Networks To Limit RNC/DNC Convention Coverage, Tampa Dem Mayor, Isaac and the RNC Convention, Cardinal Dolan at the RNC, Electoral College Predictions

The Republican National Convention - catch it on Cable News or C-Span - image: urbanchristiannews.com

It’s a wrap – the New York Times is reporting that the three major television Networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) will not offer full coverage of either the Democrat or Republican Conventions, rather one hour a day from Tuesday through Thursday for both, focusing on major speakers. Apparently, the networks are working on the assumption that viewers are disinterested in the process; therefore, it is a cross between ratings, and a public service not to air the conventions in their entirety. There are, as the network executives pointed out, other ways for those wishing to view the convention to do so, they named the web and “other sources” – those would be the cable news networks, as well as C-Span.

Meanwhile, in Tampa a bit of a storm is brewing besides Tropical Storm Isaac – from CBS Local the Democrat Mayor, Bob Buckhorn, indicated that in the event of a hurricane threat, he would have to cancel the RNC Convention. Brietbart.com suggests the Mayor, who supports his party’s nominee, incumbent President Barack Obama, maybe a bit overzealous. The Mayor, who most likely made that statement in regards to public safety, had previously noted that the RNC Convention in Tampa brings the City to the forefront, but, and this is a big but, he’s previously addressed concerns about public safety, including multiple scenarios ranging from anarchists to bio-chemical warfare in the streets of Tampa. (Indybay.org) Isaac is just one more “disaster scenario” that has come to the forefront. The probability for protestors exists at any convention, RNC or DNC, as well as the weather being a factor - however, in all honesty, the weather can be a larger threat in certain areas of the country than other – what the city of Tampa will lose should Hurricane Isaac actually materialize, would be substantial and regardless of political affiliation a Mayor of any large city, specifically in these hard economic times, faces substantial economic hardships – and the monies and publicity for the city as a travel destination due to the RNC Convention, would be sorely missed. Take this one with a grain of salt and an obvious mistrust of Democrats in general.

A larger political storm maybe brewing – New York’s Cardinal Timothy Dolan will be giving the benediction at the RNC when Mitt Romney officially becomes the GOP Nominee. Romney will also appear on EWTN (Catholic Cable Channel) in an interview that will air at 8 p.m. EDT on Thursday, August 23, 2012. (Zap2it.com) The Cardinal’s spokesman suggested that he would speak at either the DNC or RNC conventions, citing that the benediction was not an endorsement of any candidate. One would think that mean’s the Cardinal is protecting the Church because on surface, a church cannot endorse and or support a candidate publicly without the threat of loss of Non-Profit status. Additionally, the Catholic Church, in particular is not thrilled with the current administration – it is not only the issue of the President forcing religious affiliated organizations (specifically Catholic) to pay for abortions through their insurance coverage (against their faith as well as trampling on the Constitution), but goes deeper, into the administrations heavy hand when it comes to individual rights and limited freedoms. (See National Catholic Newspapers: the National Catholic Register, American Magazine Our Sunday Visitor, multiple publications off-line, and the Catholic News Service)

Adding to the drama this week The Denver Post reports that two professors, who have predicted the outcome of the Electoral College since 1980, based on economic forecast models, show Mitt Romney with a fairly large lead over President Obama: 320 (R) to 218 (D), the Huffington Post was quick to point this out and compare their own model which is more generous to the President showing a national split and several races up for grabs. That said, using a non-scientific method of measuring approval ratings state by state, over a 3 year period, with Gallup polling data, modeled on the 2012 electoral college and shift in votes away from traditional blue states to red (lost Congressional districts, and population affect the EC), the scenario is similar to the Denver University predictions.. (This blog).

A new Gallup poll released yesterday shows Romney’s lead (This week) with Romney 47 to Obama’s 45, still within the margin of error, however, climbing. Also check the latest Demographic Trends, specifically HHI: Romney leads in HHI of $39,000K and up, as well as among all Education Levels with the Exception of Post Graduate, by wide margins. Generally, the conventions would give a candidate (with nationwide coverage of the convention) a boost in the polls.

