Hilary Clinton Trump’s GOP Field in Bloomberg Politics Poll – Analysis

Bloomberg Politics commissioned a poll on 2016 Presidential match-up’s between multiple GOP contenders, the Vice President, Joe Biden and former Democrat Presidential Candidate and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In the Poll, Clinton leads all potential GOP candidates by several points, and the strongest contender appears to be Joe Biden.(Bloomberg) The Pollster, Selzer & Co out of Des Moine Iowa conducted the poll based on 1001 individuals 18 years of age or older (poll PDF here), however gives no clue as to the demographic and political affiliation makeup of those polled, of those polled, 753 are likely voters. When looking at the grouping for favorability we find Hillary Clinton, Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Rand Paul, Mitt Romney, Ted Cruz, and Joe Biden as choices. Polling strongest behind Clinton is Biden, followed by Romney, Christie, Rand Paul and Jeb Bush (tied), and then Ted Cruz. Of course, one must factor in that key element – Don’t know enough to form a decision, which those who score highest as unknown are: Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, those who score highest are Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and then Mitt Romney. Further in the matchup with Clinton against the aforementioned GOP candidates only, those candidates group tightly, with Mitt Romney leading the field, and Jeb Bush and Rand Paul, tied for second. (Business week)

There are several questions regarding the poll, or more to the point, popularity and familiarity poll so early in the game with not one candidate announced that it is truly a non poll. Additionally, when Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden score highest in any group, one must trust that there is a larger percentage of Democrats and or Democrat leaning independents participating, than say GOP or GOP leaning independents.

What does surprise is the strength of Rand Paul in this non-poll, as he ties with Jeb Bush, in all instances, while having less name recognition with the sample. Not included are more likely to run Rick Perry and soon to be unemployed Governor of Maryland, O’Malley, nor the heavyweight progressive, Senator Elizabeth Warren. If one is playing fantasy politics one should have a full team.

Additionally, inserting “Hope the run’s”, rather than those who may have indicated they might run, is also a non-starter. (That would, of course, remove both Mitt Romney and Elizabeth Warren, who one suspects the later would have done screamingly well in this poll. Leading one to believe that this poll was produced by a big fan of Hillary Clinton, or to shore up the point that Hillary is a real threat to the GOP field (send your $$ now!).

Analysis: nothing to see here, move along folks.

The Most Interesting – Rand Paul – Dr. vs. GOP and DNC Machine – What this means for 2016

According to Dan Pfeiffer, the top communications adviser to President Obama, Rand Paul is the Republican he finds the most “interesting”. This is due to his outreach to demographics currently believed to be “owned” by Democrats, and his stance on issues that would attract them. However, Pfeiffer went on to suggest that Paul does not have the organization heft. (BuzzFeed)

Buzzfeed is a left of center (for the most part) blogger platform, social media company, so articles written are more in the vein of “the top 15 this or that”. The audience is younger, which is what is playing to Paul’s favor. As to organizational heft, that’s to be determined, it is early in the game.

Although the rank and file members of the establishment GOP in DC have their hearts set on a standard Republican, a Mitt Romney, a Jeb Bush or yes, even a Chris Christie, it is not without a bit of angst on the part of those who would like to see a real change, that they are pushing the aforementioned. The simple truth is not one of them could actually win the Presidency. Breaking it down, Romney is a lousy candidate, nice guy, but he has baggage. It was not so much that he could not have won in 2012 – in fact, Mickey Mouse could have won in 2012, if, and this is the stickler – the 20 million evangelicals would have voted for someone in a religion they believe to be a cult. Simple reasoning suggests that were Romney to run again, the same religious fervor attached to voting, would once again rear its ugly head, and the Democrats could run say,. Biden, and lo and behold, we’d have a Biden Presidency. Bush has the name problem, part of a dynasty and one which there has not been enough time for the blind hatred towards his brother to elapse. Additionally, there is an anti-dynasty push through all demographics, therefore, not acceptable. Chris Christie, no explanation necessary.

What does that leave? Younger, qualified candidate that can attract not only the religious right base, but the independents as well as Democrats (some, not all), which is why this is going to be an extremely interesting race in 2016. If one understands that the vitriol pouring out against anyone who is not one of the Washington three (Romney, Christie, Bush), in the press, is due to the fact that populism is not in their favor, therefore they smear. The problem with this tired tactic is that while they retain their Washington lifestyle, Rome burns. Therefore, the man to beat, in this sense, would be Paul given the fact that there is grudging admiration on the left, and sheer hatred from the “standard right”. Of course that same may apply to Rick Perry and Ted Cruz, and other’s not yet known. This will be a determining factor in the sway of the entire nation towards a more constitutionally grounded government. Sometimes one just wants to throw the whole lot of them in a room, and suggest perhaps, just perhaps, they should let the process go its own way, and let the people actually decide, rather than their fully lined pockets. The aforementioned goes to both sides of the aisle.

Harry Reid (D-NV) – Brings Partisanship to New Heights – Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) – works with Coburn (R-OK) on Bill – Sick of it All Yet?

An article in the New York Times speaks to the power plays by the Majority Senate Leader, Harry Reid and his “uncompromising” position on anything Republican. Apparently, there have been bills brought forth by Republicans which Democrats of like mind might have voted for or against (with dialogue), yet Senator Reid stops all from being brought to a vote on the Senate Floor(New York Times). Reid, the Majority Leader, has the job of traffic cop when it comes to legislation and whose legislation is brought forth, voted upon and sent to the President’s desk for signature. When he blocks one party entirely, he’s playing partisan politics, which, one might suggest, will not turn out well for the current party in power (Democrats, which Reid leads by the nose).

Playing nice, at the moment, is the newly elected Progressive from Massachusetts, Senator Elizabeth Warren, with of all people Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK). Apparently they have co-written legislation on transparency with corporations specific to tax breaks, and the people’s money (both personal and tax) when it comes to banking. The referring article by the Huffington Post notes Coburn as an arch-conservative. - Coburn releases the annual government waste book available here, at www.coburn.senate.gov From this point of view, it’s a reasonable match, as Coburn is shouting government waste from the rooftops, and Warren is shouting corruption and waste as well. The bill will be on the Senate Floor, but the question remains, with Reid’s inability to allow anything with a Republican Label go to the floor, what happens to Warren and Coburn’s noble quest?

Reid is now in a position to play this either way – for example: He may shut it down entirely as it would appear that a Republican has something to offer and to be bi-partisans should it go to the Senate floor for a vote or, he can allow the vote – giving the one most likely to run for the Democrat Nomination for President (Elizabeth Warren), a leg up so to speak.

Meanwhile, all the worthwhile and the worthless legislation that both parties are writing (as that is the job they are hired to do), sits and nothing gets done – and Reid rules over a do-nothing Senate – if he were slightly less moral, one might liken him to the mad ruler of Rome, Caligula (referring to the madness of Power).

As the general voting public on both sides including rank and file Democrats and Republicans as well as Tea Party and Progressive, are growing more leery by the day of the partisanship shown on both sides. It is as if two big bullies are running the nation – into the ground. Which brings up a point – if one of each of what is seen as the more radical factions of both parties, actually makes a run at the Presidency and or any office for that matter, and avoids the general label of D or R – it follows that that individual would endear themselves to the public – the voting public.

A perfect example of such is the recent brouhaha over Chris Christie and his Turnpike Scandal. Not a fan of the Governor on some points, the level of partisan rhetoric coming from the Democrats, and stony silence from the Republican’s is ridiculous. The man took responsibility for something he was unaware of, and that shows leadership. Of course, the Republicans have some grievances with Christie as they felt he should not have embraced the President during the crisis of Hurricane Sandy, while Mitt Romney, the second worse candidate in recent memory, was trying to unseat the worst President since Jimmy Carter. Blaming Christie is ridiculous, as Romney was not supported by either the right wing evangelicals as well as the Tea Party! – When 20 million voters stay home, it’s time to change strategy. Not likely as they are having Bush delusions (Jeb Bush) and the Democrats are currently in love with Hillary Clinton. One might suggest that none of those mentioned in the preceding, will actually make it through the nominating process.

Which point, one of the most progressive individuals one might meet, suggested, who cares about Christie, why is this even news? This is referring, of course, to the labels - again.

Keep it up Harry, the DNC and the RNC and soon we will have new parties develop which are long past due. The public is becoming increasingly aware and increasingly Independent (or not affiliated with any political party)

National GOP Looks Towards “Moderates” – Again – Obama Approval Falling – the Partisan Fight for the Soul of America.

