GOP Debate Review – Route between Bachmann & Pawlenty, Romney Looking Like Leader, and Human - Gingrich Fires at Press – Missing: Perry and Palin

The GOP Field at Iowa - image nola.com

Watching the GOP debate sponsored by Fox News and the Washington Times provided the public (which should have been watching given the increasingly clear indication that one of those standing on that stage in Iowa, will, unless Perry of Texas and Palin of Alaska jump in, be the next President), with an insight into how these candidates respond to the “hard” questions thrown by Fox’s Chris Wallace.

The beginning of the debate was as expected, each candidate giving their view of how they might fix the economy, while dismissing President Obama’s non-efforts, in the correct “red-meat”, pre-primary language that is necessary to pump up the base. What was most noticeable with the opening questions was the similarities rather than the differences between all of the candidates on the stage – They all appeared to be in complete control, all looking, more or less, presidential, and extremely polite.

Then Chris Wallace started to ask questions that were pointed and directed at each candidate regarding a particular media story, while at the same time, inviting individual candidates to comment on the one standing at the next podium, or the one down – basically all Hades broke loose, and this is what one could take away from the ensuing brouhaha: Michelle Bachmann can hold her own, no matter how base the charge, she fires back and has the ability to look at her detractor, and the audience, as if they were somehow less than (choose any adjective).

Tim Pawlenty was the most contentious of the debaters, going after Bachmann with gusto, and a little less gusto when it came to Romney. Wallace, when asking a round of pointed questions at Answer Man, Newt Gingrich, was probably most shocked when Gingrich turned on him, literally. One thing about Newt Gingrich, the soft-spoken Virginian can deliver cutting barbs, with wit and sarcasm while refuting an accusation, all in a lecture. Romney and Cain were also asked the “hard” questions, deflecting them with ease, while Wallace continued to pit one against the other, looking quite gleeful. He should have been gleeful. He engineered a shouting match between Rick Santorum and Ron Paul that was of interest, surprisingly, Santorum appeared to give his best, while Paul had a virtual meltdown. Usually Paul is composed, but the Wallace method of creating debate brawling, got to the good Congressman. Unfazed: Herman Cain, Mitt Romney and Michelle Bachman, who stood up for themselves, without taking the bait (unless it came to Pawlenty and Bachmann, in which case, she clearly “let him have it”.

Of Particular interest was the question posed to Bachmann by Wallace, regarding a comment she made (era unknown) regarding the Christian concept of being submissive to a spouse. Wallace, asked pointedly if she would continue that “submissive role” if elected, implying Bachmann’s husband would be calling the shots. She then gave Wallace a bit of religious education regarding the biblical meaning of submissive, taking into account that most American’s don’t read their Bibles, (most notably the press): simply stated the particular verse and use of the arcane language translates into respect, and charges both the husband and the wife to literally listen and support one another. She shorted it to “paraphrasing” it means “respect”. She handled that well, if, and only if, someone understood the true meaning, however, that the majority would not, can be taken to the bank.

What this blog learned from this debate: The majority of the candidates took Wallace’s’ bait and acted like children, (it’s easy to see who the tattle-tale of the group might be) or petulant old men, with glaring exceptions: Mitt Romney, although also fired up at times, maintained his cool, also note: Romney appeared more tousled, less neat, more human, and more right (on issues), more gracious (with his fellow candidates) and therefore, more Presidential. Herman Cain, give credit where credit is due, although inexperienced in the political realm gave pound for pound, without coming across as a hot head, or someone whose temper could easily be riled. Bachmann, who was put directly under the spotlight, with hard barbs from Pawlenty and Wallace, made her points, without sounding off base, rather, using a knowing look (translated - I feel sorry for you – you idiot, now stand back) and then stating her case, without scratching anyone’s eyes out or breaking down in tears – she stood up for herself, and did so as graciously as possible, given Pawlenty’s barbs. It was as if by design, Wallace, pointedly started the mix up, in order to make certain candidates trade verbal barbs and others, to well, become unhinged. He shook the wheat from the chaff. From this perspective, Romney was clearly the winner, not on content, but on the sheer fact that he escaped the Fox/Washington Times Debate the least ruffled, followed by Cain and Bachmann.

Who was missing? Governor Rick Perry who will announce this weekend, and Governor Sarah Palin, who, one would like to see up against Wallace and his playful incitement of what can only be called a “GOP Debate Riot”. One would hazard to guess, that neither would take the bait, like Romney, it would be beneath them.

This brings up an interesting personal revelation, never having been a fan of Mitt Romney, he was actually likeable, presidential, and although accused of being “like Obama”, as was Gov. Huntsman, Romney rose to the occasion, with each leading question and pointed barb, even straying from his talking points! Romney needs to be Romney more often – the tousled, and quick witted, sarcastic Romney, that points out the worth of Candidate Cain, calmly and with reason.

One can therefore, see an Iowa straw poll that gives Romney, Bachman and, Cain credit for their performance, and as for the rest, a thank you note for the entertainment. Of course, this all depends upon what happens when the Texan rides into Iowa, and Palin drives in with her bus next week. One would like to see both announce, and give the GOP stage a real advantage for continued entertainment with a purpose, to this mind, qualified candidates are those that want the job, believe they can fix the mess, and have some resume that suggests that they can play both sides of the aisles (or use persuasion mixed with persistence), and only one was on that stage last night – Romney. The other two, would round out the field nicely, and the rest, as history notes on these debates, will be relegated to the obligatory 2 questions per debate for Candidates that don’t stand a snowball chance in Hades.

Predicating, which is dangerous, and assuming (which everyone knows what that stands for) the next debate should feature Romney, Bachman, Cain, Palin and Perry – giving the nation an opportunity to view the persons that, in this option, appear to have a handle on the dire straits were in, and are not afraid to take on the task. (Adding one Donald Trump to the mix would just be the icing on the cake!).