Obama Borrow Remarks on “You didn’t build it” from MA – again! From Duval Patrick (“Yes We Can”) to Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)(Candidate)

From: The Hawaii Reporter: Obama pushed his policy goals of infrastructure (aka stimulus) spending and "government research" as part of a collectivist utopia "doing things together." It's simply stunning that he would tell Americans, "If you've got a business—you didn't build that."
After all, could individuals be resourceful and hard-working enough to create whole new enterprises?
Obama said:
Look, if you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own. You didn't get there on your own. I'm always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart.”(Hawaii Reporter)

The President went on to say that (paraphrasing) someone built the roads…there was a teacher (who was responsible implied.)…But, the question is who said that first?
Elizabeth Warren, Candidate for Senate (D-MA)

From There is nobody in this country got rich on his own...” you hired workers the rest of us paid for, you used roads the rest of us paid for (paraphrased) and so on- this is from a video (below) from the Warren Campaign on “fair taxation”:



Elizabeth Warren is the “next great hope” of the Progressive Wing of the Democrat Party – the plan – install her as Senator from MA, bring her to the Democrat Convention in 2016, run her for president – sound familiar?

Of course, it is well known that the President has “borrowed” remarks by other Massachusetts notaries, specifically Governor Duval Patrick’s “Yes You Can”. Apparently, if something works in Massachusetts surely it can work nationwide.
Otherwise, how else would Scott Brown have been elected to the MA Senate? How else would one explain the historic gains in the House in 2010 – merely two years ago? It was a rejection of those very principles espoused by those who run on slogans rather than ideas, division instead of inclusions, and blame instead of giving credit where credit is due.

Warren is a prime example of a progressive academic, The President, although having had some experience in government with a term here and there in the State Legislature and then the Senate (Illinois) before running for President, also was and remains an academic. There is an old adage – “those that can’t do – teach”.
This is not to malign, in any way, the thousands upon thousands of credible teachers who exist solely to make a difference, to encourage individuality, and to ensure that each student understands they can achieve the American Dream of building one’s own business, becoming an astronaut (if we had a vibrant Space Program) a doctor – surely they are out there in private and public schools across the nation. Then there are those hard-line progressives who see the only way this country should be – is under Government control – with an elite group of academics and politico’s caring for the masses. If that isn’t a step backward, what is?

The rhetoric from this campaign is growing increasingly negative, lectures on wealth versus “the rest of us “have been the pivot (and in some cases “race”, but not as often as in the past election. (2008). What should be on the table – for both Obama and Romney is vision - how each candidate sees the future of this great nation and what they can do to improve the economy, education, security – and fair game is records and the defense of records. Perhaps the President would like to explain his record on job creative so that the American people can understand where he creative private sector jobs that fill the government coffers to enable them to continue to pay for the growth of government pogroms. For without taxpayers in private industry, there is no income for the Federal Government. One cannot count government employees, as they do pay taxes, true, but the taxpayer pays their wages – it’s a catch 22. Romney, to his credit, and in spite of the Obama Campaigns best efforts, did his best to create jobs in Massachusetts as Govenor, despite the Democrat Controlled Statehouse (both Legislature and Senate) doing their best to undercut every single thing he proposed when it came to increasing business development and jobs. One has to live in Massachusetts to fully understand the disparity between what is reality and fantasy – those who do understand – well, at least half of them.

Not unlike the balance of the nation, there is that deep divide between political party affiliation and ideology – one that has existed for eons, yet, never with so acrimony and blatantly untrue rhetoric – painting all with a broad brush so to speak. The days of politely agreeing to disagree are fast becoming a thing of the past. What this nation needs, now more than ever, is a leader who has an ideology that includes civility – especially when it comes to working with and treating those who have opposing views with respect, not derision. There is one candidate that meets that criterion, having not divided a government but worked with, to the best of his ability, to create jobs, balance a budget, all in the face of an opposition party that remained as relentless then as it does today.

2012 GOP CNN Debate 11-22-11 – Debate Winner - Newt Gingrich - Bachmann Holds Own on National Security - Overview, Analysis – Full Video

Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, during the singing of the National Anthem CNN GOP Debate 11 22 11, image: The Hollywood Reporter



The 2012 GO National Security Debate was held last evening on CNN and co-sponsored by the the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute. CNN made the broadcast available on the Armed Forces Network, CNN en Español, CNN International, CNN Radio and CNN.com. A full video appears below. It was without a doubt, along with the debates on the economy, one of the most important debates for the candidates to not only do well, but also to express their views on the protection of the nation, as well as how one would face the challenges that might arise now and in the future. Of all the candidates on that stage, the most qualified was apparent from the moment he took the first question, and that on individual is Newt Gingrich. Gingrich was steady, clear, precise, and above all, not over reactionary. He answered each question specifically and without rhetoric, which was perhaps, on points, the most measured responses from a candidate to date in this most interesting and qualified field. Surely in second place was Michele Bachmann, the Congressional Representative from the Minnesota 6th District and a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence was also clear in her responses, it was the gravitas displayed by Gingrich that gave him the clear lead. In this arena it was clear that Gingrich and Bachmann, were the the two who hold the most credentialed experience in national security.