They are at it again, conservative members or those who identify with the Republican Party, may be, once again, sadly disappointed at the Beltway’s choices for the 2016 Nomination. In a recent interview former 2012 Presidential GOP candidate, Mitt Romney, laid out some “suitable “names as candidates for the GOP –including Jeb Bush, but especially New Jersey Governor, Chris Christie (Huffington Post). Understanding that Gov. Romney knows how to run a business, and get elected to an extremely liberal minded state, does not make him eligible to name candidates that would be acceptable to run for the Presidency – there are obvious reasons. For more obvious reasons, he did not mention the name of Ted Cruz as one of those contenders (Huffington Post) – perhaps it was an oversight or more probably due to the fact that Cruz is an actual – conservative (or otherwise known as the hard-right-tea-party type). Romney it appears, is now the front man for the National GOP – slamming the President for Obama care this past week – which would have all been fine, had it not been for the kettle calling the pot black system, considering Romney Care leaves lot to be desired. Perhaps the roll out went smoothly enough – but there are unreported families not enjoying health care and paying the penalty to the Mass DOR, limited choice for doctors and yes, high insurance premiums. –

To the Nation – Welcome to Massachusetts.

On the theme of “denial”, Gallup is showing the President’s approval ratings taking the plunge as daily tracking shows it had fell to 40% approval in the period ending November 2, 2013. Perhaps it was that nagging question of whether or not he either lied about, or just was not aware of the fact that individuals (93,000,000 of them – that’s 93 Million) would lose their health insurance and might not be able to keep their doctors. The Wall Street Journal interview with one man who is trying to stay alive (gall bladder cancer), and has lost health insurance as well as access to his doctors speaks to the matter quite eloquently (Wall Street Journal).

Therefore, the President either lied or is clearly clueless, and that goes for any number of instances that have caused the proverbial poop to hit the fan in recent years. Either scenario is not appealing to the general public, but, the public is increasingly aware.

White the media scrambles to excuse, they still have to have a connection with what’s left of their subscribers and/or viewers – a perfect example is the USA Today editorial where they headlineObamacare's critics justified: Our view”.

Even the Kingmaker, otherwise known as Advisor and Campaign Manager to the President (and other Progressives, with little time in government that either hold or may hold a political office) got a round of “tough” questions as he Faced semi-hostile journalist on “Meet the Press. (Politico) The question of whether the President knew or not that the American Public would lose their health insurance. The key word not for plans of choice by the Public that are being cancelled and revamped to meet Obama Care standards is – substandard. Apparently, the substandard plans may not have all the mandates attached to the law by the carrier. Some may attach them and one will see increases of 400% or, they may just drop them entirely and take the first road out of Dodge.

The entire bill is a house of cards for the Democrats, as well as those moderate GOP members who supported it and slammed those who did not. It is – in essence a disaster, that is bringing attention to other disasters that had previously been swept under the rug – Benghazi, Fast & Furious, IRS Targeting, et al.

It does not bode well for those who have that stamp of moderate or Progressive as the nation heads into the 2014 election – So bent out of shape are the General Public, the chances of those who hold office, from any party, maintaining that office is growing slimmer by the day. Watch local elections to see how incumbents fare.

Lastly, one get’s the final impression that Justice Roberts, in allowing the “tax” ruling on the program, which allowed the program to go forward, has the disaster in mind from the get-go. If he had struck the bill down, the Democrats would have had a leg to stand and campaign on – by letting it live and then die a grizzly death (along with American’s who critically need coverage), he insured the demise of those less than Conservative law makers. That’s hypothesis mind you, but it underscores the premise of hyper-partisanship that is – DC.

How this all plays out in the coming months – going into the November elections and the 2014 mid-terms, is going to be of grand interest to those who watch political ideologies change in the minds of the general public.

Obama Campaign: What Polls? – Dems on Hillary Clinton’s Road to 2016 – Back Romney Best Option, Romney Should Switch Running Mate to Clinton – PUMA or Pragmatic?

Pictured Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney image Daily Beast – ArticleHillary Clinton and Mitt Romney versus Barack Obama

As the 2012 campaign turns – On the weekend Buzzfeed’s, Zeke Miller reported on the Obama Campaign in Wisconsin – Apparently the strategy is not to pay attention to the national polls, rather to focus on a few swing states:

Messina, who drove from Chicago to Wisconsin to be with Obama on his first trip to a state that appears to have come into play when Paul Ryan was selected to be Romney's running mate, predicted that the national polling will get even closer, but that the president's lead will hold in key swing states.

"I think you will see a tightening in the national polls going forward," he said. "What I care way more about it Ohio, Colorado, Virginia, Wisconsin, etc. In those states, I feel our pathways to victory are there. There are two different campaigns, one in the battlegrounds and one everywhere else. That's why the national polls aren't relevant to this campaign."

In Wisconsin, Messina said the GOP is stronger than they are nationally, but maintained that the Obama campaign still has an edge

Perhaps the national polls are all tied, but the internals may have something else to say – which is why some Democrats are looking for a path for Hillary Clinton in 2016 and coming up with some options that appear to be somewhat far-fetched, but then again, the Clinton’s, both President William Jefferson and now Secretary of State Hillary, are the most popular Democrats in the country.

This weekend, Bill Clinton weighed in about a 2016 run for Hillary – which has the media salivating – ABC News discussing the Obama-Romney Debate (You Tube Video Here) speaks about Romney’s recent debate experience as a plus, and notes that he has the most to gain in the upcoming debates, although he would be considered an underdog – that back and forth morphs to Bill Clinton’s response to a Hillary Clinton 2016 run, which said anchors note there is speculation on the Democrat ticket for 2016 – and Clinton’s smiles is an affirmation of a Hillary run.(ABC News)

The speculation and what might be considered planning, began after the Democrat Convention – when the Daily Mail broke the news that a top Bill Clinton Aide planned to vote for Romney to help Hillary Clinton take the White House back in 2016. That’s just one example, of course, so not much there, one would think, but then again, there were others. Perhaps the best case found was made on Tumblr by the blogger, Prairie Pride who suggested voting for Romney (secretly supporting) would be the best road for Hillary Clinton, from an historical perspective. He refers to overall party fatigue as the means to the ends, citing elections back to George Washington – his end note: Romney 2012 – Hillary 2016.

The most ridiculous scenario was found on Salon, and one has the immediate reaction – satire! Then again, this is Salon. Alex Pareene takes a different tactic – suggesting in August that Romney “dump” Paul Ryan as his running mate and nominate Hillary – (This is a writer who refers to the “Right-wing press). He writes in glowing terms about Hillary’s accomplishments, and not so nicely about Paul Ryan – he suggests this is a serious option because “Bob Woodward” told him.

Although, with Romney, a place in the administration or cabinet for Clinton might not be out of the question – considering, as Governor, his cabinet included both women and, yes, Democrats. Romney is all business, and if someone brings ideas to the table that are reasonable –his decisions are not based on political party, rather on what would work best for the people (of the Commonwealth) at the time. It remains to be seen if this will be part and parcel of a Romney administration’s tactic, but one might project he would operate on the same success model.

Of course, this Moderate Conservative Feminist’s dream ticket was Palin/Clinton – but….a Romney –Clinton – makes one think – it would in the very least unite the majority of the nation and is extremely utopian. In reality it would cause political mayhem in both parties, and that is not the road to the White House for either Romney or Clinton - given there are those power brokers in the party and the base of each party. Plan B appears the best bet.

Happy Monday – one final note: worth listening to:

Howard Stern on Obama voters –

Mitt Romney and the Media – “Fighting Uphill Battle” Unequivocally Stating the Obvious Negative, or Subliminal Reporting On Mitt Romney the Norm

Romney and Obama - a Tale of Two Ideologies and the Press - image mrmediatraining.com


From Politico: the Headline: “Romney: 'I'm fighting uphill battle' in media” covers the remarks made by Republican Presumptive Presidential Nominee in reference to the type of reporting from what has become known as the “mainstream” media – which is consistently negative, and growing more contentious and sensational by the day.

