrorists”, (the buffoons, personal opinion), one find each article or broadcast regarding the aforementioned GOP candidate and possible candidate prefaced by “Tea Party”.

Governor Rick Perry, who is on the verge of announcing his candidacy for the Presidency has given the anti-God, anti-fiscal, counter-culture, spread-the-wealth, live-in-a-commune and take me back to the sixties Progressives, a plethora of new articles and broadcasts from which to pontificate on the horrors of a Perry Presidency. He is religious, he is a Texan, a Conservative, a Republican and of course, “Tea Party” (now that they are all “Terrorists”). What of Rick Perry’s Presidential bid and the Media:
See CBS “Will Rick Perry answer the religious right's prayers?” The most feared words a Progressive believes exists in the U.S. is “Religious Right”, then read the article and look for the “key words”.

An excellent article on Perry appeared in the Texas Tribune, this follows his formative years: at Texas A&M, and is the best “biographical” piece one can find on a potential GOP 2012 candidate from the press.

The Monkey Wrench – The American Public.

The public will continue to watch the economy spiral downward, and every indicator from Moody’s to your local grocer, is indicative that it can and will get worse, regardless of Obama not having to deal with any debt ceilings after the debt ceiling has been raised by a dysfunctional Congress, until after the 2012 elections (While worry about the nations finances while on the campaign trail? – By the way – both political parties took part in this decision – never mind the fiscal ramifications.) In that instance Party is generally thrown aside while people cast their ballot for the person at the top of the ticket who would appear to be likely to solve the problem. The most recent example of this phenomenon was the election of 1980, the president: James Carter, the challenger: Ronald Reagan – who, by the way, won Massachusetts. Regan, at the time was cast as the religious, right, nutcase, conservative, not overly bright, he was, after all, only an “actor”, the in-concert press hammered day and night, until the election was over, then they went to work demeaning everything that Reagan did, was about to do, or might have done.
He was easily elected to a second term.

Rick Perry, more than any other possible candidate, is the most likely coming out of the gate, to defy the press and upset the Axelrod model. He is not Ronald Reagan, no one is, but Perry is now the one to watch. Other candidates announced worth watching, sleeper Tim Pawlenty, Michelle Bachmann, and Herman Cain. Darn that Tea Party.

Polling firm references to Consider:

Gallup Polling: Confidence In Institutions: Specifically see Newspapers, Broadcast Television and the Presidency – compare to:

Gallup Polling: Gallup Confidence in Institutions 2010

Gallup Polling Presidential Job Approval

Rasmussen Reports : Presidential Job Approval

Public Policy Polling National Miscellaneous Poll

2012 GOP Presidential Candidate Roundup: Sarah Palin and the Ides of September, Romney’s Too Elite? Huntsman on Bachmann – She’s Pretty!

Romney Palin and Bachmann - image Sunshine State News

As the drama from the “Debt Ceiling Crisis” continues in the Senate (Prediction: Obama get’s his debt ceiling, Republican’s get some cuts, but not enough to make a difference, and the general public, taxpayers, will enjoy prolonged fiscal pain due to lack of Leadership.) it is to the point that most American’s are disgusted, and clearly appalled by how the Congress, Senate and White House are basically dysfunctional. Reference to playgrounds rather than politics is a popular theme; followed by “kick the bums” out. It’s fantastic that we’re having a “dialogue”, however, how about taking some action, specifically in areas where one can get rid of waste, double dipping by government agencies, fraud and abuse? One Senator, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, has a report on the aforementioned that should be used as a model for first things that the Congress and Senate could do to start saving billions today. The report is available here at coburn.senate.gov/public//index it is suggested reading (PDF).

Therefore, since the “crisis” is somewhat of a foregone conclusion, as far as Washington is concerned, the week starts with a look at who could lead this nation out of the pit of apathy, and onto a road to recovery both fiscal and psychological
Over at the Washington Times, Henry D'Andrea, rolls out his reasons for believing that Sarah Palin is running for the Office of the Presidency in 2012. The reasons are sound, and if anyone were to be able to pull off an “unconventional” campaign that would be Sarah Palin.