The balance of the candidates:

Dr. Ron Paul, Congressional Representative, Texas, was true to his pure Libertarian ideology, which, in this debate arena, placed him at a slight disadvantage, he performs the best in debates on economics, as does Herman Cain, Businessman and CEO, who was clearly out of his depth in this arena, Jon Huntsman, Governor of Utah, understands China, perhaps better than the other candidates but is limited in his approach in the debate arena, focusing on that nation, and repetitious in his responses. Rick Santorum, the Senator from Pennsylvania who is most enthusiastic, also looks to his past in each answer, which, normally begins with (paraphrasing) “I’ve already done such and such…” (Wrote a piece of legislation or was part of a committee, etc.). To his credit, he is one of two that answered the following question, not only in a response as asked, but clearly and with accuracy. The Question (again paraphrasing: refer to video) what national security issue was not addressed in tonight’s debate? Santorum, the first to answer, brought up the clear and present danger in South America – Santorum, should the Republican Candidate be successful in the 2012 campaign, be assigned to a position that is most suited to his expertise – it would be a shame to waste that type of talent. Herman Cain answered pointedly but did not expound, and Newt Gingrich gave a clear three point answer to the question, as with all questions, leaving no doubt as to this meaning or intentions.

Mitt Romney, who is seen by some as the front runner and eventual nominee, was simply not prepared for this forum. He was too busy campaigning against Obama in his answers rather than clearly stating his positions. In addition, he made a few mistakes as to the state of certain nations (specifically Indonesia – where the security of that nation is at risk, especially from radical Islamic forces, so much so that it is in turmoil – see strategypage.com article from the 12th of November, 2011.) That said, other than getting tongue tied during an answer (which, one would not want to see in a debate against Barack Obama even though the current President had done the same in the past, during the 2008 Democrat primary), Romney stayed on “campaign”. This is something one should notice about Romney that perhaps has not be brought to light, however, the man is a patriot, one has to look past the clips of campaign Romney, or economic Romney, to the opening of each debate where the national anthem is played. Romney gains points for his appearance and his singing along (silently or otherwise) with passion and pride, one might add, to the National Anthem. That penchant to sing (or lip sync) the National Anthem is one thing noticed and noted, he truly loves this country. That is not to say the other candidate do so no more or no less, but in last night’s debate, one is remind ended of former 2008 Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton, who was caught on tape, singing along to the national anthem. It was a move than endeared her to those who value the nation and what it has to offer, and care less about a public display. Her critics were first to note her ability to sing, rather than praise her for her obvious patriotism. That said, Romney’s performance overall left him in the Perry category. Perry, also a patriot, was more out of his debate depth than Romney, and clearly not up for a national security debate.

This is one of two debates where it the answers are critical, the stance on the issues at hand should be measured, not reactionary and that clearly places on individual ahead: Newt Gingrich.

The tension: Where Newt gave the answer in a clear and specific manner, on illegal immigrants, and his heartfelt, and Catholic (Universal) view of compassion when it come to the family that has been in this nation for 25 years, has an extended family, and attends church, pays taxes, et. al. Gingrich proposes allowing them to stay in the United States and giving them a legal status (not citizenship), in addition, when one is in this nation illegally and joins the armed forces, that person should be allowed a path to citizenship. This is something that happens consistently with nationals from other nations who are here on visa’s, of any type. His answer was quickly seized upon by the other candidates as “amnesty”, yet, Gingrich held firm. It is without a doubt, a red meat question, when it comes to what to do with the millions of illegal immigrants living and working in our nation. It is without a doubt, the last “problem” any candidate has yet to give an answer to, and or if an answer has been given, has done anything about once installed in the Oval Office, and this is a failing of Presidents on both sides of the aisle, and goes back beyond Ronald Reagan. It was, as one of this blogs more right of center peers stated, a problem for Conservatives, and yet, what amazes this individual of Spanish decent, nothing is ever done, especially from those who spout the most vitriol against those here in our nation illegally. Therefore, the answer given last night by Gingrich, clear, fair and one which could be easily implemented would appeal to most moderates, those compassionate conservatives, and the Hispanic/Latino Community.