If one watches the morning news, it is obvious that the President is treated, on the campaign trail, as above the fray, while Romney is consistently vilified – based on remarks or “information” coming from campaign sources. The print press has been relentless, and the blogs that feed the press – even more ridiculous. What the independent sees, however, is a disparity, wondering what those in the media whose obvious support for one candidate over another, is doing – besides alienating at least fifty percent of the electorate – and fueling a greater partisan divide. The fact that Romney has been successful in his career, has been fodder for the media to portray the candidate as an “out-of-touch”, mean-spirited, rich guy – which, when one looks at past presidents from both major political parties, Romney’s “wealth” is sometimes dwarfed by those know by Progressives as coming from the Second Estate – the Robber Barron’s who made their wealth through dubious means, and emerged as the nation’s leaders – the Carnegies, the Rockefellers, the Kennedy’s. When the last Senator Ted Kennedy ran against Jimmy Carter in 1980, there was little mention of his off-shore holdings – which is common knowledge in the Bay State. Fast forward to the current contest, and the fact that President Barack Obama is not, decidedly, in the poor-house, but doing quite well in the Millions category – apparently is given a pass. Of course, there is a pass given to this President, not due to the fact of race, or competence, or anything other than a shared ideology – it is a political bent that is fueling the coverage of both Candidates.


The question now remains is the public buying into all of the negatives – it’s quite possible that, unlike the eight years the press hammered away at President George W.Bush, (and sometimes to be fair, deservedly), which was pivotal is allowing John McCain to be painted with the same “Bush” brand, and made it impossible for anyone with an – R – in their resume, to be elected (or re-elected) in 2008. By 2010, something occurred that shocked the media – apparently, this Tea Party thing, and the general public, decided to upend the entire Congress and almost caught the Senate – Now with Romney, there has been a) too much time between Bush and Romney to draw any specific comparison (although they have tried), and b) too little time to do as much damage as they hope. It is a matter of trust, and the trust in the instructions of News, both print and other, is in the tank –and not by half of the nation, but by two thirds or more.

Gallup Polling’s annual “Trust in Institutions” polling from 2011 indicated that merely 28 and 27% of the respondents put their trust into newspapers and televised news. The 2012 poll suggests that the situation has not improve with a 21% suggesting Televised News was trustworthy, and 25% placed their confidence in newspapers.


Gallup is not knows as a politically motivated, rather bi-partisan polling firm, therefore, these numbers should be fairly accurate.


The Headlines:


The Sample of Headlines from Google News alerts regarding Mitt Romney from one alert (an alert may contain one to 10 articles and there are multiple alerts throughout the day) dished up the following:

From the Boston Globe: Romney attacked on Bain Question”

The LA Times: Dick Cheney Hosts Fundraiser for Romney (one must read the article to get the full effect)

The Boston Globe Mitt Romney and his tax returns: Déjà vu?” (Reference to the Obama Campaign requesting Romney release scores of tax returns, which is neither precedented nor unprecedented in the political arena).

Upstate ”Romney gets rocky reception from NAACP”

The Washington Post Mitt Romney’s Cynical Response to NAACP Booing”

New York Daily News: Mitt Romney Uses Old Hilary Clinton Footage to Attack President Barack Obama”

The Dickenson Press: Stinky Economy Plays into Mitt Romney’s Hands”

And on and on and on...

However, if one has a Google Alert set up for the President – one finds the following – far too many mentions to post in one short blog – 99.9% of those in supportive verbiage – rather than any mentions of missteps, such as Solyndra, or Fast and Furious, or the drums of war beating again as the U.S. heads towards the Persian gulf.

It is a divide so obvious and so great, is it any wonder that a) the press has scored so low in Gallup’s polling and b) Romney is raking in contributions, and not, as portrayed in the press, at just those big fundraisers (the President has those as well but they are reported in glowing, rather than “negative” terms) but at the clip of $3.00 to $10.00 per donation, adding up to a net plus in the last reporting to $34,000,000 more than the President managed to amass.


The political cheerleaders in the U.S. media may find a backlash – similar to the one in 2010, but more important, a need to replace the ever decreasing readers and viewers who simply cannot stand another issue/broadcast – regardless of the coupons, crossword puzzles, and other “exclusive news”. It has little to do with the internet, or Fox News (often vilified), or the “blogs” (guilty as charged) – if one reads all material, or one watches all network news (and cable news network’s) one sees a definitive difference in reporting on the same event – from the press to MSNBC in the extreme, to Fox offers straight news, with no inflection of opinion, and opinion programming, clearly marked as not news, yet compared to MSNBC, extreme right, to CNN, where there’s a seeming middle ground. CBS, NBC and ABC, both local and national is clearly in sync and clearly invested in the campaign.

Romney, however, is most likely the least surprised at the fact that he will never be friends with the media, and will have little to no fair coverage, nor would any other candidate who may have been the front-runner and the presumptive GOP nominee. It would not have mattered one bit, the treatment would be the same.


This is why, in a short history lesson, the Founders, in letters published in the Federalist Papers, debated heavily over giving the Press certain rights, there was keen opposition mainly due to the possibility that the press might actually try to change or overthrow the government – from the Federalist Papers #84 – written by Alexander Hamilton

I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why, for instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed? I will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power; but it is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretense for claiming that power. They might urge with a semblance of reason, that the Constitution ought not to be charged with the absurdity of providing against the abuse of an authority which was not given, and that the provision against restraining the liberty of the press afforded a clear implication, that a power to prescribe proper regulations concerning it was intended to be vested in the national government. This may serve as a specimen of the numerous handles which would be given to the doctrine of constructive powers, by the indulgence of an injudicious zeal for bills of rights.

On the subject of the liberty of the press, as much as has been said, I cannot forbear adding a remark or two: in the first place, I observe, that there is not a syllable concerning it in the constitution of this State; in the next, I contend, that whatever has been said about it in that of any other State, amounts to nothing. What signifies a declaration, that "the liberty of the press shall be inviolably preserved"? What is the liberty of the press? Who can give it any definition which would not leave the utmost latitude for evasion? I hold it to be impracticable; and from this I infer, that its security, whatever fine declarations may be inserted in any constitution respecting it, must altogether depend on public opinion, and on the general spirit of the people and of the government.3 And here, after all, as is intimated upon another occasion, must we seek for the only solid basis of all our rights.

To put the essay into perspective, the Bill of Rights was put forth by the State of New York, insisting that the language in totality be included in the framed Constitution. There was a rather heated debate – much of which is available in biographies of Madison, Jay and Hamilton. That said, the questions raised in the past, were not, obviously unfounded. In the end it was included by a vote as well as the need to keep the New York contingent in the fold.


To be certain, the document is timeless and somewhat prophetic – in not the way that the press would cause a revolution, per se, rather in how the press would choose political sides, and a progressive ideology to support and include in their “opinionated straight news”. That is not to say the press is without purpose, nor that the entire body is to be maligned, as there are obviously solid journalists with integrity who will not inflict their personal opinions into an article to make one appear less than perfect, or perhaps use video footage that has been so badly edited, one is immediately caught (Andrea Mitchell, editing Mitt Romney’s on the campaign trail),or consistently being forced to retract incendiary headlines or statements, under threat of law suit (too numerous to mention).





If for example, the media woke up tomorrow, and began to report straight news, and use investigative journalism in reporting for good, or ill, on both candidates, one can bet the house, there would be a renewed subscriber base or viewership – one that had the highest score in Gallup’s trust in institutions polling. That would have a net effect of creating more jobs in journalism and the trickledown effect of an increase in revenue. The aforementioned is, of course, wishful thinking.


Mitt Romney might, in the long run, wish to thank those in the press for being so gung-ho for one political ideology, as only 30% are listening with attention, while the balance are not buying it – like the collective boy who cried wolf, sooner or later, the people will rise up and elect a Republican candidate – just as they did in 2010 and with each negative article or broadcast, as the cash pours into the Romney Campaign, it may represent a return to 2010, at all levels – the only way the press has to prevent this is to treat each candidate – equally.

Obama Comes to Mass for Cash – Channel's Patrick - Warren Acts As Attack Dog – Romney's Sense of Humor – Drives Circles Around $18K Obama Fundraiser!

