CBS: OBAMA LEADS IN OUR D+13 POLL

Anyone following the presidential campaign through the prism of media polls is doing themselves a serious disservice. Virtually every one uses a polling sample that is so heavily-skewed towards Democrats that it distorts the actual state of the campaign. Of course, that is a feature, not a bug of the polls. The polls are specifically designed to drive a narrative that Obama is surging and Romney is struggling. Increasingly, though, the polls are having to go to ridiculous efforts to support this meme. Friday's CBS/New York Times poll, for example, uses a D+13 sample of registered voters. This is absurd. 

In 2008, an historic election wave for Democrats, the electorate was D+7. In 2004, when George W. Bush won reelection, the electorate was evenly split. In other words, D+0. Repeat after me; the Democrat share of the electorate is not going to double this year. Given the well-noted enthusiasm edge for Republicans this year, the electorate is going to be far closer to the 2004 model than 2008. Any poll trying to replicate the 2008 is going to artificially inflate Obama's support. 

CBS does apply a Likely Voter screen to the head-to-head match up. The LV sample is D+6, similar to the make up of the 08 election. In that, Obama leads Romney by just 3 points, 49-46. In the RV sample, which more than doubles the proportion of Democrats to D+13, Obama leads by 8 points, 51-43. See the simple relationship there? 

Let's try a simple thought experiment. Imagine if, for a week, all media polls decided to use a sample that replicated the 2004 electorate--a D+0 model. Given the GOP's enthusiasm edge--even the CBS poll found Republicans voters with a double-digit lead on enthusiasm for the election--the electorate is going to look a lot more like 2004 than 2008. Imagine how the narrative of the campaign would change. The CBS poll found Romney beating Obama among Independents by 11 points. With a balanced partisan sample, Romney would likely post consistent leads against Obama. 

A week of this and Politico would run out of fuel for its daily "Romney is struggling" theme. Which is why the media will never adjust its samples. This election, it isn't so much about polling as propaganda. The polls are simply a tool being used by the media to try to depress GOP turnout and give a powerful lift to Obama's obviously lackluster campaign. 

The polls confirm that the media aren't really biased. Rather, they are active players for the other team. 

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

U.S. Poverty Rate At Record 15 Percent

U.S. Poverty Rate 15 Percent; Record Numbers Persist

WASHINGTON — The ranks of America’s poor remain stuck at a record 15 percent, the Census Bureau reported Wednesday.

Roughly 46.2 million people remained below the poverty line in 2011, unchanged from 2010. The figure is the highest in more than a half-century.

And while joblessness is 

persistently high, the gap between rich and poor increased in the last year. The top 1 percent of wage earners had a 6 percent increase in income, while income at the bottom 40 percent of earners was basically unchanged, said David Johnson, the chief of the Census Bureau’s household economics division.

“A lot of the increase is driven by changes at the very top of the distribution,” Mr. Johnson said.

The report comes less than two months before the November presidential election, and the still-weak U.S. economy is the top issue for voters deciding between the leading candidates, President Obama and Republican Mitt Romney.

Experts earlier predicted a fourth straight annual rise in the poverty rate, but dwindling unemployment benefits and modest job gains helped to keep that from happening.

“This is good news and a surprise,” said Sheldon Danziger, a University of Michigan economist who closely tracks poverty. He pointed to a continuing boost from new unemployment benefits passed in 2009 that gave workers up to 99 weeks of payments after layoffs and didn’t run out for many people until late 2011. Also, job gains in the private sector helped offset cuts in state and local government workers.

Via: The Washington Times

Continue Reading...

After 2010 Rebuke, Obama Never Turned to Center

The byzantine relations between President Obama and former president Bill Clinton could fill several psychology textbooks, providing juicy examples of passive aggression, older man/younger man competition, complex alliances (Hillary as secretary of state is the perfect embodiment of the maxim “Keep your friends close and your enemies closer”), and mutual interests.

That the president needs Bill Clinton now to make his case to the country must be richly satisfying to the only American whose ego can compete with Barack H. Obama’s.

Let’s recall that one of Obama’s supposed triumphs in 2008 was defeating the vaunted Clinton machine. The Democratic party’s delirium for Obama supposedly obliterated the Clinton magic. After winning the South Carolina primary in January, Obama exulted that “we’re up against the conventional thinking that says your ability to lead as president comes from longevity in Washington. . . . But we know that real leadership is about candor and judgment and the ability to rally Americans . . . around a higher purpose . . .” Though he never tired (and still doesn’t) of insulting George W. Bush, that barb wasn’t aimed at him. It was for the Clintons. 