From a true left of center independent, watching this debate, Gingrich stood above the rest, in terms of intellect, and has now become “human”. Someone who is likable when need be and one who is tough as the occasion demands. The second choice – startling to this blogger was Bachmann. Startling because of the choices – in the conversation was the following that should give Gingrich the biggest boost. (Paraphrasing) With today’s economy and the state of the world, Gingrich is the best choice to lead the nation, I would not have thought so ten years ago, or ten months ago, but after seeing him in several debates, he is clearly the smartest in the room, and we need someone who is smart.
What might be most interesting about the two responses, one is an avowed Massachusetts Right Voting evangelical, the other, a New Yorker, who more often than not, votes along the alternative party line.

Two do not make a poll obviously, however, if the smartest man in the room, is the choice, even despite a disagreement on an answer on immigration which was immediately misquoted by candidates on stage, of two so diverse political voters, one has to ask, take away the party purists from the Democrats, and those left, are most likely leaning with Newt. Those on the right, are most likely forgiving Newt his past, and looking at him as the one to trounce the President in the debate arena, and in the polls (this is yet to occur, however as Romney has been given the most media attention as the “eventual nominee”, and polls are now just beginning to show Gingrich equal to or above Romney”, a first look by many will clearly move those numbers in Newts’ favor should his debate performance remain constant going into the Iowa primary.

The next debate will be held on December 10, 2011, co - sponsored by the Des Moines Register and the Iowa Republican Party and broadcast on ABC News at 9:00 PM eastern.

The Iowa Caucus is the first 2012 general election decision made, followed by New Hampshire, the first primary in the nation. Both will take place in early January, just six weeks or less from today.

CNN Debate Video

2012 update: Colorado Straw Poll – Cain Bests with 48%, Romney at 10%, Perry Takes Second Place.

Herman Cain, GOP Candidate 2012: image: theblackconservative.org

From: the Washington Times Herman Cain, businessman and GOP Presidential Candidate for 2012, had a commanding lead in the Western Christian Summit, straw poll, at 48% of the votes.

The Summit which was sponsored by Colorado Christian University, took place in Denver. The sold out Summit included speakers: Herman Cain, Rick Perry, Mark Steyn, Dennis Prager, John Bolton, Juan Williams, Dick Morris, Arthur Brooks, and Pat Caddell among others.

For a full list of the scheduled speakers visit www.ccu.edu/centennial/events/wcsummitlive.asap
.
Although Straw polls can be indicative of a candidate’s strength or weakness within a certain demographic, they can be exclusionary of other demographics in a State and or Party, as these are paid events. That said it is not surprising that Herman Cain won the straw poll, but that Mitt Romney, who is usually strong in Western States, came in behind Texas Governor, Rick Perry, who has yet to announce his intent to run.

At another Conservative Summit held this weekend, Smart Girl Politics Straw Poll, saw Cain come in second to Michelle Bachman. Although early in the process, what one sees in Herman Cain is an individual businessman with no ties to Washington. This may be why the strongest polling numbers are currently being pulled by those who have either been Governor’s or strong in Business, the exception: Michelle Bachman, a U.S. Congresswoman, and is an attorney, with a focus on: taxes.

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.

ABC WAPO Poll – Romney Leads Obama – The New-Improved Mitt Romney - Changes Tactics Takes 4 Point Lead over Palin - Now Wears Jeans, Rolls Up Sleeves!

Mitt Romney? Indeed! Image rssbroadcast.com

In the latest GOP 2012 poll conducted by the very non-partisan group at ABC and the Washington Post, indicates that Mitt Romney is tied with Barack Obama, before noting that Romney is actually beating Obama by two points. In addition, the poll places Romney in first place with 21% out of a field of six, including Sarah Palin, who places second with 17% and has yet to announce whether or not she will join the fray. The Post reiterates the mantra – that no voter is thrilled with the GOP field – and although Obama is skewered by the 1002 randomly sampled adults in a telephone survey, somehow, those randomly sampled see the current President as a strong leader.