The Master and the Mentored: Obama, Patrick, Axelrod - Anyone see a theme here? - image (Obama/Axelrod) Masslive - Patrick - New York Times


When a sitting President visits any state, even Massachusetts, it’s a big deal, if the President takes the time to say hello to the people who might have got him elected – unless of course, the State is a Commonwealth and that Commonwealth is Massachusetts – where Democrats overwhelmingly preferred Hillary in 2008. That said it does not prevent the President to turn to the Progressive faithful in Boston in a whirlwind grab for much needed Cash – before campaigning elsewhere, or going elsewhere for more money. The Boston Globe’s”Money is the focus during Obama’s Boston visit” - with a few interesting points:

“President Obama thanked Boston Monday for trading Red Sox third-baseman Kevin Youkilis to his Chicago White Sox, but he owed far more thanks to the supporters who donated thousands of dollars to see him at three Boston-area fund-raisers.”
“The whirlwind day — with stops at Hamersley’s Bistro in the South End, Symphony Hall, and a private home in Weston — was intended to tap a Massachusetts well that has yielded fewer maximum individual contributions than the president collected in his 2008 campaign. The number of Bay State supporters who contributed the $2,500 maximum to Obama’s campaign fund had plunged by nearly half when compared with the same period four years ago.”
President Obama spent more than an hour inside Hamersley’s Bistro, whose front windows were covered. At the restaurant, 25 supporters, hosted by Boston advertising executive Jack Connors, paid $40,000 each to attend.
Many held signs, including one that read, “The 1% of Boston Welcomes Obama.”
At Symphony Hall, general-admission tickets for a crowd of 1,800 people started at $250, with a limited number at $144 for younger supporters. And at the day’s final event at the Weston home of Judi and Douglas Krupp, 100 people who attended dinner with the president paid $17,900 each.
The pressure on the president has been ratcheted up by Mitt Romney’s fund-raising performance. In May, for the first time, Romney’s joint fund-raising committee collected more money than Obama, $76.8 million to $60 million. Despite being outpaced last month, the president’s return to Boston just before the end of the fiscal quarter should boost his numbers.

What one reads in the Boston Globe is the following: Obama’s fundraising is down, even in Massachusetts, he’s being welcomed by the 1% - or those who are not associated and make sure one knows it with “Occupy anything” – rather those that are characterized for their “Corporate Greed.” In order to attend the least pricey event, only 1800 had the $250 bucks to see the President speak, or wanted to part with it – but 100 individuals from the more elite Progressives had at least $17,900 to sit down with Obama in a private home. Finally Obama is feeling the heat from Romney’s fundraising Prowess – or his own lack of fundraising ability this time around – especially in the Bluest State, where if a Democrat isn’t a shoe-in to being with, those loafers can be made to fit.

Meanwhile – the Los Angeles Times Suggests that the Progressive Democrat Senate Candidate, Grandma Warren, is now Obama’s attack dog – the opening act for the President in Boston (maybe he’ll do us all a favor and Ms. Chow Wow Pow on the road.) The Times goes so far as to suggest that Warren has “joined forces with the President”. Joined Forces – that’s brilliant! Her motto with Romney – Bain, Bain and more Bain, with a little smattering of Outsourcing – which would be nice, if Romney had been at Bain, at the time, which he was not, and which most Democrats agree is somewhat of a toxic take on attacking Romney – but – she’s running for the Senate in Massachusetts – as a Democrat.

Remember, Warren started the Occupy Movement, which makes one wonders how she reconciles sitting down to dinner with the 1%’ers who support her better half (Obama)


Romney and His Bus - He even pumps his own gas! (image: greenautoblog

Not to let an opportunity to pull a prank go to waste, the suddenly humorous former Governor of Massachusetts, and yes, Obama foe, Mitt Romney, took his campaign bus out for a ride around downtown Boston, once again circling those Obama supporters they could find. (Weaselzippers). The left of course felt it was truly awful. Over at TMP, the word “heckling” as bandied about instead of “honking”. The point – Romney is a smart guy, if he’s doing anything, he’s recruiting! – Something that the President is, according to the Boston Globe (see beginning paragraphs) not doing in Massachusetts, but holding onto at least 50% of his 2008 supporters. Romney’s drive-by’s are simply Romney having a sense of humor, Romney being ever entrepreneurial and Romney turning Lemons into Lemonade! What happened to our national sense of humor?

As a matter of fact, Romney’s sense of humor and the more he applies his pranks, makes him ultimately more appealing, especially to those who are sick and tired of the gloom, doom and indecision that has caused the malaise that now permeates every nook and cranny of the country. Therefore, in the beginning one might have been tempted to vote for Mitt Romney because he was not Obama, now, one might be tempted to vote for Romney because he’s still not Obama, but he has a sense of humor to boot – and contrary to Elizabeth Warren’s ranting about greedy corporations, the fact is not all corporations are greedy (especially when one reads about politicians just stopping in at the Commonwealth bank of Progressive Ideology), Corporations both employ people and they pay taxes. Those taxes support Warren while she’s at Harvard teaching how to write Native American Cookbooks without even trying very hard or using one’s own materials. Mitt Romney, of course, is not running against Elizabeth Warren, he’s running against Barack Obama, and something has to make this contest interesting for those of us in the state most likely to vote – Democrat (Maybe)

One has Mitt Romney’s sense of humor or the wish to have been a fly on the wall during the debate prep between President Obama (playing himself) and John Forbes Kerry (I park my Yacht in RI to stiff the Commonwealth), playing Romney! (Boston Globe)

Saving the Best for Last:

From the Globe: :
“They figure that if we simply eliminate regulations and cut taxes by trillions of dollars, then the market will solve all of our problems,” Obama said of Romney and the Republican Party.
“We don’t need more top-down economics. What we need is some middle class-out economics, some bottom-up economics. We need a plan for better education and for better training, for energy independence, for innovation, for infra¬structure that can rebuild America,” Obama added.
If that speech sounds familiar, it echoes the notes Governor Deval Patrick struck as he won reelection in 2010. He shares a political adviser, ¬David Axelrod, with the president.

He also shares his notes, and his mantras: Yes you can, Yes you Can, Yes You Can – However, this time next year, the President may be wishing he had a different adviser, used someone else's “cliff notes” on riling up crowds and getting elected”, and had taken a few economic courses from someone other than Jimmy Carter.
From the State that turned Red Twice in the last 50 years in a Presidential election – (ironically with more Democrats in Power and Carter in office.) the President is now heading to warmer climates in the hopes of coming up with more Cash before the end of the quarter.

Illinois Polls Give Romney the Edge by 14-15 Points. A Test of Turnout and Impact of Negative Advertising – Will ILL be a Repeat of MS for Santorum?

Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney - the last men standing (given recent results and current polls in upcoming primary contests) - image Salon.com


There are two polls taken over the weekend that give GOP presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, a considerable lead over his nearest rival, Rick Santorum – Romney leads in both polls by double digits. The first, a poll by American Research Group has Romney up by 14 points over Rick Santorum with Gingrich at 13% and Paul at 8% - The poll taken between March 17-18 used a random telephone survey method of 600 participants and has a margin of error of plus/minus 4% .

The second, by Public Policy Polling, released yesterday used a random telephone survey, of 506 respondents over a two day period, the focus was mainly on the urban and suburban areas, 20% Urban, 48% suburban and 31% rural. In this poll, Romney has 45 % to Santorum’s 30%, Gingrich at 12% and Ron Paul at 10% - The two polls are rather in concert as to the outcome, given the point difference between the two firms in a random sample of respondents per candidate.

That said, in looking at PPP’s marginals, the question becomes one of geography, in a poll released last week by the Tribune, there was a 6 point difference between the two top tier candidates, with Romney outside the margin of error by one point. In that particular poll, the geography was taken into consideration with 95% of the state outside of Chicago and suburbs, having equal population, with Santorum over performing in the state outside of Chicago, and Romney over performing in the Suburban areas. It will be of interest to see how geography factors into this contest dubbed as the “next critical” state for Romney to win. At this point, taking away the hype, both Santorum and Romney need to win each state going forward, as the game of attrition of delegates is quickly becoming outside the grasp of candidates Gingrich and Paul, as the focus is on the front-runner Mitt Romney and the his potential replacement – Rick Santorum. (This based on voters preference and placement in the second half of the March contests.)

On paper it appears as if this primary should be a “walk in the park” for Romney, and Matt Drudge can be predicted to once again, announce him as the “winner” at approximately 4PM eastern, well before the polls close in ILL. The site did so based on polling on the Mississippi Primary, and had to adjust the message as the votes began to be tallied – the final message of the evening: Rick Santorum wins Mississippi.

It is not that Matt Drudge of the Drudge Report was wrong about the polls, and that Romney was clearly ahead in Mississippi, however, what was taking place on the ground was a two-fold phenomena that clearly favored Santorum – low enthusiasm and voter turnout for Romney and exit polls indicating that voters were clearly turned off by the deluge of negative advertising.

Moving to Illinois, there are difference from state to state, but voter turnout is critical – something that the Romney team has yet to be able to effect with the exception of New Hampshire, Massachusetts (although there were zero signs of a Romney Campaign in MA), and in Puerto Rico. The organization is, from sources, apparent in Illinois, but in the Suburbs focused on Chicago, rather than the 95% of the state which is considered stronger for Santorum – The enthusiasm gap between Santorum supporters and Romney supports has been evidenced in the past as far as the get out the vote effort is concerned. There are several factors in play to consider: Romney has the establishment GOP and those earning 100K or more Republican’s, while Santorum continues to pull blue collar, and those earning less than 100K in each state. Those with more to gain and less to lose generally are more enthusiastic when it comes to getting out the vote. In addition, the constant media hype of Romney as the front-runner and eventual nominee has not helped his campaign rather, it has made his target voter complacent - complacent voters generally vote in absentee or depending on the weather, not at all.