Although the press as we know it today, would continue to live in the fantasy land where the President wins reelection handily because not one of the GOP candidates is suitable (to them). What this blogger saw was the absolute potential in the aforementioned that were on that stage, and as a moderate, choosing a candidate that will lead our nation, without taking months to deliberate, have the background and history of making decisions (or in Bachmann’s case, standing up and fighting in the trenches for the people and fearlessly, one might add) and most importantly – lead, both the on the U.S. stage as well as globally.

Closing: Although much is made of Romney’s involvement in “Massachusetts Care”, which morphed into Obamacare, read this article: From the Examiner: Romneycare-a-revolution-that-basically-worked”which talks about Governor Romney’s original intent, and where the Massachusetts Legislature mandated it to the point that made it appeal to Obama.

Déjà vu Pervades US Economics and the Coming 2012 Presidential Election – Both Carter and Bush shadow Obama – Reelection: Mission Impossible

Carter/Obama and the Rule that History Repeats itself image: ututilis.com

Although it may not seem fair to the President, as both the Congress and the White House take a summer recess and Obama hits the campaign trail during, what has to be, one of the bleakest weeks in the economic lives of Middle Class American’s, the President is being, aptly, compared historically and accurately to one James E. Carter, one term economic fiasco and former President of the U.S.

After Jimmy Carter’s attempts at trying to right the nation (he inherited a recession), by spending his way out of it, including, but not limited to, job stimulus programs, the bailout of Chrysler, and an anti-military, anti-big oil and anti-wall street approach to economics, with the end result being a misery index that provided an opportunity for the nation to stand up and vote him out of office – Carter’s dismal record was such that even with a third party candidate in the mix, Ronald Reagan won handily.


Mitt Romney compared to Reagan - from the Daily Beast

Yesterday, while the stock market plunged, and world markets went wildly in the same direction, due to the fact that the US has hit its Obama requested debt ceiling, and has literally “nowhere to go”, those who own a 401K are now terrified of checking the balances – 401K’s have replaced traditional pension plans for most employees, including those who may be making a minimum wage – they not for the “rich” but for the average Joe. Anyone who may have taken what is considered a “hit”, stand fast and hold on to your socks until January of 2013, unless of course, it looks like the Republican challenger to Obama is going to handily best him in the Presidential Contest of 2012, around say September or October. If it appears there is no snowball’s chance in Hades Obama (see Carter) would be reelected, the markets will roar back. The alternative is unthinkable.


Pawlenty Compared to Reagen image Poltico

Here’s a take on the subject from an historical perspective: “Not Since Jimmy Carter” “Dow’s losing streak unmatched since 1978” Marketwatch – in reference to the Stock Market’s reaction to Obama’s Economic Policies a la former President Carter.

Just as American’s who lived through the Carter Years, and managed to survive (without eating cat food as a staple meal – reference to rising price of food, fuel and rentals, and those who were on fixed or limited incomes, who could not afford to pay bills and also eat – it was that bad), and now look at parallels too eerily similar to not make one start to look at any alternative candidate for the Presidency – the brand of the Democrats has turned just as toxic with a certain element of Déjà vu.

Deja Vu II Guilt by Association

The Posts note that those incumbent Democrats are now running away from any association with the President, especially on the campaign trail has begun: Headline: “Weprin distances himself from Obama” New York Post
In the Carter years, there was more loyalty, so to speak, and going “down with the Good Ship Carter” appeared to be the norm, however, with the ever Republican, Conservative, Right Wing, Tea Party, (i.e. anyone who is remotely “not progressive”, attitude of the Press, the constant bad news associated with one much maligned George W. Bush, Obama predecessor saw Republican’s distancing themselves in both 2005 (heading up to the 2006 mid-terms) and again in 2008: Headline: “Bush's calendar empty as McCain & Republicans avoid him” from:current.com

From an historical perspective this is a time period that most voters should be able to recall – it is another nail in the coffin of the sequel “Obama II – Let’s Finish off the Economy”, when the proverbial rats start jumping off the good ship Progressive, as it sails into 2012.



Bachmann Compared to Reagan - from the Daily Beast - getting warmer

What is perhaps, the saddest part and parcel of this entire mess, had history been viewed from a realistic perspective, by the President and by his ad visors, he could have changed course, before ever investing in a stimulus! Had someone, somewhere, taught the President in a History class at either of the Universities that he attended, on the politics and policies of the Carter Administration, and the end results, a tragedy could have been averted and he would have been, perhaps, the Hope the nation longed for. In other words, had the professors (who are progressives) had not held up Carter as the ideal, rather than in truth, the disaster, those who attended college, preparing for life, from the 1970’s onward (even while the nation was “burning” the “professional left” (i.e. university professors and Progressives in general) were holding Carter in high esteem, and, daresay, shocked to the core, when Carter’s policies, both foreign and domestic were booted to the curb. Yes, unanimously, by a vast majority of the states (including Massachusetts), Ronald Ray-Guns (see: Joan Baez) was elected to the Office of the Presidency. At that time, Reagan was not considered the conventional candidate, although a popular Governor of California, the man was an “actor” and fodder for the press, which apparently, from Walter Cronkite to the New York Times, was patently ignored by the voters. Unconventional, not the norm for the Republican National Committee, rather, someone who was considered a bit of a rogue candidate, a “Cowboy” an “Actor”, a “Clown” who in truth was a smart man, who had principals, and has a proven resume when it came to governing. Sound like anyone familiar that may not have announced?




The Comparison: Sarah Palin to Ronald Reagan (and Maggie Thatcher - not pictured) image: Newsrealblog

To those who fear the future and see no end in sight, recall, that 2012 “can’t come soon enough” (Sarah Palin), and that a ship that has almost gone under (see Carter/Obama), can be towed to safety and made ship-shape again, in a few years, if the right person is at the helm. (Note: Choose your GOP candidates carefully as one of them (historically speaking) will be the next President of the United States. The fact is that Obama (historically looking at Carters’ time tables) has no time to make the correction that should have been made pre-Stimulus.