Does the public really need these types of polls? Perhaps, as entertainment – however, anyone who is paying rent or a mortgage, utilities, and has managed to maintain a job (in the private sector mind you) is most likely too busy or depressed to give these types of polls much credence. It is no longer a fact that if one organization prints/broadcasts/blogs a “fact”, it will eventually sound true enough to the targeted viewer. It's hard to admit when the "honeymoon" (or "revolution") is over.

The problem that some fail to see (though not all) is that overall, Obama has lost his mojo – he’s no longer “cool” with College students (See Atlantic Wire.com article.) Of course, one can easily find out just how cool the next crop of 2012 voters feel Obama might be by asking; the results, across socio-economic, ethnic, racial and gender lines basically result in the same data – he’s last year’s news. Not that one should rely on the youth vote, perhaps, but Gallup’s last poll on the Presidents approval on a state by state basis showed he was above 50% in 10 states based on 2010 approval rankings. One has to wait until the 2011 rankings come out sometime next April to see if there has been any improvement – perhaps he’ll pick up a state or two, but that scenario at this point, appears unlikely. (This screams: unelectable)

Reality: although the GOP field of contenders for the Office of the President may appear to the respondents to the Washington Post/ABC News poll, and similar polls taken by media outlets and Universities with political science polling programs as "lackluster" – when push comes to shove, one of those individuals will become the next President. This is beyond 1980 apathy and distrust of a public figure, this has morphed into an “anyone but” situation, with no time for recovery.

The “Leader of the Pack”, one term former Massachusetts Governor, Olympic Saving, Health Care Plan inventing (for Massachusetts only), Fee, not Taxes, “Perfect Hair and the Guy in High School one just could not stand”, Mitt Romney, appears to have risen to these new heights due to a remarkable makeover: Romney was spotted by the Boston Globe, of all tomes, sporting Jeans!! – the Tie was gone! This is breaking news! In a recent guest spot on WRCN Worcester’s Wesley and Weston Review (airs from 6 to 7 am Saturdays), this humble blogger suggested that Mitt become a bit more …..like the rest of us, let his hair get a bit ruffled, roll up his sleeves and well, be a little less perfect. Apparently, it works.

The reason that Romney, Massachusetts Budget Busting, Individual Liberty removing, Massachusetts Health Care Plan and Club for Growth Issues aside (They just are not “feeling it”) , is better received, is his “less perfect” persona. Jeans work, he now needs a tee-shirt – just saying.

To those Massachusetts residents who are horrified at the thought of exporting yet another disaster nationwide, there is still hope that Sarah Palin will still run and offer, if not merely entertainment, an opportunity to vote for someone who is less “Mitty”. Massachusetts, not exactly known for embracing conservatives, regardless of race, gender, or if one of them suddenly walked on water, are actually eyeing Palin. It is the media’s best kept secret (along with the Mass GOP and other Romney supporters in the Bay State), and here-in lays the kicker, young, old, male, female, Palin's best attribute to a Massachusetts Independent or Democrat, or Republican (there are a few who prefer Mitt in a suit), is that she appears to be able to take on anyone or anything – plus, she’s cool, like Donald Trump cool. These are Howard Dean leaning liberals, who are convinced Palin can beat Obama, and they are not going into therapy, they are hoping she runs. Somehow, they are under the impression that she fixed some problems in Alaska, and well, she didn’t care if someone was a Republican or a Democrat, or Big Oil, she threw them all out, and then gave everyone in the State of Alaska a piece of the action. (Movie reference to Stephen K Bannon’s – The Undefeated - (*like here on Facebook) a look at Sarah Palin and what she actually can do (as opposed to what has been repeated “reported”), scheduled to run in key GOP early primary states, and coming soon to a theater new you .

The biggest point to take away from the film (based on reviews) is that Palin, not unlike Ronald Reagan, was eviscerated by the media and the GOP establishment – and we all know how well Reagan did, especially since he took the Blue State of Massachusetts – twice. (That is the only comparison, from what reviews are available, between the Palin and the aforementioned Gipper).

Satire aside, (what fun is there in that?), Romney, Palin, a mind-changing Mike Huckabee, and Donald Trump to boot, in a debate, would induce skyrocketing ratings - This is not to diminish other candidates with less visibility, however, in a perfect political world, it would be mind-blowing entertainment to watch Romney in Jean’s and Tee-Shirt (think West Side Story (banned in Amherst Massachusetts as “racist”), Sarah Palin in whatever she wants to wear, Mike Huckabee, sanctimoniously preaching about twelve ways to fix the economy, and Donald Trump telling it like he sees it! Any bets on who would win that debate? Smart money in on the Barracuda.
What of the Media?