Finally, the negatives advertising which had a huge impact on the upset in Mississippi, may or may not have the same impact moving north to Illinois. In Mississippi exit polls from CNN showed that negative advertising factored 2 to 1 in decisions to vote for Santorum over Romney. As of now, Negative ads run by the campaigns and certain Super PAC’s supporting both candidates (outside of the control of both candidates), are giving Illinois the Mississippi treatment but by a larger margin. According to PoliticoRomeny is outspending Santorum 21 to 1 in Illinois, specifically in the Chicago Market (includes Super PAC’s). Obama Advisor, David Axelrod a big believer is spending on advertising, noted that “Romney will Roll in Illinois” due to what he termed a” Mittzkrieg”. Axelrod is the brains behind the careers of both Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick and President Obama – obviously watching this contest closely.

But will negatives work in Illinois? That is the question. Between Apathy, or lack of enthusiasm (The Atlantic) affecting voter turnout and the notion that a vote against Mitt Romney is a vote against Negative Campaign adverting (Chicago Examiner) one has to wait and see how this will play out in when the polls close at 7PM central – 8PM eastern.

If the networks (or the AP) do not call the race within the first 10 minutes, then look for a long night – if Romney begins with a larger lead, and holds it, then the polls play out, however, if it is a repeat of Mississippi (polling similarly had Romney up over Santorum outside of the margin of error) , with lower voter turnout (especially in the suburbs and urban areas), and a distaste for negative ads is a factor, watch for a long night and a possible Santorum upset.

David Axelrod will be watching as well, and looking toward framing the message that the President will use in his reelection campaign going forward.

Where to Watch: CNN – best primary coverage hands-down: Based on: Wolf Blitzer and Jon King and the “map”, with real time results coming from reporters covering counties that are normally critical in elections, giving the avid political junkie, an inside scoop of factors affecting a win in a pivotal county, and exit polls that reflect the trends in diverse sections of a state and by demographics.

GOP 2012 Update: Primary Schedule for March and Available Polls - Gingrich Out after AL, MI? - Analysis

Will Gingrich Suspend after AL and MS?(ABC News) giving Santorum the edge in a two-Man race? - image political ticker blog

The following States and Territories go to the polls through the end of March, to choose the GOP Presidential Nominee:
March 10th: Kansas, Virgin Islands, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, March 13: Alabama, Hawaii, Mississippi and American Samoa, March 17: Missouri, March 18th: Puerto Rico, March 20: Illinois and March 24th Louisiana. After March, there are 22 states left to weigh in on the process including: New York, California, Texas and Pennsylvania.

Polling for the March races:
In Alabama, Rick Santorum leads with a lead of 22.7% to Mitt Romney’s 18.7%, Newt Gingrich support has fallen from 26.9% to 13.8% in the latest poll from the Alabama State University’s Center for Leadership and Public Policy. A whopping 29.8% remain undecided with 15% voting for other candidates. A second poll taken a week prior by the Alabama Teachers Association (Union) gave Mitt Romney a lead over Santorum of 31.2 to 21.6%, with Gingrich also taking 21% of the vote. (Al.com)

In Kansas Rick Santorum is favored to win the Caucuses, according to Politico, while Romney is being supported by Bob Dole, and Newt Gingrich will not participate.

Mississippi, no polling yet released, however an article from Ya’ll Politics suggests that Mitt Romney could do the impossible and win the state, this is based on the fact that Romney’s locked up endorsements (and those endorsements are delegates) of most of the State’s GOP elected officials . The website suggest that the poll taken in Alabama by the Teachers Association that gave Romney a lead, (neglecting to put in the later poll which showed Romney losing ground and Santorum leading) as the predictor to give the race in Mississippi to Romney – simply because Alabama predicts how Mississippi will go. Using that logic, should Santorum win in Alabama, then he will also win in Mississippi – Using logic in general, there is no valid polling data to date.

Missouri, No Polling available

Hawaii, No Polling available

The territories including Puerto Rico – No Polling available

Missouri – No Polling Available

Louisiana – No Polling available

Illinois – No Polling Available

The lack of polling data this close to these contests denotes either a total lack of interest in the process going south, to the territories and mid-west for the balance of March or a lower prize allocation to the candidates. Delegates totals in the balance of March races total 367 (Alabama (50), Kansas (40) Puerto Rico (23), Guam (9), Virgin Islands (9), Marianas and American Samoa (18), Hawaii (20), Mississippi ( 40), Illinois (69), Missouri (52) and Louisiana (46) - Green papers.com).

Projecting based on past state history (conservative vs. moderate); Romney should take the states of Illinois, Hawaii and the territories. The balance of the Southern and Mid-western states where Romney has previously had problems in the south and mid-west (in 2008 and now in 2012), should go to Santorum.

On Gingrich: He is not competing in Kansas, and his strategy for a comeback in the south, although limited poll data exists (Alabama) does not look probable. According to an ABC News Story this morning, should Gingrich not win in both Alabama and Mississippi, it will be time to throw in the proverbial towel. At this point, one is wondering what the former Speaker hopes to gain by stating in a contest that is clearly shifted to a two-man race. It also makes one wonder what Gingrich hopes to achieve (his original intent was to stop Mitt Romney – however, the result has been to stop Rick Santorum – Santorum and Gingrich voters are usually simpatico, with many calling the other a first or second choice. Therefore, if Gingrich’s plan is to stop Mitt Romney, then he should take the risk and suspend his campaign prior to these two contests and let the chips fall where they may. If Gingrich were to release his delegates to Santorum and turn to endorse his former protégé, then it would give Santorum a clear advantage. However, if he is a true establishment Republican as some have suggested, his staying in the race, is not to defeat, but to protect the GOP Establishment choice, Mitt Romney. Newt Gingrich has been called arrogant, in his quest for the nomination, however, he is simply the brightest in the bunch – the aforementioned is pure speculation on the part of this blogger. The races going forward, it should be noted, are primarily winter take all.

This is not to say the race, even with Gingrich and of course, Ron Paul, included, will be decided in March or April, the fact is that George H Bush dropped his bid against Ronald Regan (Bush was the GOP Establishment candidate), in May of 1980.

Huntsman Ends Campaign, to Endorse Romney, the Consequences - Right Media Vs.Mainstream Media Now Resembles MSNBC – Romney vs. Gingrich - Analysis

Former Utah Governor, Jon Huntsman has decided to end his campaign for the GOP nomination and will endorse Mitt Romney as of Monday the 16th. The fact that the Utah Governor failed to secure a stronger finish in the New Hampshire primary, and his extremely low poll numbers going forward, has not been lost on some media – excellent article to be found at the The Christian Science Monitor.

In reviewing the most recent poll numbers in SC at Real Clear Politics Gingrich is fast on the heels of Mitt Romney, and from the pollsters results, one can find that the race is shaping up similarly to the Iowa Caucus where one finds poll numbers erratic, and Romney, Gingrich and Ron Paul leading the pack – all within a variety of margins of error (depending upon the pollsters marginal’s. In addition polling taken in recent days finds that 8 to 20% of those polled are still uncertain as to which candidate for whom they will vote. The polls thus far, are only as good as those taken a day or two prior to the primary, as anything else that has been released is akin to reading tea leaves!

How important is South Caroline in a win, even if it is by say 7 votes? It is of supreme import as the Palmetto state has accurately “predicted” through their primary winner, the eventual winner of the GOP nominee for the past few decades. A win in South Carolina from a psychological point for a campaign, can be extremely meaningful, it is not that a photo finish will mean a hill of beans, but a wider margin of 2 to 6 points between the two front runners, will be the tell-tale sign of either rejection or acceptance going forward into Florida, Nevada and the Super Tuesday. Gingrich has a firm grasp on the south, and is polling well; he polls well across all demographics in most polls, with two other that are considered to be pulling votes from the same “well”, one Rick Santorum and one Rick Perry. Should either one of those drop out of the S.C. race (which is, at this point, unlikely), those votes are assumed to go to Newt Gingrich, however, should their leads diminish over the next few days (given two debates, one tonight the16th on Fox news and one on CNN on the 19th (best debate arena to date, hands down goes to CNN), then any points lost may be evenly split between Gingrich and Romney – those voting for Santorum most likely to go to Romney (who if he does end his campaign, would, in all likelihood, endorse Romney as the RNC choice). Should Texas Governor Rick Perry end his campaign, the split may be even, although the later two, along with Gingrich, allegedly have the same “base”. That said, with 8 to 20% undecided – and Gingrich within the margin of error in most polling with Romney (i.e. statistical tie), then should those undecided’s break for Gingrich, he would have a clear advantage, with or without Perry and Santorum in the race. Ron Paul should remain at his current level in SC which is at approx. 14 to 18 % of the vote.