Note: Making comparisons to Ronald Reagan has become some sort of Litmus Test for Conservatives and honestly can be a tad on the ridiculous side, especially when candidates try to out-Reagan each other at Debates. That said, some are obvious. No more or no less so than the Comparison of Policy, Faith in America, the Free Market System, versus, Progressive Values in the Carter/Obama comparison.

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 GOP Update: Pawlenty – Sees No Difference Between Fees & Taxes, Bachmann Leads in Polls, Palin to Announce Late Summer

Pawlenty vs. Bachmann, Pawlenty Sees "Fees" as the answer (ie. Taxes!), yet criticizes Bachmann for lack of experience at a Governors Mansion - image: TPM.com

In the latest Iowa poll released by Magellan StrategiesMichelle Bachmann leads the field in Iowa by 13 points, followed by Romney at 16, Pawlenty the third in line, by 8 points, the balance of those announced also in lower single digits. 24 percent of the respondents are undecided, with Sarah Palin not included in the polling. Bachmann leads in all poll demographics, Female and Male Voters, Fiscal and Social Conservatives, as well as voters 65 plus. Although there is still a significant amount of time between July and the 2012 Caucuses/Primaries, it is interesting to see Bachmann, currently the lone woman in the race, pulling far ahead of her male counterparts. In casual grocery store, to art gallery polling, this blogger finds that across a wider range of demographics, to include political affiliation, the general consensus is, at this point, although some may not care for the women running (they automatically include Palin), they would prefer to see either Bachmann or Palin in the White House as opposed to any of their male counterparts or the current occupant. Granted, these are non-scientific polls, based on casual conversations in primarily New England States, however, the fact that the respondents are unknown, chosen at random, and in states considered “Democrat strongholds” – it is reminiscent of the Carter-Reagan contest of 1980, but with more at stake – there appears to be more willingness on the part of the staunch Democrats to look at the women in the GOP.

Perhaps being so close to Massachusetts, where taxes are the norm, regardless of the economic clime, Pawlenty’s inability to see the difference between fees and taxes is a deal-breaker. In an interview on Fox News, Pawlenty has no problem taking umbrage at Michelle Bachmann (given his standing in the Iowa polling, however, he also had no problem in assessing fees on cigarettes and other items while Governor of Minnesota. While Romney was Governor of Massachusetts additional “fees” were assessed on a multitude of services – all fees are considered revenue for the State involved – revenue for States is generally derived from taxes. In any wise, both fees and taxes are additional monies taken out of the individuals pocket and placed into the hands of the State. Note to Pawlenty: Semantics: Fees Are Taxes!

Sarah Palin, also on Fox, noted that she would make a decision by August or September (AP.) Palin, as previously noted in this blog, can afford to announce into early fall, as she has a solid grass roots organization and name recognition. In addition, with the release of the documentary “The Undefeated”, Palin’s story is being told across America – one which is in direct contradiction to the general impressions proffered by the “mainstream media”. Although currently playing in limited venues in key states, how long before the DVD’s will be available for grassroots supporters and private viewings? Dubbed, the “Road to 2012”, the film is making an impact on both the choir and those who may not have been fans of the former 2008 GOP VP candidate. In effect, Palin, through the documentary is on the campaign trail, however, once announced; will that translate into a surge in the polls? Palin currently, when included, generally places third in all polling, therefore, if announced, she and Bachmann may find themselves the first women in history to be frontrunners in a major political party. Although there is a “rebuttal documentary” regarding Palin, it is receiving little play with the exception to those dedicated Palin Derangement Syndrome leftists. The film was produced by a British filmmaker, with a debut at the Toronto Film Festival in September. Again, in Toronto. One has to wonder how many of Hollywood’s elites will flee the country (or at least threaten to flee) if either Bachmann or Palin are elected to the office.

2012 GOP Update: Michelle Bachmann Leads Mitt Romney in Latest Iowa Poll, Pawlenty Gains – The “Undefeated” – Waiting for Palin.

2012 - The Year of the Women? - image MSNBC


A poll of 500 likely Iowa caucus voters commissioned by theIowa Republicans, finds Michelle Bachman (R-MN) with a 4 point lead over former Massachusetts Govenor Mitt Romney in the latest survey. Bachmann leads Romney in Favorability by 10 points, with an 11% Unfavorabilty. Romney is at 21% with a 66% favorable, with Tim Pawlenty at 9% (a plus) with a 60% favorability. The margin of error is plus or minus 4%; therefore, this might be considered a statistical tie. Go to: the Iowa Republican to read the entire article.

From this perspective, it is still early in the political game, even in early caucus and primary states such as New Hampshire, Iowa, and South Carolina, (the three leading up to Super Tuesday). Should, for example, Sarah Palin, enter the race, those numbers may change dramatically, and for the first time in history, one might find two women leading the polls in one of the two largest national party general election process. Additionally, Governor Rick Perry, who has yet to announce, would change the dynamics, most likely affecting those who are currently in the field. Neither of the aforementioned are considered “dark horses” rather, they are most likely viewed as able to compete an already competitive field. One might suggest that the latest either one of these candidates would announce would be early October, 2011, however, that announcement must come with a pre-set grassroots organization and the wherewithal to run a blitzkrieg campaign in at least one of the three key states.

Palin is being aided by filmmaker Stephen K Bannon, with a documentary that debunks the myths regarding the lack of just above everything “Palin”. CBS News’, Jan Crawford, after viewing the documentary opined

"The Undefeated" goes a long way towards debunking that tired narrative. It shows an unbroken line in her thinking over the past two decades. The things she's saying on her bus tour about freedom, free markets, fiscal responsibility and the proper role of government are the same things she's been saying ever since she entered into politics.
It got me to thinking about the grossly unfair and inaccurate story line that developed over the years about Justice Clarence Thomas - another favorite target of the Left. The rap on Thomas was that he was unqualified for the Supreme Court and incapable of serious thought - so as a Justice, he blindly followed conservative superstar Antonin Scalia.