Although the field continues to be at best ho-hum, to the point where Donald Trump is considering running if the “right person” is not nominated by the GOP. One thing that was missing in D’Andrea’s article, Sarah’s visit with Donald Trump. Although merely speculating here, Trump has commented on certain candidates, liking Bachman more than some others, however, he way rather “coy “for “The Donald” when asked about his visit with Palin. Both individuals play by a different set of rules than the usual “politico’s” – which is a) unnerving to the media and b) smarter by setting the pace, and letting the pundits speculate the outcomes. A September announcement by Palin would not only shake things up a bit, but add much to the debates that are scheduled throughout the fall and winter leading up to the first primary and caucus.
Note to D’Andrea: This blog believes Sarah Palin will run – out of a sense of duty to the nation.

Meanwhile, Mitt Romney can’t seem to please anyone, either it’s the way he dresses, or his perfect hair, and now, it’s his perfect education: From KSL, Utah comes the latest nonsense that Romney’s Ivy League Education would hurt rather than help him as a candidate, given the anti-Ivy League (i.e. Elite) stance of that darn Tea Party. One should note that Tea Party meetings generally have speakers on the economy, et al, and those speakers hold degrees from Ivy League Universities. Go figure. Romney is Romney, he’s the perfect person, and he’s smart, and willing to compromise, perhaps a bit too much for the taste of many conservatives. He prefers the word “fee” to the word “tax”. Frankly, the later is more of a turn-off than whether or not he was educated at Harvard or Yale, or if spent six years at a local community college – makes no difference. Is there anything else that the media can think of that makes Romney just “too perfect”? One has to feel sorry for the guy. Our candidates should be judged on their prior experience, not their religious preference, how they dress, their gender, if they are too perfect, or if they went managed to get through school on collage loans and work study, going through several schools to do so, until they could graduate. It simply does not matter – what matters? Do they have those leadership qualities that are so desperately needed by this nation, and are they fiscal hawks, not just conservatives, but hawks.


Finally, the most ridiculous and way to stick foot in mouth award goes to Jon Huntsman (who?) 2012 GOP Candidate: Apparently, according to Mr. Huntsman, his problem (and other lower tier candidates) cannot get enough press, because, get this: it all goes to Michelle Bachman “because she’s pretty!”

What an idiot! Michelle Bachmann receives media attention because she’s campaigning, and since she’s in Congress, she’s got a ready made platform – she’s also smart, savvy and oh yes, Tea Party. Anyone that is that petulant over not getting enough press, and uses the “pretty card” to attack the only announced female candidate to date, has to be fairly desperate. Of course, one has to wonder if Huntsman feels the same way about Mitt Romney? Is Romney too Pretty (there’s that debate again, pretty/perfect)? How about Herman Cain, who just won the Colorado Straw Poll (in Huntsman’s back yard)? Is Herman just too pretty?


Cain, Palin and Romney - image Republican Redefined Blog

It is the usual garbage that is associated with a woman running for higher office – although one has to admit, it’s a lot nicer (in a cry-baby, whining sort of way), than other things the press has leveled at Ms. Bachmann, and Sarah Palin should get an award for handling a press that is not only hostile, but sexist to the extreme! Look at the handful (one hand that is) of woman that have run or God forbid (media take) been nominated to a major party ticket or ran for the nomination, from the wonderful Geraldine Ferraro, to Hillary Clinton, to Sarah Palin, (a 30 odd year span one must note between the first and the second) – the treatment of these woman has ranged from the frivolous to the bizarre, but all of it has been – because they are women. If a policy were being discussed, and one did not like a certain policy, that’s fine, but those articles just can’t stop there, they have to include “what she wore” or some comment that just roils!