Perhaps NBC’s nightly news anchors would not have to do 30 second promo’s begging those watching to “TiVo” the news, if they somehow cannot find time to watch it! (Seriously that’s actually running.)

2012 Update: Mitch Daniels Bows Out – Trump Continues to Receive Requests Asking Him to Reconsider and Run for the GOP Nomination

Trump - Deluged by Requests to Return to the GOP 2012 Race

The Wall Street Journal is reportingthat Indiana Governor, Mitch Daniels, will not be seeking the GOP 2012 Presidential Nomination. As the field narrowed, with the decisions of Mike Huckabee and Donald Trump to forgo a run in 2012, some Conservatives are still hoping for a “dark horse” candidate. Daniels was one of those they had hoped would run, along with New Jersey Governor, Chris Christie, who has, to date, not announced any intention other than being the Governor of New Jersey.

That said, Donald Trump, is still being “deluged” by calls, emails and the like, to reconsider his withdrawal and run for the nomination. The source, Newsmax, has appeared to be a fan of Donald Trump’s run since the beginning, however, they most accurately point to the 1990 general election where Ross Perot had withdrawn and then was pressured by the business community to reconsider (as is the case with Trump according to the articled.) Perot, however, ended up leaving the race in the end. Should Trump reconsider, it would please those conservative who he “spoke to” through his “take no prisoners” approach to all issues – he also had Democrats who would have gladly gone over to Trump as a Republican. Those looking forward to debates that included Trump (and Huckabee), now view the field as rather boring, even if Palin enters the race, it appears as if Mitt Romney, may be too “perfect” a candidate for some to support wholeheartedly – one comment: “He is a younger, more prefect version of John McCain.” That particular comment came from an individual who, for the most part, leans left, but would have thrown his full support behind Donald Trump.

It is, however, doubtful that Trump would change his mind, given the beating that he Press gave him, vis a vis his running against the President. Trump may have received more negative Press and attacks than Sarah Palin, who is still in the race, and has not announced any intent to either run or withdraw. Palin, who has survived perhaps the worst that the “mainstream” media could give, appears to be able to brush it off – One wonders if Trump’s main reason, (although many have concluded his run was a ruse to build ratings, and that he declined due to the offer of (at the time reported) 60 million dollars – a theory that one might consider rather ridiculous, as Trump’s need for 60 million dollars is simply an oxymoron, and secondly he appeared to be sincere in his pronouncements – to the average voter, Trump appeared patriotic, and one that was willing to and able to take the reins and right the course of the nation from a businessman’s perspective. That said, Trump, one must understand, is also human, and it is not without some reservation after the scathing attacks by the press, that he might not be as thick skinned as, say, a Sarah Palin. He is, after all, used to the adoration of the media, with occasional barbs about his hair, but these attacks were both personal and vicious, possibly leading him to reconsider the bid.

The fact that in today’s elections in the U.S., the media does not report, rather editorializes, on a candidate, and extends that editorial to the candidate’s family, from a personal, not political policy, perspective. If Trump were to reconsider, it would be a breath of fresh air that would be injected into the race. All of those looking for “excitement” and a candidate that resonates with the average voter are praying that Trump reconsiders.

Obama Approval 39% TSA Debacle Taking Toll – How Low Will It Go? – Will WikiLeaks Have an Impact? Analysis

US News and World Report notes that Zogby Interactive Polling places Obama’s approval at 39%, well below the “average” on Real Clear Politics. Real Clear Politics averages all polling data (with the exception of Zogby) , in order to offer an overall assessment of job approval.

In the US News article, the poll results included hypothetical match-ups with GOP possible presidential candidates. In this poll, Gingrich, Romney and Jeb Bush all bested Obama; Palin was within one point – giving a picture of how interactive polling (or those using the internet versus traditional telephone surveys) predicts the 2012 outcome as of November, 2010.

(The Zogby methodology uses random samples of individuals who are invited to participate in a secure online poll, which allows for faster, larger samples. This method is light-years away from typical Internet “polls” in which results can be skewed to favor one “candidate” over another simply by having supporters clear their cache on their computer and vote incessantly. Some of the online polls offer a 24 hour lockout of an ISP, which can be tricked by clearing the cache. Therefore, Zobgy’s polling methodology and the integrity thereof, is not subject to multiple entries, and no different than traditional polling methods used by organizations such as Rasmussen which uses a computerized telephone sample method.)