Perhaps most intriguing I the article in Huffington Post (yes, the Huffington Post), by Amy Siskind, entitled “The Undefeated: The Movie I Wish Hillary Had Made” - the premise, is obvious, getting to know the real person, and debunking media myths, however, for the film to be as well received by both the MSN, Conservative and more Left of Center outlets, is telling. Additionally, literature accompanying the film proclaims “The Road To the White House 2012”, although unannounced, the message to Palin is clear, support for a candidacy is there, and it is only a question of time before the former Alaskan Governor and 2008 GOP Vice Presidential nominee throw her hat into the ring.

Two Women: Let the attacks continue/begin.

The film on Palin will begin playing in 10 theaters in some key demographic states this weekend July 13th, for a full schedule visit: victory film group.com. The film debut took place in – Iowa. The most ridiculous article to date: (one can now, with certainly, claim Palin Derangement Syndrome) comes from Gawker Magazine online ripping through every aspect of Palin, and an article released in Newsweek, entitled: “Palin plots her next move” is more foreboding than complimentary.

Bachmann, who is definitely in the limelight, is catching flak in both print, as well as from her competition: Immediately following Bachmann’s stellar performance in the CNN Debate, a Senior Pawlenty aid made a sexist remark (see article here at the leftist “Time Magazine”.), for which he later apologized. The point being when all else fails, attack a woman because she might be attractive. Of course, that was coming from Pawlenty’s aid, however, this weekend, on Meet the Press, Pawlenty went roaring after Bachmann’s “lack of experience” in matters of governing. He’s walking a fine line - there is a general consensus among conservative as well as independent voters, that Governors have more experience than say a member of congress or the Senate and would be more capable of governing the nation (Evidence for that case: Barack Obama, one term Jr. Senator from Illinois).

That is Governor Pawlenty’s opinion; however, when Palin enters the fray, he and his aides might have to come up with a few “bombshell” remarks in order to keep the candidate in the news. Both Bachmann and Palin have a take no prisoner approach to negatives, and are far from “shrinking violets when faced with criticism either from the left or from within their own party. Points for these two women. One has to wait and see how these remarks made by Governor Pawlenty and staff, impact his overall poll rankings in the early caucus states, negatives, either in spoken, written or commercial form do not play well with Conservatives, Independents and or Moderate Democrats. The most damaging commercial in recent political context pitting female/male candidates to date, in this point of view, came from the campaigns of one Martha Coakley, who ran against Scott Brown for the open Senate Seat in the Bay State: Coakley ad here on You Tube - the result: Senator Scott Brown.

Therefore, Romney, Pawlenty, Cain, and the rest of the “boys”, including not yet announced Rick Perry, should understand that attacks on one record are just fine, don’t cross the line – otherwise, you’ll become just like your Democrat counterparts – (see Hillary Clinton).

Personal note: As a Conservative Feminist, who would, of course, want to see the first woman elected to the highest office be a qualified female, one with the wherewithal to stand up to both the press, the political left and the political right, one that would transcend criticism in the long-run, and defend themselves during their terms in office. One must reference the recently released Rasmussen poll on women and the Presidency noting that within ten years, 73% of respondents, across the political spectrum felt a woman was most likely to be President. Of note: the only option as far as time-frame offered to respondents was 10 years. One has to wonder, with the economy, the state of the nation in general, how that poll would have looked had Rasmussen suggested 2012? One has to understand that if one thought 10 years from now a woman would be elected, that they might also take that stance in less than two years (or 2012).

With that said, out of the current field, Michelle Bachmann offers her congressional experience, however, she also stands up for what she believes is right, an endearing quality to those of us sick of the “establishment”. That said, should Palin enter the race, then it stands that the former Governor from Alaska would have the full support of this writer. This is not necessarily because Governor Palin is a woman, (although that is a bonus), rather, in looking at her experience, from an historical context (and note: having attended no preview of the “undefeated”, rather having done due diligence prior to her acceptance of the 2008 VP nomination) – one finds: A woman who is in it for the people, does not differentiate between fraud or abuse by party, gets the job done, whatever that job may be, and sticks to the Constitution (in this case State of Alaska) and the courts, when it comes to her decisions. In all cases, she sticks up for herself. One has to look closely at those elite who cannot comprehend anyone who had to claw their way through their degree programs, perhaps going to several schools to achieve a goal. It is what the average American has to do, loans included, to accomplish their goals. It is this East Coat or West Coast mentality that someone who went to Harvard or Yale are ultimately superior is a fallacy. GPA’s for Presidents Bush, John Kerry, and other recent Presidents and candidates (with the exception of one Barack Obama) are available, and show less than stellar performances when it comes to “smarts”. Therefore, give us common sense and an above average or even average GPA at the finish line, relevant governing experience, the ability to cross the aisle in good times and bad, and that individual has this vote - Male or female, right now it does appear to be a female. Bonus: someone who has no direct connection to the Beltway and makes the media crazy.

2012 Election Update: Massachusetts 2012 Primary Set for March 6, 2012, Pawlenty Airs First Ad in Iowa, Teachers Union Surprisingly Endorses Obama

Romney, Bachmann and Pawlenty - will the later compete in Massachusetts? - image New York Daily


The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has set its 2012 primary date for March 6, 2012, a movethat Democrat Secretary of State William Galvin suggests will give greater influence to the State due to Mitt Romney’s run for the Office of the Presidency.