To sum it up this blog believes, Palin will run, (and will be President), Romney is still too perfect, it is time to take the focus off the his good looks, perfect what –have you, and focus on his governing in Massachusetts, Bachmann is a stellar campaigner, and like Palin, she is taking the heat, and staying out of the kitchen- that’s honorable. Huntsman, the media adores him – enough said.

Although it is far too early to really begin to speculate about which candidate might make it through even three primaries, and or announce, it is imperative that those who are looking for leadership, begin to watch and read about these candidates, and make some choices, whether it is Cain, Perry, (any day now), Palin (September), Bachmann, and or Mitt – as Obama’s numbers stand now, (a continual slide south), there is little chance that the man can be elected unless of course, a third party candidate comes forth to split the vote (Hint, find out who Donald Trump thinks is an acceptable GOP candidate and then get behind that person 100%). If a third party candidate runs (which is David Axelrod’s desire), a Massachusetts scenario will ensue, whereby, the incumbent manages somehow (Deval Patrick) to be reelected by 1 point. – Repeat 1 point! Choose early, choose several but choose – and as the field narrows, should your preferred candidate does not make it so to speak, make a second choice, or a third – the alternative, is unacceptable.

2012 GOP Update – Who Taxed or Added Fees and State Mandates (or supported Federal Fees) From the GOP, DNC - Still Waiting for Sara Palin!

There’s that tired old adage, two things in life are certain, death and taxes ( Daniel Defoe 1726 and Benjamin Franklin in 1789) and in any reasonable individuals mind, one understands that in order to receive certain services from a state or federal government a tax must be assessed. The original intent was the provision of security, on a federal level, and that was basically the sum of it. What we have today, is a never ending cry from Congress and the Whitehouse (circa 2011), that more is needed: a higher debt ceiling, and alternately from the Republicans: cuts in discretionary spending (spending at the request of a Congressperson – to build parks, bridges, and what not – some of it necessary, much of it not so much).

Currently, only fifty percent of the populace pays Federal Taxes (up from 43.4% in 2006(Tax Foundation), leaving the balance to find ways to make ends meet, as, depending upon the State in which one lives, Federal and State Taxes can add a hefty burden to the monthly personal budget. For example: Massachusetts added a telecommunications tax in 2009, (along with 18 other taxes, that allowed, miraculously one might add, Deval Patrick to be reelected), that tax coupled with a Federal Tax, on an AT&T family wireless plan, with two lines, adds an additional $18.00 to the monthly bill. It also adds to the Cable TV Bill, and Internet Bill, prepaid cell card bill, and the beat goes on). These little added taxes, are in addition to all the other taxes we do pay, income taxes, sales taxes and sundry fees, in order for the state and federal governments to meet not only their constitutional obligation, but over the ledge employee pension, salary and benefits (union), welfare handouts (to include, (Massachusetts) free cell phones, cars, and Triple AAA), and increases in budget for schools that continue to fail, even though MA is in the top of the eleven schools who won Race to the Top grants, and are scoring the highest, the best the students can do is a 50%.

One of these days, the Congress, President and Senate, will understand that the problem is not fixed by throwing cash at it, but addressing the situation. I’m hopeful for my great-great-grandchild’s generation when perhaps someone in government will get the point, or 2012 when they are replaced with someone who might get the point.

Therefore looking quickly (not overly due diligence) at some in the field of GOP and the Incubment, who have taxed, for a variety of reasons - some of the taxes are disguised as “fees”. A Fee is a tax, as long as a government is taking money from a citizen to run the government. Calling a Tax a Fee is just trying to “pretty it up a bit”, but it remains – a tax.

In addition to taxes, there are also mandates; some mandates having to do with ones’ health. As more than 50% of the nation went ballistic when the Obama Administration rammed a mandated health bill through Congress, one should be aware that Republican’s also support mandates. These Mandates generally come with a high price tag, and the erosion of personal liberty.

