Problem found at board of elections as Voting Machines default to "OBAMA"

MARION — Joan Stevens was one of several early voters at the polls on Monday. But when Stevens tried to cast her ballot for president, she noticed a problem.

Upon selecting “Mitt Romney” on the electronic touch screen, Barack Obama’s name lit up.

It took Stevens three tries before her selection was accurately recorded.

“You want to vote for who you want to vote for, and when you can’t it’s irritating,” Stevens said.

Stevens said she alerted Jackie Smith, a board of elections member who was present. Smith declined to comment, but Stevens says she mentioned that the machine had been having problems all day.

Stevens also reported the issue to Sophia Rogers, the director of the board of elections for Marion County.

Rogers said the machine worked fine when she and others tried voting on it. No one else had reported problems with the voting machines malfunctioning.

Rogers suggested the issue may have been caused by not hitting the button directly or tapping with more than one finger. Stevens was aware the machine had to be operated a certain way.

“I know how to do the voting,” Stevens said.

Despite no problems with that particular machine, Rogers decided to take all precautions. She contacted the vendor and had them inspect the device.

“Because of her issue, we had that machine recalibrated,” Rogers said. “I am certain the equipment works properly.”

Rogers said that those still skeptic about using the electronic stations have the option of filling out a paper ballot, even voting from home and mailing via absentee ballot.

Voting in-person is open daily to all voters at 222 West Center Street through Election Day on November 6. All qualified Ohio voters can also submit an absentee ballot by filling out a form found at the Marion elections website at marionelections.com

Via: MarionStar,com

Continue Reading...

GOP COULD SEE 'TSUNAMI' OF VOTERS ON ELECTION DAY

In many battleground states, Republicans traditionally outperform Democrats at the polls on Election Day, and some analysts believe there will be a GOP "tsunami" at the polls on next Tuesday's Election Day.

Over the last two weeks, GOP political operatives have noted Democrats have been turning out "high-propensity voters" -- or voters who normally vote on Election Day -- for early voting, while Republicans have been turning "low propensity voters" -- or voters who traditionally do not vote on Election Day. This means Democrats have fewer voters to draw from their universe on Election Day while Republicans have more.

One Republican analyst said "Democrats are cannibalizing their high-propensity voters in advance of election day to get stories that they are winning," which is amounting to "stealing from Peter, or Election Day, to pay Paul, or early voting."

As the Examiner noted, "in Ohio, the Democrats have turned out 43 percent of the most loyal supporters to vote, compared to just 27 percent of the GOP. In Iowa, the difference is 43 percent to 29 percent."

Although Democrats have touted their early voting strength, a Gallup poll found Romney with a seven-point lead among voters who have already voted, and even a Pew Research survey found Romney already has a "turnout advantage over Obama, which could loom larger as Election Day approaches." 

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

Romney, GOP suddenly plunging onto Democratic turf

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) - Mitt Romney is suddenly plunging into traditionally Democratic-leaning Minnesota and Pennsylvania, and his GOP allies are trying to put Michigan into play. It's forcing President Barack Obama to defend his own turf - he's pouring money into television ads in the states and dispatching top backers - in the campaign's final week.

The question is: Why this Republican move?

GOP efforts in the trio of Rust Belt states could indicate that Romney is desperately searching for a last-minute path to the needed 270 Electoral College votes - without all-important Ohio. Or just the opposite, that he's so confident in the most competitive battlegrounds that he's pressing for insurance against Obama in what's expected to be a close race.

Or perhaps the Republican simply has money to burn. Use it now or never.

(AP) President Barack Obama gestures while speaking during the his visit to the Disaster Operation... Full Image

Former President Bill Clinton was dispatched in response on Tuesday. "Barack Obama's policies work better," he declared on the University of Minnesota campus, one of his two stops in a state that offers 10 electoral votes and hasn't voted for a Republican presidential candidate since Richard Nixon in 1972.

This late-game expansion of a campaign playing field that, until now, had focused on just nine states was taking place exactly a week from Election Day. At the same time, Obama spent a second day in Washington to focus on his presidential duties and Romney edged back into active campaigning in the aftermath of superstorm Sandy.