Apparently, Galvin believes that other states would be watching Massachusetts to see how Romney fares in his “home” state, thereby lending said state more clout. However, it remains to be seen how well Romney actually does in the Bay State (think Tea Party). The Most recent polling data on the Bay State comes from Public Policy Polling June 15th, with 244 likely GOP voters taking part in the poll, Romney lec the field with 49%, followed by Michelle Bachmann at 10% and Sara Palin (unannounced) at 9%. The actual primary results will depend upon the number of the 51.6% of the Bay State’s “Unenrolled” voters who turn out to vote and choose a Republican Ballot. The Commonwealth’s electoral makeup is as follows: 36.48% Democrat, 11.33% Republican, 51.6% Unenrolled, .38% Libertarian and .2% other parties. It is “understood” that the Republican Party in Massachusetts is firmly behind Romney, and unless and until another candidate decides to step foot in the Bay State (Pawlenty, although polling low in PPP at 4%, and had visited the state for a Tea Party Rally in Boston – would actually have to have boots on the ground in the Bay State to put a dent in Romney’s numbers.)

Unfortunately, more often than not, major party candidates tend to avoid the Bay State unless there is a major donor fundraiser event (usually Democrat) in Boston. The Bay State is not a “winner take all” primary state – therefore, any Candidate in competition with Romney might be well served by spending more than 20 minutes in Boston and spend some time shaking a few hands in the once great industrial cities sprinkled about the state – keeping in mind that the majority party – Unenrolleds – rule the roost in MA and decide many a primary and election. (Note to Bachman, Palin and Pawlenty – this state did vote for Reagan twice! (See Jimmy Carter).

Tim Pawlenty has aired his first television commercial in Iowa and has hired political strategist, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, to lead his team in Iowa. The campaign ad speaks to Pawlentys ability to fight the Unions by holding the line against tax increases, The quotes from race42012.com go back to a 208 article from a left blogger entitled: “How Tim Pawlenty Made his Case for VP by Wrecking the Minnesota Economy”:

Voters across the country might be interested to know that no one has been more influential than Pawlenty in reversing Minnesota’s longstanding tradition of using progressive taxes to make prudent but significant investments in our social and physical infrastructure — education, transportation, health care and the environment (emphasis mine).
Among complaints Robson makes about Pawlenty:
“A biennial budget that contained more than $2.7 billion worth of tax relief” (It was more than twice as large, per capita, as any other state tax cut in the nation.)
“The very next year …returned hundreds of millions of dollars through an income tax cut and reduced vehicle license fees”.
“Lowered property taxes”
“Rebated $700 million worth of sales taxes back to citizens”
“Pawlenty had signed a pledge not to raise taxes. As billions of dollars’ worth of state programs were slashed, most of them in health and human services, the governor stood fast on his pledge”
“To dramatize just how radical this no-taxes stance was… Pawlenty has tenaciously rebuffed any income tax increases during his six years in office”

Although the Wall Street Journal, at the same time, posted an article that indicated Governor Pawlenty liked to impose “fees”, and even walked across the aisle more than once to get things done. (i.e. Tax Hikes and fraternizing with the enemy) Anyone who lived in Massachusetts under the Romney Administration understands “fees” all too well – especial when prefaced by the word “Increased”. Additionally, those GOP Governors who are virtually surrounded by Democrats in control of a State Legislature have to walk that walk in order to get anything accomplished.

Finally, the One of the two (yes there are two) National Teachers Unions, the National Education Association, while holding their annual convention in Chicago came out with a strong endorsement of the 2012 Obama campaign yesterday. Apparently after spending a day with Joe Biden, the union had no choice but to offer an early endorsement of the President. What your children will be learning in school between now and the first Tuesday in November 2012, might have little to do with math, science or reading – instead, they will be given a course on rhetoric. However that rhetoric may be wasted on those students faced with increased debt for college (under the government takeover of student loans which was added to the Omnibus bill that also included Mandated Health Care), and/or the inability to find a job in this “economic climate, as well as an ability to vote and a glaring lack of respect for what their teachers may have to say on any given day. One can assume, that unions members will be voting for Obama in this election, however, union membership in the nation is declining and represents only 11.9% of the U.S. workforce. (Bureau of Labor Statistics) Obama also has, what has become to be known as, “the mainstream media” and their members which will, no doubt, be actively supporting his reelection.

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.

GOP 2012 Update – “Top Tier Candidates” skip Fox South Carolina Debate, follow 1999 Examples

Out of the Pack of "Top Tier" candidates: Huckabee, Palin and Trump (not pictured) yet to commit to run - image: freedomslighthouse.net


Fox News held the first GOP debate last evening in South Carolina – the debate featured Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul and Tim Pawlenty – absent the field of “GOP Potential Candidates: Huckabee, Romney, Palin, Bachman, Trump and Gingrich. The prevailing theory is that the Fox hosted debate was more of a loss for Fox News, rather than the GOP field, as those Top Tier “Candidates” have not yet announced. The question remains, when will these much ballyhooed candidates decide? The answer obviously is when they are ready pending current obligations and strategy.

From Politico: Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee told a group of freshman congressional representations this past week that he had not yet decided one way or the other and would make his decision this summer. The prevailing theory is that with Huckabee, Palin and Trump particularly, there are media contracts in place which would prevent them from announcing sooner, unless these contracts were dissolved.
What’s the rush? The debate process a mere decade ago began in the later end of 1999 - George Bush, who went on to win the GOP nomination, skipped the first two debates which begin in October 1999, and although he announced an exploratory committee in March of that year, did not firmly commit until the summer. Bush went on to win the nomination, after announcing later than McCain, and skipping two of the first debates – he had to work harder on the ground in the primary states, but was able to raise funds and observe the other candidates, plain strategy. The early debates and announcements began in 2007 with the emergence of Barack Obama as a candidate for the Presidency, prior to that, the announcement, exploratory and debate process got off to a later start.