Rick Perry Mandates: Mandated a then (and continues to be) Controversial Vaccine for Teen Girls: Galvelston Daily News

Tim Pawlenty, (Romney Lite) Likes Fees: he placed a Fee on Cigarettes: for some state program or the other, and well, cigarettes are bad and therefore, no one will mind, except maybe the smokers, and or those who feel Tim should have called it a 75 cent per pack “tax”.

Romney not only mandated the first Statewide Health Care Plan, but included Fee for Employers and individuals who did not follow the mandates guidelines. Known in Massachusetts as the King of Fees, Romney created new, and raised old fees in order to balance the budget – of course, fees, taxes, it’s all semantics.

Even staunch Fiscal Conservative, Michelle Bachmann supported a “Federal Fee” on Cigarettes back in the day.

Again, a fee is a tax, plain and simple, and whether it be on cigarettes, pornography, your license, registration, fishing licenses, telephones, cable going into the house, or your family pet (Massachustts), it is still a tax.

To date one of the only "candidates" who has not announced, also is not a fan of the tax or fee – rather upon taking the Governorship of the State of Alaska, Sarah Palin, reduced taxes and fees , on business and individuals, and forced oil companies to pay the taxes they owed, then turned around and gave each Alaskan citizen a tax rebate.

Barack Obama – need one add anything to the resume of Mr. Mandate, Mr. Deficit, let’s hit 20 trillion! and Mr. Tax the rich, middle class or poor. From memory “we have to eat our peas” (paraphrasing Barack Obama on fiscal restraint). One may like peas, one may also have to get used to paying a tax on those legumes should the President not be replaced by one of the “Fee and Mandate Republicans” (Run, Sarah, Run!!), featured above. If one has to look at a Republican in the field, (suggest waiting until at the latest September before committing to any one candidate), then choose the one that understands that we do need taxes to pay for services, however, that person owns the “fee” or “tax” if one will, and so will the rest of us.

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.

Obama 2012 PollsLags: Rasmussen Any Republican Bests by 4 Points, Public Policy Polling: Obama Trails 3 GOP Candidates - Huge Loss with Redistricting

Romney and Bachmann currently most likely to best Obama in 2012 - image NY Daily News

As the summer of 2011 hits mid-stride, and only seven months to go before the first primaries are held, President Barack Obama’s polling indicates one-term is more probable as the weeks go by. Rasmussen’s latest poll on the President’s electability against a “generic” Republican candidate now stands at 46% (Any GOP Candidate) to 42% for the President. The survey uses a larger than average sample of 3500, giving a smaller margin of error – plus or minus 2 percent. Considering that Obama bested McCain in 2008 by 7.2% (no incumbent), Bush bested Kerry by 2.46 in 2004 (July of 2003 Bush job approval at 60% (Gallup), with the highest “mandate” given to Nixon garnering 23.15% over McGovern in 1972 (no incumbent), and Reagan besting incumbent Jimmy Carter (job approval 29%), by less than 10 points in 1980, (Source for general election statistics: Dave Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections), notes that those incumbents who are historically below the 50% approval trending incumbents against job approval ratings from the previous July, lost the election with a varied margin, those above the 50% approval were re-elected (again with a varying percentages). Therefore, the likelihood of a recovery for Obama from this point forward is dimming.

With redistricting taking place, and Texas being one of the prize states, Public Policy Polling’s latest on the Lone Star State indicates Obama would lose both the popular and increased Electoral College votes: now rating at 42% approval. GOP candidates that lead Obama are: Mitt Romney, Michelle Bachmann, Tim Pawlenty and Ron Paul (Paul’s home state), he is tied with Herman Cain and leads the non-announced Sarah Palin by 1 point. Given the fact that the pollster trendsDemocrat, and in all press releases accompanying polls makes no secret of the fact they are pulling for Obama, makes these numbers doubly troubling for the President.