The media influence.

With all the railing against the Mainstream Media choosing a candidate and stumping for one over another, namely Barack Obama, by the likes of Andrew Breitbart and Matt Drudge (and name a pundit, especially on Fox News) it appears they have taken the same low road when it comes to anyone who get’s within striking distance of Mitt Romney. Gingrich, to the Republicans, represents someone who will end the status quo, a man who has a past, a man whose past indicates he will work for against both parties, to push legislation that is Conservative in nature without abandoning his Conservative principles. Gingrich, who worked with President Reagan and then President Clinton, has angered more on the right, perhaps than the left, for getting things done. To Mitt Romney’s credit, he did work with the Massachusetts legislature, but handed them almost everything they requested – the excuse: “I was outnumbered.” So why is Mitt Romney being pushed so hard by everyone from Charles Krauthammer to Ann Coulter (who has yet to pick a nominee that would win)? How much are these pundits of the Beltway vested in Politics as Usual?

For example; a recent headline on the Drudge Report, touted, “FLASH: Newt Booed At Huckabee Forum Over Romney Attacks... *” (see Screenshot), which led to this link on http://tv.breitbart.cm/newt-booed-by-sounth-carolina-crowd-for-bain-attacks” with video.
Those watching the Huckabee Forum with each candidate answering questions from a SC audience, never saw any such booing taking place, and when one reviews the video, which is short in length, one notices perhaps a 5 second grumbling, the question was not as implied, regarding Bain, rather it was regarding Newt Gingrich’s views on Capitalism and he explained it quite well. The grumbling, which again, was minor (see video) started when he mentioned Mitt Romney’s claim of creating jobs, and ended abruptly as he was reminded of the rules by Huckabee (apparently no attacks on other candidates). This was not an attack rather a contrast, and by way of example – Gingrich quickly changed tactics, the grumbling had long stopped and went on to give an outstanding answer which applause given was cut off on this short video.


Screenshot of Drudge Headline: links to: video below




The problem with rushing a candidate though without vetting (and that is exactly what is happening here with Mitt Romney), is one is going to end up with either another McCain and or Barack Obama. It is clear that the left is in the “tank” for Mitt Romney, which should tell the right that there is something out there that may be problematic.

They should also be aware that Newt Gingrich most likely knows what that problem(s) may be – given the fact he has visited Massachusetts more than Romney and given the fact that Romney eradicated his email records, and then was angered by the Secretary of State, Galvin’s decision to release hard copy documents. If Romney is concerned about these documents, it follows that there may be something there that most likely runs contrary to his current “Conservative” message – he was most concerned that the Obama campaign have access, however, it is possible that other GOP campaigns have gained access to these records as well.

Again, although Romney had his staff dumped email records of his term in office, (called highly unusual by all GOP Gubernatorial predecessors) the hard copy remained:

An Associated Press examination of much of the available Romney archives holdings earlier this year suggested the material available then was far from comprehensive. More than 75 cartons reviewed by the AP included staff and legislative documents but no internal records written to or from Romney himself -- except for ceremonial bill-signing and official letters.
News organizations have pressed to view the archived Romney files. Also, the Democratic National Committee recently submitted three open-records requests to current Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, seeking to learn more background about the Romney administration's purge of emails and other electronic records.
Romney's campaign, meanwhile, has asked Patrick's office for any evidence of collusions between his staff and Obama re-election officials.

Boston Globe December 6th, 2011

This is a candidate of choice? He may be, but without a fair process, (i.e. slanted news stories regarding other candidates and the constant drumbeat that Romney is the only one who can win against Obama (without, by the way, any statistics that suggest he is that capable), it will be up to those voting in the Republican Primary, including independents, who will make that decision – the innuendo’s and false claims from headlines prove that the vast right wing conspiracy is nothing more than an RNC front.

Now there are 5 major candidates left to debate and follow through with the process, with the likelihood of there being 3 or 4 after the Carolina's: Romney, Gingrich, Paul, Santorum and Perry. One might look for an additional announcement prior to the S.C. primary of a suspension of a campaign. It is unlikely at this point, however, it has been rumored, not confirmed.

It remains to be seen if the right media will go to the lengths that he left media did vis a vis Romney and Obama – but it is likely: See Right Leaning Mediaite: headline: “Chris Wallace Confronts Pro-Gingrich Super PAC Spokesman About Gingriches Ties to Equity Firm” more of the same type of inflammatory headlines, and little substance in the actual article, other than additional right centered media making assertions. It is interesting to watch this play out, and to understand that there is little difference between FOX and MSNBC other than ratings. What is telling is that CNN is quickly becoming the choice of the moderate – go figure.

To answer the questions poised, Gingrich is being maligned with misleading and inaccurate head nines simply because: he’s in Romney’s way. Let the process take its course, and the last man standing will be the nominee, regardless of whether or not that nominee is approved by the RNC and its surrogates.

Lastest SC GOP Polling: Gingrich in Tie with Romney - Debate Schedule for SC

The latest Insider Advantage Poll has Newt Gingrich in a Statistical Tie with Mitt Romney. The poll, conducted on the 11th, shows Gingrich leading among Independents, and statistically tied with Romney for the Republican vote. The balance of the placements: Santorum and Paul tied, Huntsman and Perry one point apart in single digits, with 15.2% undecided. the complete marginals are available here in pdf from realclearpolitics.com.

There are three debates in SC: First Fox with Mike Hukabee's Forum tonight at 8PM, on the 16th of January 9 PM Fox News, and on January 19th, CNN at 8 PM.

Fear 2012 - 2 in 1 Choose Obama Reelection – US News and World Report – Who Can’t Best Obama – The Import of the GOP Primaries

The primary process will decide who faces President Obama in 2012 Election: pictured Newt Gingrich and the President - image form bet.com


U.S. News and World Reportsare citing multiple polls that suggest 2 in one American’s fear Obama’s reelection more than any other event in 2012. Second in events is a rise in taxes, something that seems inevitable with a second Obama term. However, the poll that they cite is internet based, and one must be extremely cautious when approaching internet polling. It is the Gallup daily tracking poll that suggests reelection is unlikely at this time – other polling institutions, such as those that are campus based, or those that are politically ideological (see Rasmussen as leaning right and Public Policy Polling as leaning left), are sometimes suspected of leaning in favor of the GOP and/or the Democrat Party. In the end, it is the reality of the economy, foreign policy decisions and extremely unpopular legislation that is the crux of the matter - and those factors, regardless of the political party, will signal a change in administrations.

Therefore, the voting public has a decision to make, if not Obama - then which of the Republican field is best suited to lead the nation forward? The pollsters, pundits and Washington Establishment (which includes members of Congress, and the aforementioned) appear to be pushing Mitt Romney as the inevitable nominee, however, the truth of the matter is, at this point in time, any one of those candidates, from the lowest polling to Romney, are capable of winning the White House – it comes down to the voters choice, and the order of states in which voting takes place. Today there will be a vote in New Hampshire, and although Romney is the favorite there, and has been touted in the media as going into New Hampshire with a “win” in Iowa (it was a small amount of votes, but a win non-the-less, not a mandate), the main problem with Mitt Romney, or perhaps Mitt Romney’s main problem is that he does not resonate with the primary voters. The reasons vary, from the very superficial to those who feel his tenure as Governor of Massachusetts left a record behind of increased taxes and a loss of small business, and many broken promises to those who aided him in his campaign for Governor and then President in 2008. He also has a history of extreme changes in policy regarding not only social issues, which drive a percentage of the GOP, but in all policy – he is a moderate to the core – a point that one must carefully examine and challenge prior to casting a vote.