Does it really matter when Huckabee, Palin or Trump decide to run and formally announce? Not in the grander scheme of things. A question asked at the Fox debate of the attending candidates was (Paraphrasing): There are certain (people, groups) who feel that Barack Obama is unbeatable, do you feel that he is vulnerable in any way? The answers, resoundingly from those present were – yes, and the main reason, the economy.

It will be the economy, the lack of transparency, the appearance of indecisiveness and the inability of the administration to get any story straight, regardless of the import, or lack thereof, that has both left and right thinking American’s thinking strongly about the alternatives. There are polls which show the President’s job approval rating at all time lows, polls that contradict whether or not he got a “bounce” from the Bin Laden incident, and polls that indicate the birth certificate issue is still alive. The fact that so many are now questioning whether or not the demise of the Al Queda leader, Bin Laden was “staged” is, in a word, stunning. Therefore, it does not really matter if one announces in March or in August, it really does not matter if they have the “billions” the President is hoping to have in his “war chest” for reelection – what will matter is that the individual who breaks from the “pack” by September or October of this year, is one who is decisive, has a clear understanding of the economy and who is less “Washington” - being able to convince the general public, not just the Republican’s and Republican leaning Independents, that they are capable and additionally willing (key word) to take on the task of running the nation as the top CEO. It will be someone who comes across as Decisive, and that is, if nothing else at this point, any one of the ten or so individuals announced and unannounced.

The fact that the news organizations,ABC, CBS, CNN and Fox included, are pushing so hard for the sake of ratings, has little to do with the final choices made by the candidates and those who support them – It may be Donald Trump who ends up leading the field (he appears, despite the naysayers to be a serious candidate), it may be Mike Huckabee, or Sarah Palin, or it may be a soft-spoken, decisive Governor from Minnesota, one Tim Pawlenty, or a perennial presidential candidate Ron Paul, who takes the lead. It will, in this opinion, however, be a candidate who is decidedly not connected to Washington – which has become synonymous with greed, indecision and a quest for power, not service. Therefore, when the field of contenders finally forms this summer (and that is when all will know for certain who is in and who is out), then the debates will draw ratings, the speculation and dirt will fly, and the 2012 election season will get underway. What is hoped is that should Trump, Palin, Romney and Huckabee all enter the race, that this debate season, equal time will be given to those who, although considered by the “pollsters” to be less likely to win a nomination, be heard.

2012 GOP Presidential Contenders – Trump, Palin, Romney, Pawlenty and Huckabee - Media Analysis and Update

Trump in Good Company - Ronald Reagan Depicted as a Clown - image: publicly funded PBS.org


A Boston Herald article by Rachelle Cohen, entitled “No Trump-ing Obama”, notes that there are so many candidates and potential candidates for the GOP nomination, none of them attracting more than 19% of the total, that Obama should be pleased indeed and easily reelected. The logic belies the fact that out of the myriad field of contenders, only one, to date has announced an exploratory committee, one Mitt Romney. Additionally, what is of more import perhaps is that regardless of how one feels about any one of the “candidates”, at the least, they are taking time out of their lives to run for public office (or think about it, more to the point). What it does leave the nation with are choices, and as far as the media whining about not having a front runner this “late” in the game, are perhaps not familiar with the history of 2000, where major contenders did not announce until August, and the field was full, both Democrat and Republican. Although Al Gore was a given, due to the fact that he was the Vice President under Clinton, he still had challengers, and the simple fact is, having challengers helps the public to winnow out the chaff from the wheat so to speak.

Just follow the polls, the general public is already talking through them, and the fact is, they are split as no one has officially declared (exploratory committee is not a campaign committee). The same was true in early 2007 when politicians began to line up to run or be expected to run:
In 2007 the field of Democrats included: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, Bill Richardson, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel. The Republican field included: Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson, Ron Paul and Duncan Hunter. It was not until well after the first primaries in 2008 that front runners emerged on both sides and the race was off and running.

Understanding that Obama and Company (the Campaign, not the President per se), and the media, have intentional short memories, it is good to remind the lot of them that having 5 candidates a year before the first primary takes places results in numbers similar to those 19% leads currently held by 2012 GOP “potential candidates”.

That said, one cannot stress enough the fact that, those that run, do so out of conviction and love of country, they must, regardless of how many times someone calls an individual a myriad of insulting and most often misleading “names”, it remains reasonable that unless one wanted the job of overseeing the finances and well-being of this Great Nation, losing 10 years off one’s life in less than 2 years, and taking a ration of utter crap from the press, they would not be doing so for any “publicity stunt”, especially since, in viewing the field of GOP contenders, not one seems hard pressed for personal cash, fame and or the need to put up with the crazy people in the general media.

As it is the end of the week, it was important to point out the fact that the current crop of “potential candidates for the GOP” are doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing, getting the attention of “likely GOP voters”, and the press can write and report on the lack of front runners all they like, until such time as one of those running, pulls out with a majority in a poll conducted by any reasonable pollster, at the right time, the polls running now, are akin to taking a pulse on a patient that is literally in a coma, until they wake up and announce their intent to run officially. At that point, one can bet the house, those 19% leads will be, if the announced candidate is the choice of those voting with the GOP, multiplied by, at the least 60 percent, to the 30’s, and as the next one appears, those numbers will go up and down, until the debates, which, incidentally a decade ago, were held in October of the year prior to the election. One’s stock would rise upon winning the Iowa Caucus and or the New Hampshire Primary, or perhaps not until one has been though the winnowing field of South Carolina.

Meanwhile, Obama has recycled his Campaign from 2008, the price of gas is about to go to $5.00 and beyond, unemployment has not moved, the dollar is declining and inflation is on the rise, never mind key topics like the Health Care Bill that the majority of the public continues to rail against. Who’s zooming who? (Taking a line from the great Aretha Franklin.)

What are those that have a toe in the GOP Presidential Water up to this coming week?