US News suggests that the boondoggle from the TSA have been attached to Obama in the public eye, and that may be a reason why his approval is dropping. The fact that his policies have been rejected by the American public, as evidenced by the 2010 mid-term elections, is, in all likelihood, being enhanced by the constant revelations of the Administrations ineptitude in handling just about anything – including WikiLeaks and one Julian Assange.

Yesterday Mr. Assange, an Australian computer hacker turned “activists”, released classified foreign policy documents to newspapers globally as well as posting these “secret” documents on the WikiLeaks website. Mr. Assange, seeking more than 15 minutes of fame, is nothing more than a left of center, anti-government anarchist, who is using the web in order to further his “fame”. The documents were obtained through a U.S. Army intelligence officer who was apparently gleeful of “leaking” the documents to Assange:

“Hillary Clinton and several thousand diplomats around the world are going to have a heart attack when they wake up one morning, and find an entire repository of classified foreign policy is available, in searchable format, to the public,” Manning wrote.”

Two questions come immediately to mind: one, how much of a “Clinton hater” is this young disgruntled (about to be demoted prior to releasing the documents) man? Clinton, not Obama appears to have been the target given this statement, so one could conclude that the young man was not a fervent supporter of the Secretary of State.

Additionally, how much does one get paid for leaking to WikiLeaks? To believe that the website is not a corporation in and of itself is naive. The group survives by “donations”, which can be made through its website via bank transfers and credit cards. In order for Julian Assange to travel the World, he would need quite the bankroll, and any employees of WikiLeaks, one can bet the house, are not unpaid volunteers. To note, the website is based on leaks primarily of U.S. Origin, so one can further speculate that those “donating” to the cause, do not have the best interested of the U.S. at heart. Would that include Heads of State, perhaps?

The man who became the target, perhaps unintended, was not the United States overall, but the President and his administration. Upon publication of the information by the New York Times they offered an editorial on their decision to publish, after having spoken with the Administration, and agreeing, only in some instances, to not publish certain materials. Overall, the ”Treasure trove” of leaked cables is featured in a 4 page article on the front page of the Times website.

It is, again, naive to believe that the President will not take the brunt of the blame for this debacle. His failed foreign policy trip to Asia, directly following the mid-terms has become somewhat legendary. These leaks just add fuel to the fire regarding the ineptitude of the administration’s ability to deal with foreign policy.

The fact that the most powerful nation on earth, which, under the Bush administration, appeared to have a fairly decent handle on intelligence, and overall, may have been “hated” by the “world” for being a “cowboy”, has become, under the Obama administration, one big joke after another, is not surprising. Former President Carter used similar methodology to Obama’s when dealing with foreign policy – inexperience. He also applied the same principles to the economy with similar results. The problem in this instance is that the picture painted by these documents make Obama out to be some sort of foreign policy “thug”, especially when The “Great World Hope” of Obama used what amounts to extortion when certain World Leaders wished to meet with the White House. Considering the later, and how it relates to the “Chicago “gangsta” persona employed by the President from time to time”, perhaps he might have, with foreknowledge of these leaks evident, employed the same threats to that weasel Assange, sending him back to his mothers basement where he belongs. However, he did not.

The “Revelations” in these “Leaks” (to date), are more embarrassing to the administration than anything else. Much of the “leaks” are somewhat “common knowledge”, for example, the “revelations” regarding the relationship between Saudi Arabia and Al Queda. However, the harm done will be to the Obama administration and places one more nail in the proverbial coffin of public opinion of the President.

The unintended consequences of Assanges’ actions:
As the world digests the duplicity of the Obama administration (evidenced by these “leaks), and the voting public understands that the President is clueless when it comes to keeping the nation safe (see Borders in addition to the “leaks”), how the next President will be chosen, will now be based upon, not only the economy but also foreign policy strength, or more to the point, a drive to keep American’s safe and the nations data safe. This brings up the list of potential candidates thus far: Mitt Romney, who has business experience, has half of the equation, Mike Huckabee, a Governor, has little business (Fortune 500) with foreign policy experience that is at least equal to most State Governors. (Which said, Governors who have to run a mini-government, including a military (National Guard), do have the bonafides to assume the office of the Presidency more than a one-term Senator. Finally, when Palin, who spoke of the ability to see Russia from certain points in Alaska (which was taken by comedienne Tina Fey to mean Palin’s house), gives the V.P. candidate turned potential Presidential Candidate a bit of an edge, given her work with the U.S. Governors Association, National Resources Committee (Energy), which is crucial to U.S. Defense, the Economy and Foreign Policy - given the nature of the Republic of the United States of America and how independent most states are when it comes to determining policy that affects the entire country. That said, of the three mentioned above (being those most often associated as running in 2012 by the press) the leader of the U.S. must have at least an appearance of strength or the appearance (to the world and those on the left) of being crazy enough to challenge the world in the best interest of the United States. No crystal ball needed to understand that the odds of Obama being a 2nd term president, given the continued “gaffes”, are greatly diminished.