The moderates of the GOP are not unlike the DNC candidates, in both temperament and ideology – some may feel that is necessary for compromise, others find this to be untenable and most believe that the moderate wing of the GOP (the Snows, the McCain’s, the Romney’s) cannot differentiate themselves enough from the status quo and will therefore be ineffective in governing – it is that moderation that crosses the line between being principled and voting against one’s own political party at times in order to work for the American people, rather than doing what one feels will win an election or popularity with the media and or their peers. There are others who will stand steadfast in their beliefs regardless of their party affiliation, and will act independently – a good example is one Senator Scott Brown, who, prior to the election, and although a Republican, noted that he would not always vote with his party, but for what he felt was best for his constituents. He has done just that in his tenure in the Senate, and although facing reelection is favored to win – he is extremely popular in Massachusetts, even though he angers those on the left and the right for voting in the Commonwealth’s interest. That is the type of candidate that the nation is most likely to elect – and that mold does not fit either the President or Mitt Romney – those who will do or say anything to get elected, and then, when in office, to serve the public, appear to serve themselves, and their party.

Understandably, the choice is not always clear, and the notion that an extended and nasty primary with multiple candidates is not in the nation’s best interest, is hogwash. The primary seasons ends in June with the nominating Convention held in August, therefore to push a particular candidate as the eventual nominee, before the first vote was cast, is an insult to the public. This will be true regardless of which political party and philosophy one subscribes – the primary process, in its entirety, gives more time for the public to decide which candidate, from both sides will better serve the nation. It is a job that not many would want to take, and the motivation could not be financial reward , nor the fact that the President is viewed as the most powerful figure in the nation (or should be), a leader that is shapes Foreign policy and the economy, someone with the backbone and the knowledge going into the job, that they are most likely to be challenged and berated at every step – turned on by members of their own party, and the public – it accounts for the overnight aging one sees in each President, as they either enjoy peace time or war, a good economy or bad, it is an inevitable part of the “job” for which the American public hires a President. That is what is lacking – it is the humility, regardless of primary primping and hubris that some candidates may display, that the candidates shows when speaking of the office as one in which they are working for the American people, hired on a temporary basis in order to steer the ship.

As a nation, it is doubtful that choice has been made, and it becomes more evident that many candidates on the GOP side are doing their best to ensure that the most powerful (media, pundits and those in the Washington Establishment) allow a person to make up their own minds – which is most important in this election year. Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman, are all, to a man, pointing out Mitt Romney’s “faults” as a candidate – and that is not always seen as a positive – but it should be. The two or three or four candidates that go forward, beyond South Carolina and Florida, and stay in the race on Super Tuesday, will do a larger service than the American Public may know, and one of those will be the nominee. It may be Mitt Romney, or Newt Gingrich, or Jon Huntsman, or Ron Paul or Rick Perry, it will be their showing in this (to borrow a thought from Speaker Gingrich) tortoise race to the finish, that will produce the nominee, and that nominee will be battle hardened and tested, not only by the negatives coming from their own peers, but by the race itself and the peoples in those primary and caucus states that will be voting for one over another.

The focus on money and the billions here and millions there that are necessary to run ads, and keep a campaign in the black to continue, is appropriate to an extent, and one should know that a individual may be polling last, and yet, when one wins or places in this large a field, money does come in from all sources, and that includes the PACS.

Therefore, one must choose their vote based not on the media, nor the polling, but on what that particular candidate offers in the way of similar beliefs, and how well that candidate is prepared to take on the roll of the President. There will be a healthy back and forth, and in the end, there will be those that drop out of the race, perhaps after today’s New Hampshire decision (which is unlikely), perhaps after the South Carolina primary (which is more likely), and those three or four that are still standing on Super Tuesday, will ensure that the public has a fair advantage in choosing the nominee. The notion that one candidate alone can win the White House is a fallacy, especially in this election cycle – it is the one that will be vetted after a protracted primary process that will be the best choice. Again, it may be Mitt Romney, it may not, it may be the Speaker Gingrich, and it may be Ron Paul (regardless of the fact that many pundits and the media as well as well as rank and file Republicans may naysay his chances due to his Libertarian leanings). It may be any one of those that are in New Hampshire today or heading this morning to South Carolina, or already there, campaigning.

It is the candidate that the people choose, not the media, nor the Beltway that will win the day – regardless of the polls, and regardless of the constant rush to nominate – the last candidate in the position of Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, Jon Huntsman and Ron Paul, at this stage in 1979 was one Ronald Reagan – and he led the nation to years of prosperity and peace – therefore it behooves every one that is casting a vote – to choose with both head and heart. There will never be another Regan, but there may be a Gingrich or Santorum or Perry or Paul, or yes, Romney that will shape the course of history and drive the nation back to prosperity and peace, and in our lifetime. The choice is the public’s to make.

One last note on endorsements: Although the endorsements from the media, movies stars, peers and pundits appear to play a factor in the race, they most often boost a candidate’s moral, and on the flip side, loose votes, depending on how the public views the endorser, as well as the endorsee. It is the endorsement of the voter that counts – and that is best to be kept in mind.

Iowa – Polling Varies to Extreme’s – Anyone’s Guess – Ground Game will Prevail – Ron Paul Organizational Strength

Iowa has been at the center of attention with newscasters touting poll after poll suggesting that Mitt Romney, Ron Paul and variations of Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum will be the likely winners of the first 2012 GOP caucus. The latest Insider Advantage poll taken on the 28th of December, shows Paul, Romney and Gingrich in a dead head with Santorum in a statistical 4 way tie within the margin of error. (Marginals PDF hereat Real Clear Politics) A number of polls suggest either a Paul, Romney, Santorum win or any combination one can conceive of those candidates running (with the exception of Huntsman whose focus is now on New Hampshire). It will be the first three placements in Iowa that will count towards any “political capital” going forward to New Hampshire, where Romney is leading in polls, but where, again, one cannot pinpoint, by current polls and the variance that is going to come out in the top tier. It will be the state of South Carolina that will forecast which of these candidates can stay in for the long haul, by the placement of the top two – going forward, the candidate that can hold the South and Midwest on Super Tuesday, will emerge as the front-runner (or front-runners as 2012 appears).

All the Super PAC’s and candidates cash on hand will count towards the battle, in the sense that those left with cash will be able to make those necessary appearances and run advertising in states where they are not known – which is where the crux of the matter lays. With the media 24/7 news cycle it is doubtful that anyone who isn’t living under a rock does not know who is running for the GOP nomination. Even in Massachusetts, the local news is bringing the Republican contest into the first half of the news cast, the focus on Iowa and New Hampshire being so strong, that the affiliates are running national stories on the early contests, including commentary from the local anchors. It appears to be message, message, message and who can appeal across the board to a wide range of voters, including the Democrats who are now considering (and not in a paranoid, Democrat Operative voting for the Republican to spoil the race for a specific candidate, type of way, but in a sincere and selective manner, in which they will, many for the first time, and many for the second time in a matter of 30 years, cross party lines) voting against every political instinct instilled in a Democrat – for a Republican to lead the nation.)

Nothing speaks to this stronger than the marginals of the Insider Advantage Poll, and as a resident of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (known as the bluest state), a Super Tuesday participant, one cannot help but wonder when those who always cast Massachusetts aside (with the exception of the 2009 special election for the Senate seat, won by Scott Brown) will finally poll the Commonwealth. It is not that Massachusetts would be a deciding factor in any Presidential contest (not withstanding the fact that the state offers 9 electoral votes, which, in a hotly contested race may make the difference), but it would offer a snapshot of the depth of the race, and which of the candidates those Massachusetts Independents (the largest portion of the electorate) were considering for the March 6th contest.

Who resonates, who is the candidate that will capture, not the Republican Party loyalists (otherwise known as the Country Club Republican Set (not unsimilar to those in similar positions in the Democrat Party), but those rank and file members who are making decisions based on the newscasts, the mailers, the candidates that show up in the state, and those that have volunteers in sufficient numbers to knock on doors.

One has to consider who has made appearances, that is likely to go a long way towards additional state and local news, and who has an established ground game. (See Campaign Tracker by the Washington Post – visits to States by Candidate noted in this interactive map). History will also play a factor, if one cannot succeed in the Southern States, one might as well be spitting into the wind, so to speak. Historically, those who have risen to the top of the pile, by virtue of either state wins in caucuses or primaries to win delegates at a convention, or those in a brokered convention, and who cannot, on their own merit, carry the South or the west, will choose a running mate that can – the exception being John McCain, a moderate who chose the conservative Govenor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, to boost the base. Consider the case of Kennedy, who chose Johnson in order to solidify the South, so important it was for that Massachusetts Democrat to have geographic representation in order to secure a win.