The Donald, who is serious as a heart attack, will be in Florida at a Tea Party Rally in Boca Raton, with Congressional Representative Allen West Judging from emails received by this blog in unprecedented amounts over the past week, The Donald is running the gamut of approval by the entire spectrum of political strange bedfellows. An expert from one enthusiastic Bay Stater enthusiastically noted: “ I also believe The Donald will be our next President. He is starting to get the " Reagan treatment" by the press. He has already been depicted as a clown.” (See Cartoon of Reagan above from PBS).

Trump was to attend a small rally in Boca, which, once news got out that he was going to attend, turned into a much larger crowd, the event had to be moved in order to accommodate the increased interest in Trump. He is also set to announce his bid (according to a variety of reports) after or immediately following the final NBC Apprentice show, which, with Neilson checking heads, might give an indication of interest vis a vis ratings for Trump. On the Trump – Obama Birth Certificate Issue – it’s being overplayed by the press – so much so that the obvious vitriol towards Trump is helping, not hurting him. It is also a matter of fact that Trump is merely expressing an opinion, shared by many, that there might be more to the issue of the Presidents Constitutional Eligibility to hold the office. Therein lays the crux and the confusion. Although this blog advocates leaving that issue lay, the fact remains that the Constitution is clear on one fact, No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.” Therefore, there is a litmus test, so to speak. One cannot merely be a citizen, one must meet certain credentials. Of course, a great deal depends on how one views the Constitution, either as written in stone, or interpretive. Regardless, the right to question, is guaranteed by the First Amendment (the one upon which the Press relies). Trump is merely expressing an interest in the subject as well as defending the Constitutional rights of others to do the same. Good for him.




Sarah Palin, who has lost some of the limelight given the entrance of the Donald will be at a Tea Party rally in Madison Wisconsin, home of the stand-up to unions Governor Scott Walker, and now home to many transplanted SEIU paid personnel who are there to stand up for the rights of the people who pay their salaries (i.e. Wisconsin Public Employees). It should be interesting; those on the left apparently are planning a counter rally to the Tea Party.

Mitt Romney is faced with trouble in his own back yard - Massachusetts Conservatives (i.e. Libertarians, the rank and file Republicans and those who identify themselves as conservatives, aren’t throwing their support behind Mitt. Romney is not, apparently attending any Tea Party Rally in the Bay State, but his competition is:

Former Minnesota Govenor, Tim Pawlentywill be in Boston for the Tea Party Rally on tax day (April 15th), with a trip to New Hampshire planned.

Finally, the man who runs strongest in national polls (Gallup) (until recently – see tied with Trump), former Governor of Arkansas Mike Huckabee is takings some heat for his support of in-state tuition for those here in the nation not quite legally – his premise, children of illegal immigrants (which may mean these students are American Citizens, by the way), should be eligible for in-state tuition, as it would expand the tax base, as they would gain employment, rather than an EBT card. Although this logic drives the “right of right” insane, especially those in certain presidential candidate opposition camps, Huckabee has a point.

(Side Note: during a recent interview, Donald Trump noted that the border problems could be fixed, by putting our military on the border (agreed), and then deciding, on a case by case basis those illegally in the nation’s ability to stay or be deported – the criteria, productive, stay, criminal go. (Agreed!).

Huckabee Continues to Lead Field of GOP Potential Candidates – Gallup Release Tuesday 3-15-11

Huckabee Continues to Dominate Early Polling on GOP 2012 "potential canidates" - image: Huckabee2012.com,

Former two and a half term Governor of the State of Arkansas, 2008 Presidential Candidate and political pundit, television and radio personality and bestselling author, Mike Huckabeecontinues to lead the field of “potential” GOP Candidates in Gallup’s latest release. The field of 12 candidates included: Huckabee, Palin, Gingrich, Romney, Bachman, Paul, Santorum, Pawlenty, Barbour, Daniels, Huntsman and Johnson.

Huckabee continues to dominate polling nationwide, with the bulk of news organizations noting that although Huckabee is the strongest of contenders (who have yet to announce), there is no clear front-runner out of the pack. Of course, it is logical to expect that those answering surveys about potential field of twelve candidates may result in a lower rating for a frontrunner, than say, if that field were reduced to 6 candidates (as in the 2008 presidential primary), where in early stages, Giuliani, who had not announced, led the field, while Mike Huckabee, then a newcomer to the national stage, was a mere blip on the radar. It will be when those five or six, or 10 for that matter, who firmly commit, that a more clear picture of a front runner will emerge, and that may not take place until the later part of 2011. Most announcements regarding the formation of exploratory committees and/or intent to run are not expected until Spring/early summer (based on comments made by those who are featured in the polling data).

Missing from the polling was business mogul and television personality, Donald Trump, who was recently profiled by Conservative Website Human Events, in an article entitled: “Can Donald Trump Save America?” , which includes a lengthy interview with “The Donald” and reflections on his intent to run for the office of the President. A summary paragraph in the article notes:

But Trump’s not just a businessman. He’s an American personality. He’s a man that can bring the constituencies of Rush Limbaugh and Howard Stern together, which, as he observes, is “probably tougher than [bringing] the Republicans and the Democrats” in concert.
(Source: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=42269#)

Of the potential candidates, based on governing or business experience, there are clear choices in the pack, the obvious, Huckabee, who, although still considered “liberal” by those on the right, has the ability to relate to a broad electorate, (Arkansas for example),this alone gives him far greater electability in general that most of the field. Palin, who also served as Govenor, and in other administrative capacities, has the same type of experience, and her extensive knowledge of the energy industry will be key in the next election. The missing man from the poll, Donald Trump also falls into that category, what he lacks in governmental experience he makes up for in business acumen. Although early in the crystal ball stages of picking the frontrunners where no announcement shave been made, look to those three to lead the pack, with Huckabee the strongest – what one needs to keep in mind, the rock star electability factor still plays in the nation – those aforementioned are in the public eye consistently and would easily make the transition to the political stage, with the exception of Trump, who, would stand on his merits of outspoken patriotism, take no prisoners with no excuses, persona and of course, his ability to govern business. It is my no means, a stretch.