In the last Gallup 2010 state by state poll on Obama’s job approval, the President broke 50% in only 10 states, including California, Massachusetts, New York, Illinois and Vermont. should Gallup’s 2011 survey (due most likely 3rd week of July) show no improvement, coupled with the continuing decline against “Generic” GOP candidates nationwide, the election eve map will look eerily familiar to either Nixon’s or Reagan’s, even if he manages to continue to hold onto those 10 states.

One suggestion to anyone who wants a voice in who the next leader of the free world may be (of any political leaning:) start looking at which one of those GOP announced candidates one might prefer over the other as the probability that (as of this survey) Romney or Bachmann (the two leading most state polls in early primary/caucus states), would be the next President. Either one or actually any one of the announced candidates previously mentioned that would have the best chance of winning the GOP nomination – would, based on statistics, go on to best Obama in the general.

GOP Field Characterized as Unpopular in Home States – Politico Dubs “Unfavorite Son Primary - Lacking Grasp of English and Common Sense

Politico Notes Romney, Pawlenty & Bachmann not blazingly popular in blue states - seriously - image NY Daily news

A slew of GOP Candidates have come under the scrutiny of Politico in the latest article to downplay the field as “lackluster” - The article title: “The GOP's unfavorite son primary”. The Premise: GOP Candidates such as Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney and Michelle Bachmann are not popular in their home states and may potentially lose those states in a primary and or general election. The aforementioned were elected officials from the states of Massachusetts and Minnesota, two states that would be best categorized as “blue states” having a majority of Democrats in the legislature, with the recent exception of Minnesota, where the house flipped to the GOP column.

Romney, is not extremely popular in Massachusetts for several reasons, one of which is the fact that he appeared to run for the Presidency in 2008 rather than stay and govern. It is not without some pride in the State itself that those “on the ground” would prefer to keep their one check and balance on the political scale, than lose it to the national stage. Secondly, Romney downsized his living space in Massachusetts and purchased property over the border in the more conservative State of New Hampshire – effectively doing what so many other conservatives in Massachusetts have done over the years, bailing out of a high tax, high entitlement environment.

Pawlenty, who served two terms as governor may not have been reelected by landslides (a la a Republican in Texas), however, two terms in Minnesota is, in any universe, amazing. They also cite Michelle Bachmann’s inability to garner more than 53% of the vote in her home district, which is also in Minnesota. Politico cites the fact that Bachman’s district is leans GOP, while one with a grasp on reality understands that a district leaning GOP in states such as Minnesota and or Massachusetts (yes they exist – so far as redistricting is not complete), means the GOP candidate must rely on a lot of cross over votes from both Independents and Democrats!

Given the aforementioned, instead of labeling these three candidates as “unfavorite” (is that actually a word?) sons (no reference there to daughters) perhaps a more fair analysis would have been, that these GOP Stars were able to get elected in states where their political party was basically a third party.

On being able to carry a state in the general, the article cites Dukakis and Mondale, as examples that state “sons” can and do win in their own states. However, comparing Dukakis and Mondale (MA and MN) to Romney, Pawlenty or Bachmann is an oxymoron. The two were carried in states, not because they were widely popular, but because those two states had a well grounded Democrat machine that was able to get out the vote. However, when the residents of the Bay State are so disgusted by the economic climate (see Carter), even Massachusetts will go red (see Reagan), therefore, all bets are off regarding the three candidates.

Incidentally, if the nominee were Romney, or Pawlenty or Bachmann, losing their home state (and again with the changes in Wisconsin, that might not even be a factor), it would fall into the blue state versus “red” candidate category, rather than a nationwide assessment. One left out of the article, was the former Vice President, turned Global Warming hustler, Al Gore, who lost the state of Tennessee in the 2000 Presidential general election, and this could be for much the same reason, Gore was not from a terribly “blue” state.