Therefore, one must look at strengths and weaknesses, endorsements being what they are, in the eyes of some, specifically those who are less inclined to watch the news more than once in a blue moon, or who pay little attention to the primaries, (this year, perhaps an exception). The GOP endorsements to date (running up to Iowa) have been made in large part to Mitt Romney and those endorsements have been mainly GOP establishment figures, Gingrich has received endorsements from, most recently a noted economics and Michael Reagan, Rick Santorum is being back by former Huckabee campaign personnel and certain evangelical leaders in the state, some of whom have gone so far as to suggest to other candidates that they drop out of the race. Ron Paul – has organization, the scope of which it is doubtful that anyone has bothered to look at with any seriousness – but they should.
Paul has, in the past, had the support of the youth vote (think Occupy Wall Street) but this has changed in the age of the Tea Party (think strict Constitutionalists) and now includes a wide spectrum of ages and individuals who are tired of “business as usual”.

A recent op-ed in the New Hampshire Union Leader by Publisher Joseph W. McQuaid entitled “Ron Paul is truly dangerous” speaks to the rise of the Paul Candidacy and the lack of media attention vis a vis Paul’s national security stance, one which many would conclude, as did Mr. McQuaid, are “dangerous” to the security of the nation. Mr. McQauid also points out that his appeal lays in his “domestic libertarian views” which “are quite attractive to some voters fed up with politics as usual”.

How organized is Paul? Take a look at one of the organizations that is backing Paul, to understand the scope of not only his campaign organization but what amounts to a “super pac” of supporters. The websites for reference are Young Americans for Liberty and the Campaing for Liberty (which boast 600,000 plus members). Granted this may not transform into votes, however, look back at the marginals of the Insider Advantage Poll to understand who is voting in the Iowa Caucus and those states through the end of March that offer proportional delegates to those placing, and open primaries where Independents and Democrats may vote and/or change affiliation to vote in the Republican Primary.

The Poll breakdown is shown below:


Insider Advantage Poll Iowa - click to enlarge

Iowa is of import as well as New Hampshire in measuring the depth of the organization of one Ron Paul versus the lack of grassroots organization of the establishment candidate Mitt Romney, leaving South Carolina and Florida to stop what may become a freight train. Those candidates that garner votes in sufficient numbers that cross party lines are at present: Paul, Gingrich and Bachmann, the three candidates that represent the most “outside of Washington” personas and are able to amass votes from all parties.

Herman Cain Wins Nevada’s WRLC Straw Poll – The Significance with Analysis on the 2012 Nomination.

Cain and Gingrich, Big Benefits from Latest Straw Poll


From the Washington Times: Herman Cain has won the Western Republican Leadership Conference Straw Poll, leading the field of GOP contenders for the 2012 nomination. The second place went to Mitt Romney (29%) 2 points behind Cain, followed by New Gingrich at a healthy 20% of the vote. As far as straw polls go, in general, they have little impact outside of the particular political party; however, this poll was conducted after the CNN debate in Las Vegas, sponsored by and packed with members of the Western Republican Leadership Conference. Those are the GOP activist, the activist that will work to secure a nominee’s position in the race. Cain, who is neck and neck or leading Romney is traditional polls, is on track, with Romney and Gingrich, at this point, to become the nominee. With the promise of an earlier than usual primary season, the fact that Cain remains at the top of the GOP pack, despite the general knowledge that Romney is the preferred candidate by the so called Republican Establishment, is, it and of itself, a victory for those who would prefer to see a non-politician take the lead.

With Fox News analysts now changing their tune to “maybe money does not matter” – are now proposing a Cain/Romney or Romney Cain Ticket. That scenario may satisfy the establishment GOP; however, it may be more likely a Cain-Gingrich ticket - solidifying the more traditional Republican base with the less traditional grassroots Tea Party and Independent voters who are taking an anti-political class stance. Additionally, as the nominating process is to begin early, one must look at the critical states that will impact the entire race, and have traditionally pushed the eventual nominee on to victory. Those states are all, for the most part, located below the Mason/Dixon line and in the Heartland. The key is South Carolina – one might take New Hampshire, and one might take Iowa, but without South Carolina, and its sister states, the candidate might as well pack it up and go on home..

Although a lot can and will happen to change the fortunes of the current “front-runners” between now and either December 2011 or January 2012 (depending upon New Hampshire’s “final answer”, it is appearing more likely that the top three Candidates are solidifying their positions in the race.

GOP Debate Reminder: Tuesday, October 11th, at Dartmouth - Bloomberg TV, Washington Post

The next GOP debate will take place this coming Tuesday, October 11th, with a pre-debate analysis beginning at 7pm est, followed by the debate at 8pm on Bloomberg TV, or streaming live on the Washington Post website.

Those who live in the Western Massachusetts area and have Charter Digital services can find the Bloomberg on Channel 299, those without Charter; check your local cable provider listing for Channel number (Comcast does carry the channel in Western MA).

This debate will focus solely on the Economy. There are nine candidates, currently, who have participated in past GOP debates, and have declared themselves for the GOP 2012 Presidential Nomination: (In no particular order)

Herman Cain: www.hermancain.com
Mitt Romney: www.mittromney.com
Rick Perry: www.rickperry.org
Ron Paul: www.ronpaul2012.com
Newt Gingrich: www.newt.org
Michele Bachmann: www.michelebachmann.com
Rick Santorum: www.ricksantorum.com
Jon Huntsman: www.jon2012.com
Gary Johnson: www.garyjohnson2012.com

For a full list of candidates: visit: http://2012.presidential-candidates.org

2012 GOP - Herman Cain Rising – Tonight Show Appearance – Cain’s Straight Talk, Take No Prisoner’s Approach – Two Words: Brilliant and Capable

Herman Cain, speaking at crowded event - image World News Blog

On Friday evening, 2012 GOP Presidential Candidate, Herman Cain, was a guest on NBC’s “Tonight Show with Jay Leno”. Both Leno and his counterpart on CBS, Letterman, have been slumping in the ratings lately (NY Times) , therefore, Leno took the step to attract the rest of the available late night audience which may not be overly “left”, with an appearance by Cain. The last time both Leno and Letterman had sky high ratings was when they opened with guests: Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin in early 2010 (LA Times). Apparently, lost on the networks (or those booking for the shows), was a spike in ratings when one brings in the Conservatives – and Herman Cain would be no exception, as he certainly has the momentum in the race at this point.

One knows that Cain’s stock is rising when Democrat “strategists” start playing the race card! (Real Clear Politics). Apparently, to a Progressive Democrat, (i.e. Socialist), Cain is a bigoted racist. That mind boggling remark is sure to be added to other less brilliant or original attacks on Cain from the left, due to the fact that his presence and his rise in the Republican Race, doesn’t’ fit neatly into their mantra of “All Republican’s are white Racists” – wait – that’s where they got it. Apparently, whether one is Latino, a woman, African American, and a Conservative, one is suddenly a "rich white man", in the eyes of Socialists Democrats. How well that plays is well, up to the electorate.
Unfortunately, Cain being embraced by the GOP and Tea Party knocks out that age old theory, so they either have to attack him on his plans, his experience and or his personal life – they’ve got nothing – so, they use what seems to have failed in the past (which explains the current administrations fascination for and implementation of for Carter’s foreign, domestic, and economic policy).

Cain is likeable, and he’s smart, and he’s got a sense of humor. He’s been able to pick up the appropriate tone in the debate arena, faster than any politician’s one has seen in a long time – for someone who is clearly not a politician – His remarks regarding his economic plan are solid, and he backs them up with facts, from a businessman’s perspective. Not a lot of hubris being thrown out there by Mr. Cain.

The highlights of the video clip below (in two segments via NBC):

Cain on the other candidates: Mitt Romney: Good Hair, New Gingrich: Brilliant and Ron Paul: Grumpy Old Man shows a sense of humor that is peppered with honesty.
When asked about the comments by Palin regarding his being flavor of the week (which was a speech not on Cain per se, rather on the media, which concept has gotten lost somehow (last word rhetorical) Cain noted correctly that Palin had called him Herb (and he forgives her now), that she lends a great deal to the national debate, but that he doesn’t feel she’ll enter the race.

Overall it was a good foray into the late night show talk circuit lion’s den, and one can anticipate more appearance by Cain in the future (specifically if Neilson gives the green light to Leno in ratings next week – one can expect additional GOP candidates to be in the rotation.)

Cain is a breath of fresh air, and although one might argue that he doesn’t have experience in “government’ – that’s more of a plus than a negative, whiel his forty plus years in executive positions gives him credibility, the man would be more capable of hiring the right people than any politician to take the reins since the founders – that’s something to think about heading into the primaries.

The Tonight Show with Herman Cain Part I

The Tonight Show with Herman Cain Part II


To learn more about Herman Cain visit his website: www.hermancain.com