As to those who feel the name “Huckabee” might be a bit too much - one only needs one piece of evidence to dispute that whole silly theory: Barack Obama

Field of GOP Presidential Candidates May Include Donald Trump – Seriously Considers Run against Obama in 2012

Donald Trump 2012? Image askmen.com

Donald Trump has announced that he is ”seriously considering” a run for President in the upcoming 2012 general election. The first mention of Trump considering a run as the Nation’s top CEO, came from a CBS News article on October 5th, after a poll conducted in New Hampshire pushed Trump to the top of a field of GOP possible candidates. The poll, which as of October, news sources could not locate a source, was conducted in September. Those polled were questioned if Trump’s donations to Democrats in the past and his television appearance would help or hurt him in a run at the White House. (Granite State)

Trump, who is an American businessman and Reality Television “Star”, made the announcement national on Fox News' “On The Record” last night. Trump’s focus is creating jobs, and the trade deficit between the U.S. and primarily China. He noted in the interview on Fox that politicians are talking about creating jobs, but not offering solutions. His solution would be a 25% tax on imported goods, which would even the playing field for U.S. production of items such as Toys. Additionally, Trump stated that the international business community finds elected officials in the U.S. to be “stupid”, and that lobbyist for foreign interests in Washington may be swaying the way certain elected officials cast their votes.

Trump would certainly add more than a bit of drama and business acumen to the “hypothetical” field of GOP nominees, which includes Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, among others. Santorum was in New Hampshire yesterday, “testing the water”. Others, who have made the trip, according to WMUR, New Hampshire are: “Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, former New York Gov. George Pataki and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.”

“The Donald” also made mention of his potential run on his Facebook page where he received some positive feedback from his fans. There are multiple “Donald Trump 2012” pages on Facebook, none, as of yet, official. His political ideology of Protectionism just may resonate with voters who are frustrated with the lack of manufacturing jobs, the return of which would certainly be a boon to those millions of unemployed, especially the 99’ers (or those who will have their unemployment checks cut as 99 weeks expire this week).

Historically, President Theodore Roosevelt led the nation with a policy of tariffs on foreign goods, which he used to push the United States to the heights of prosperity.

New York’s 23rd District, Doug Hoffman takes Lead in Latest Poll – Pawlenty Endorses. The Nation Trends Conservative - Analysis

Doug Hoffman, New York 23rd Conservative Candidate - image Madison County Courier

Doug Hoffman, Conservative Candidate for the New York 23rd Congressional District, has now taken the lead according to a poll conducted by the Conservative Club for Growth. Hoffman receives 31% of the vote, with Democrat candidate Owens at 27% and the Republican Candidate, Dede Scozzafava at 20%, the balance of those polled remain undecided with just over a week until the election. Tim Pawlenty has become the latest in a string of Republican heavy hitters, to endorse Hoffman. Pawlenty, who is considered a considered a potential candidate for the 2012 Republican Presidential race, gave Hoffman his endorsement on Monday. Pawlenty joins Sarah Palin, Steve Forbes, Rick Santorum, Fred Thompson who have endorsed Hoffman over the Republican Candidate, Dede Scozzafava, who is considered to be too moderate. Former House Speaker, Newt Gingrich has endorsed Scozzafava – Gingrich is once again, considered to be a possible candidate for the 2012 Republican ticket.

Why the split?

As happens in the two major political parties in the United States, there are various sub-factions within each party, all holding several basic tenants, but at the same time, disagreeing on many – neither party is, as of this writing, cohesive. The Democrat Party includes progressives, and moderates, as well as the newly minted “Blue Dog” Democrats, which are, from all intents and purposes, Republicans. The Republican Party has the moderate or Beltway Republicans and then the more focused conservatives, both fiscally and socially, that drive the vote. In addition there are several up and coming parties, including the Libertarian and American Conservative Party, all of which are drawing new members from both major political parties. Hoffman is a candidate of the New York Conservative Party, a separate entity, which was founded in 1962, after members of the Republican Party in New York, felt disenfranchised, and formed their own entity. The New York Conservative Party has been influential in races in New York State, electing James Buckley to the Senate in in 1970. (An extensive overview of the New York Conservative Partycan be found here at the University at Albany.

The Political Landscape

There has been a shift in the political think of the American populace, to the right – according to a recent Gallop Poll

“Forty percent of Americans describe their political views as conservative, 36% as moderate, and 20% as liberal. This marks a shift from 2005 through 2008, when moderates were tied with conservatives as the most prevalent group.”

Gallop explains that the reason the shift is significant is that independents, are weighing in as holding more Conservative views, a 29% shift towards conservatism since 2008. Given that independent voters, (which make up a significant part of the electorate, especially in certain states (see Massachusetts with over 50% of the electorate designated as unenrolleds), and that those voters generally choose a candidate based upon identity, not party affiliation, it would then follow that conservative leaning candidates will be given the nod in the 2010 and 2012 elections.

The Evangelical Factor

A leader of what is dubbed “the right-wing, Evangelical factor”, (often erroneously tied to the Republican Party although, often responsible for Republican Candidates wins or loses, for that matter), James Dobson, made a stunning argument, or one might say prediction of today’s political landscape in 2007 in discussion with Fox New Talk show host, Sean Hannity. In a nutshell, Dobson argued that if the evangelicals did not endorse any Republican political candidate, and a left-of-center Democrat were elected President, the backlash to liberal politics over a period of several years, would result in a sweep of conservatism in 2012.
As one looks as polls on races in 2009 and 2010, Real Clear Politics, it is apparent that the nation is trending conservative in their choices.