Therefore, if the GOP nominee loses a state to the incumbent, Obama, it would most likely be one of ten that are on the plus side for the President as of now, and that includes Massachusetts. Although the prevailing theory is that without a strong GOP candidate (and no candidate appears strong enough for the press), that Obama will easily win reelection – which is somewhat interesting when one looks at approval ratings on a state by state basis, and finds that he is not competitive in 40 states based on Gallup’s 2010 survey (see treatment here comparing to electoral college by this author.) If one does the math, at present, and there is zero change in job approval, either up or, with the economy at the present time, down, the name that is on the GOP ticket will hardly matter – the GOP nominee, if not particularly “American Idol” material, will be given the nod, not for the love of the GOP or the nominee, but rather as a vote against the incumbent – again, refer to Jimmy Carter, who, not for nothing, lost both Massachusetts and Georgia.

Although things may turn around in the short time, it appeasers that the President is somewhat resigned to the fact that one term may be his limit, or is beginning to make a case for losing the election: A recent AP Article: Obama: My family would be fine with just 1 term speaks to the family aspect, suggesting that the family would be fine if he decided against seeking a second term. It is doubtful that he will decide not to run a second campaign, as there is not one Democrat who would want to step in and throw millions into the win in an environment where Bush would be able to be reelected - However, recent Google searches from this blog suggest that the general Democrats might not mind if Obama didn’t run either - as there is an increasing number of individuals inquiring if Bill Clinton might not run again in 2012 (obvious it is imperative the civics be reintroduced as part of the curriculum in every school in the nation.)
To recap: winning or losing the home state has little to do with winning or losing a primary and or general election, historically it means little.

Last note: Politico used the usual “expert” professor from a local university to channel the thought processes of both Bachmann and Pawlenty, which allegedly lends credence to the article.

CNN GOP Debate – Pawlenty, Bachmann and Romney Score with Media, Missing: Sarah Palin – Waiting for Pal and the Fall Debates

Sadly Missed at CNN Debate: Sarah Palin - image Zimbio.com


CNN held their first 2012 GOP debate, with a field of 7 candidates answering blazing fast questions from an obviously partisan network – the final analysis of the debate from David Gergenopined that Mitt Romney and Michelle Bachmann were the clear winners of the debate, but questions whether this debate will help the GOP to win the White House – seriously.
Gergen’s take:

As to the individual candidates, Romney had a clear, easy-to-understand message and he stuck to it: Barack Obama has failed as president. Other candidates said much the same thing but with less consistency.

Obviously, if one has read even a paragraph of Ann Coulter’s latest tome, “Demonic”, and the premise would be defined by a picture of Gergen as the poster child. (The Book: Strongly recommended, strikingly brilliant and Available on Amazon.com).
From the perspective of one of who believes the only people watching the debate were either political junkies or campaign managers and the opposition team, there is another point of view. Romney appeared to rehash the 2008 campaign talking points, and lacked substance outside of the many slogans which peppered his retorts. Bachmann and Pawlenty clearly had the most concise and compelling answers, given the fact that the moderator and debate format did not allow more than :30 seconds for each candidate to respond and, in the case of Herman Cain, went so far as to “rep-word” a response to the point where it no longer resembled exactly what Mr. Cain said: Although he corrected the moderator, it was obvious to those with half a brain that the CNN team was taking cues from MSNBC (no need for further edification).

How much trouble in the Obama in as far as the obvious falling approval ratings, the economy moving further into the tank (with reasonable people understanding that at best, a two to four year recovery with radical cuts and corporate tax breaks will be necessary to right the otherwise sinking ship), brings out former White House Press Secretary, Gibbs as his campaign “surrogate”.

The most obviously and patently clear response to the process came from Herman Cain regarding the field of contenders pointing out exactly how early it was in the process.

The two “players” to watch at the moment, for the moment, to this mind are Michelle Bachmann (who may have stunned more than a few people when she suggested dismantling the EPA, a statement that was obviously referring to the ridiculous practices of the bureaucracy that kills industry to protect any obscure form of fish and or fauna in any given area of the nation, spending millions in the process, while killing jobs at the same time. The minnow, however, appears to trump sanity.)