David Axelrod on CNN on Deval Patrick – Lowering Expectations for the Massachusetts Governor

In a CNN video posted to Real Clear Politics David Axelrod, White House Advisor, and reported Obama’s campaign manager for reelection in 2012, reviewed the mid-term elections. The Headline ”Axelrod Suggests Dem Upset: "Stay Up For The Full Night" suggests, according to CNN that Axelrod appears somewhat misleading, as Axelrod rambles through questions posed by CNN’s John King noting: “as I said, I think you're going to see an -- an election where, you know, people win who perhaps you didn't expect to win, people lose who -- who, perhaps, you didn't expect to lose on -- on both sides.”

However, the interview begins with a discussion on which races Axelrod will be watching, and the East Coast is discussed first, specifically, Axelrod’s former client and alleged test for Obama’s 2008 victory,Deval Patrick. Paraphrased from the video below: “Deval, an old client of mine, spectacular person, Massachusetts has elected Republican governors for 16 years before he arrived, so that’s a competitive race.”…

After that quip, Axelrod goes into the discussion regarding surprises the night of the election and highlights the California Governor’s race as an example. Axelrod suggests that spending $200 million dollars might just clinch the deal for Democrat Jerry Brown against Meg Whitman. That’s apparently all he has right at the moment.

Meanwhile, back in the Bay State, the three man race for the Governor’s seat is in its final two weeks, with Democrat turned Independent, Tim Cahill going to the 10 point range, in the latest poll from Suffolk University. The poll released on October 14th and taken between the 10th and 12th of September, suggests that the electorate was far from a commitment on any candidate. On question 17: where do you stand on the race at this point, one finds Patrick at 44%, Baker at 37% and Cahill at 10% (with the balance either undecided, Green Party, etc.). On Question 18 however, when those leaner’s are asked who they would vote for if the election were held today? – There is a startling difference: Patrick receives 6%, Baker 12%, and Cahill 2%, with a whopping 49% refusing to answer or not sure. The results of the poll which were released were the combination of the two questions, gives Patrick a somewhat artificial edge. That said, with a pollster that repeatedly includes 8% of it staff (Suffolk University) in the mix, one has to ask, how accurate can this poll be? Consider it is doubtful that 8% of the Massachusetts electorate resides on the Suffolk campus. (See screen shot below).


Section of Marginal from Suffolk Poll showing larger percentage of undecideds only two weeks away - deduct 8 points for Suffolk only participants - click to enlarge


It is more than likely that internal polling on the Patrick team suggests the gig is up, which is why Axelrod was softening the “blow” so to speak when reviewing the Massachusetts Electorate. One can bet the House (literally) that he will also have his eyes on the Bay State’s 9 Congressional races, which, as of this point, don’t appear to be heading in a direction pleasing to Axelrod and Company. Axelrod, who is certain that Mitt Romney will run in 2012, could not have missed that Romney’s PAC recently endorsed certain Congressional Candidates, including Sean Bielat, running against Barney Frank and Tom Wesley, running against Richard Neal. The move on Romney's Part can be viewed in two ways:one, the man is a businessman first, and would not waste a dime, and two; it goes toward building political capital for the future.

As races either tighten up or completely blow out in normally “Blue States” such as Illinois and Massachusetts, one has to begin to realize that the electorate, in larger measures (according to a WSJ/NBC pollwould prefer to elect a candidate that has not held office before, that would, perhaps explain why seasoned politicians, such as Nancy Pelosi and Richard Neal, have ducked debates, and have become almost invisible in their home districts, even though they were responsible for taking a break to campaign and not voting on the extension of tax cuts. Axelrod is a smart man, and looks more pained than confident in this particular CNN clip.

Axelrod on CNN