Bill Clinton, for his part, nurses grudges. Obama eclipsed Clinton as the most charismatic Democrat. The former president and his wife also got a crash course in media bias. Obama spoiled the Clintons’ carefully nurtured plan of returning to the White Houseand achieving vindication. And as someone who preened himself on his high standing among blacks (Toni Morrison called him America’s “first black president”), Clinton was justly outraged when Obama supporters Donna Brazile and Rep. Jim Clyburn accused him of racism in 2008 because he referred to Obama as a “kid” and dismissed his Iraq War stance as a “fairy tale.” Good thing he didn’t use the word “Chicago” or mention “golf” — as those are now “dog whistles,” we’re told.Now His Royal Majesty needs old Bill. He needs him to mount the stage in Charlotte and persuade waverers to reelect The One. Why? Because Clinton, for all his squalid ways, and for all that he was a practitioner par excellence of what Obama disdained as the “old politics,” has something Obama lacks — a successful economic legacy to brag about.

Via: Real Clear Politics

Continue Reading...

Chuck Norris Warns America

America’s favorite action star is doing just that this election – calling on evangelical Christians across the nation to join him in crushing the creep of socialism under President Obama.

Norris and his wife, Gena, have filmed a public service announcement, unveiled exclusively at WND, wherein the two urge Christians to help save the country in November.

“We are here to talk about a growing concern we all share,” Chuck Norris explains. “If we look to history, our great country and freedom are under attack. We’re at a tipping point and, quite possibly, our country as we know it may be lost forever if we don’t change the course in which our country is headed.”

Gena warns that voter apathy among evangelicals in 2008 may have contributed to Obama’s election in the first place.

“With our country at a crossroads, Chuck and I have asked ourselves what we can be doing to help support this great country we’re blessed to live in and how we can encourage our like-minded American brothers and sisters to unite and let their voices be heard,” she said. “It is estimated that in the 2008 election, 30 million evangelical Christians stayed home on voting day and Obama won the election by 10 million votes.”

Chuck cautions Christians about the cost of doing nothing while the nation spirals into a state of socialism from which there will be no return.

“We know you love your family and your freedom as much as Gena and I do,” he says in his appeal to Americans. “And it is because of that we can no longer sit quietly or stand on the sidelines and watch our country go the way of socialism or something much worse.”

Gena urged Christians to register and cast their votes on Election Day to ensure “our voices will be heard.”

Chuck recalled the cautionary words of great patriots on the subject of preserving liberty:

“As Edmund Burke said, ‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men (and women) to do nothing.’

Via WND Faith

Continue Reading..

TARP and GM

In December of 2008, GM approached Congress and asked for a bridge loan to allow them to restructure. While the House passed legislation to accomplish this, it was not passed through the Senate. Days later, the Bush administration initiated a loan through the TARP program which would provide $14 Billion in loans and stock purchases to GM and follow many of the guidelines that were sought in that legislation. This included a restructure plan that would have to be approved by the Obama administration.

In February of 2009 GM presented their plan to the Obama administration. The plan was seen as preferential to union workers by bondholders and many stated their intention to oppose it. In March of 2009 President Obama announced that he was not accepting the viability plan put forth by GM, but that he was authorizing more funds to keep the company afloat. President Obama also initiated programs to provide funds to companies that supply parts to GM and Chrysler.

GM was placed into bankruptcy on June 1, 2009 and the company was supplied with an additional $30.1 Billion dollars, bringing the total loans and stock purchases to $50 Billion. The company was made a private entity at that time.

The bankruptcy restructuring plan agreed upon by the government and GM gave the US government a 60% share in the company and gave the Canadian government a 12% share. The United Auto Workers gave up a health and savings plan worth $20 Billion in exchange for a 17.5% share in the company and over $8 Billion in debt and preferred stock. Bondholders held $27 Billion in stock prior to the collapse and received only a 10% equity share in the new GM company. 

Throughout the bankruptcy process, President Obama stated that he had not desire to run a car company and would not interfere with daily GM business. This is at odds with numerous actions taken before and after the bankruptcy filings.

• Days before GM was placed into bankruptcy, the Obama administration demanded and received the resignation of company CEO Rick Wagoner.
• The Obama administration pushed for the closing of numerous GM dealerships
• The substance of the bankruptcy settlement was heavily tilted to favor unions - a result that many people suggest would not have occurred without political motivations
• The bankruptcy settlement allowed the US government, the Canadian, and the UAW Union to appoint chairs of the board - an action that would directly change the direction of the company for years

The TARP program established specific rules on what could be purchased with the funds. These rules stated that only Preferred Stock or Common stock without voting rights could be purchased. The reason for this was to prevent the government from controlling a company it purchased stock in through TARP funds. President Bush violated those rules when he used the money to provide a loan to GM. President Obama further violated those laws when he purchased stock in the company and used the ownership of that stock as authority to appoint board members. The creation of programs to give funds to companies simply because they depended on GM and Chrysler for business was also not allowed in TARP documents.

Via: The Political Guide

Continue Reading...

Flashback: Obama Promised In 2008 He Would Not Run Negative Ads...

When there is nothing left but a string of broken promises too numerous to list.  Then there's this.....

Via BuzzFeed


Posted by Conservative Happenings (c)2012