Pawlenty, steady, straight forward and specific on each answer, appeared to be more substantive than his male counterparts. One thing about Pawlenty that was noticeable, he does indeed have a personality, and one must concede the point, he’s offers individual voters the opportunity to assess the “safe and steady” side of the GOP. Is his economic growth plan a bit aggressive, most certainly, however, he has one, and it is, despite the screaming from the left, doable.

After Carter, the nation needed radical reforms, including tax increases (which were temporary) in order to kick start the economy. What the nation needs now, is a surgeon, not a rock star, who will be as aggressive as possible in order to bring jobs, industry and the less is more approach to the mix.

The problem with both Bachmann and Pawlenty is that they show leadership and that may not play well in Washington. For a kind article on Pawlenty from the host network: CNN’s “How Pawlenty's life story prepared him for possible White House run”.

On the flip side, watching the debate one was constantly waiting for more: there was obviously something or someone missing from the mix (and this mix, contrary to the constant drumbeat, is a good cross section of conservatives with plenty to offer), is one Sarah Palin. Palin with Bachmann declared, would bring two of the strongest conservative with any gumption to the stage, and although it is this opinion that Sarah Palin would shine in this area, without her, Bachmann managed to keep it lively, how much more livelier would it be? Debates that make on want to grab a cup of coffee (CNN’s last night), rather than a debate that makes one want to grab the popcorn is what is needed – Palin brings that.

She’s become somewhat annoying, however, to the press, since the revelation that her recently released emails (perfectly timed as they showed her to be an apt, and reasonable leader) are ”Annoyingly Gaffe-Free” (Los Angeles Times). The problem is that the Times, in this instance, cannot understand how this can be? Therefore, there must be a reason: the premise, the emails were heavily redacted by the State of Alaska therefore, there must be something missed.

The fact that her emails are written at an 8th grade level is Big News! However, take the column that is noting Palin’s obviously 8th grade level emails, and copy and paste into any copy of Microsoft word and be amazed – those journalists are writing at: an 8th grade level.

Rick Perry would bring the State of Texas, red meat Republican; factor to the stage, after suggesting that the state of Texas secede and seriously assert state’s rights, Perry would be entertaining.

Pawlenty did note that Palin was obviously qualified to be President and had the audacity of honestly in answering the question, of which, not one of the other “men” on the stage would dare to opine. Bachmann of course, would have her own reason for wanting Palin off the stage, perhaps, as they are similar in ideology, with the exception that Palin is better spoken, less rigid ideologically and more experienced in the debate arena. Which is why, to this mind she was missed.

The final analysis: pointing to Romney as the front-runner this early in the race, is clearly not a complement, as one understands that early front-runners generally are sent into oblivion. (Although his “guy in high school most would want to see fail” appearance has improved with the rolled up sleeves and jeans, his newly sported, less than perfect debate “coiffe”, came off less tasseled and more “mad scientist”.) Should Palin, (please!) enter the area, al-la George Bush circa 1999, say in late August, it would shake things up a bit. Keep in mind that in early polling Palin still comes in behind Romney, however, the most recent Gallup poll showed that Romney’s lead might be shortenned up a bit by several factors including additional public appearances and continued use of slogan, leaving the 20 plus percent who had not previously made a selection of any candidate, jumping to support Palin, Bachmann and Pawlenty.

Why? They appear to be the least “Washington”, the most “Genuine” and the most capable of the bunch. Of course, this is an analysis based on watching the debate, rather than being associated with CNN in any way. Additionally, how much more enhanced would the field be should two or even three women enter the fray, especially since, it has been noted, these women have the ability to speak their minds in a way that makes the GOP male field (and any other candidate in this upcoming election) appear a bit “less than capable” – perhaps this feminist is biased, but more than one male commentator has noted that the aforementioned have more, politely put: chutzpah, than their male counterparts. What we need is a leader, and in this time and in this case, one has to have faith that the old boys club no longer can hold sway over the electorate – regardless of political party.