"This is a tough time for millions of people ... but America is tougher," the president said during a brief visit to the American Red Cross, where he sought to reassure victims, encourage aid workers - and warn of more storm damage to come with rising floodwater.

In Ohio, Romney, too, spoke of concern for storm victims, telling supporters who were collecting supplies that "a lot of people hurting this morning."

Beyond the candidates' pause from feverish campaigning, the impact of the storm on the election wasn't all that clear.

(AP) Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney holds bags of food as he... Full Image

National polls show an even race for the popular vote, though Obama appears to have both an edge in key battleground states in the electoral vote hunt and more state-by-state pathways to reach the 270-vote threshold.

Of the nine states where the two men have spent more than $1 billion in advertising since June, Romney is in the strongest position in North Carolina. But public and internal campaign polls show he's locked in stubbornly tight battles in Colorado, Florida, New Hampshire, Nevada and Virginia and is fighting to overtake Obama's advantage in crucial Ohio as well as Iowa and Wisconsin.

That said, Romney still could win. Anything can happen in the race's closing days - including Democratic-leaning states like Minnesota, Pennsylvania or Michigan going Republican.

Via: MyWay

Continue Reading...

GALLUP: OBAMA'S EARLY VOTE ADVANTAGE COLLAPSES 22-POINTS OVER 2008

My pal Guy Benson found a juicy nugget that helps to bring more clarity to the news from Gallup yesterday that shows Romney leading Obama in the early vote by a full seven points, 52-45%. Almost exactly four years ago (October 28, 2008),  according to Gallup, Obama was massacring John McCain among early voters with a fifteen-point lead, 55-40%. That means, at least according to Gallup, that Obama's early vote advantage has dropped 22 points when compared to '08.

Benson also notes that the percentage of voters who have or intend to vote early was 33% in 2008 and remains at 33% today. As Don Surber said in this tweet, "People don't wait in line to vote for the status quo[.]"

In his email to me, Benson makes The Point: "Obama had a 55/40 lead on McCain with early voters in '08, but only led by 3 pts with the election day crowd.  He ended up winning by 7 overall."

In other words, among those who actually voted on Election Day, Obama's advantage over McCain was only three points. Obama won by seven overall because of the early vote margins he had accumulated. If Gallup is correct about 2012 and Romney being ahead by seven with early voters, that means Obama's in very deep trouble. Even polls that show Obama with a small lead in states like Ohio confirm Romney will win among those who vote on Election Day.

Like me, Benson is skeptical of Gallup because, like its daily tracker that gives Romney a five point lead over Obama nationally, this early voting poll defies the CorruptMedia's conventional wisdom. But there are a few things you have to keep in mind.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

EDITORIAL: Dirty Tricks on Election Day

THE WASHINGTON TIMES -- The race for the White House is coming down to the wire, and the closer this contest gets, the greater the chance it could be decided by electoral shenanigans.

Though voter fraud affects everyone, it has turned into a highly partisan issue. Republican efforts to strengthen laws to require voter identification and an audit of voter rolls have met persistent challenges from Democrats and the Obama Justice Department. Democrats pretend such fraud is imaginary and allegations to the contrary must be manifestations of racism. This argument not only has a corrosive effect on the political culture, it is demonstrably untrue.

Independent investigations across the country have identified serious systemic problems. An audit by Election Integrity Maryland found cases of deceased voters still on active rolls, duplicate voter registrations and people listing vacant lots or business addresses as residences. In North Carolina, investigations discovered several thousand voters listed at the age of 110. Another 30,000 turned out to be deceased. Sometimes these are just paperwork errors, but other times something far more troubling is going on.

Maryland’s 1st Congressional District Democratic challenger Wendy Rosen was forced to withdraw from the race in September after she admitted casting ballots in both Maryland and Florida. In Philadelphia, there are precincts where voter turnout surpasses 100 percent of those registered there. In North Carolina, some early voters noted that their touch-screen ballots for Mitt Romney were defaulting to Barack Obama. Local election officials said the problematic machine needed “calibration.” However, this illustrates the frightening potential for deliberate fraud in electronic and computer-based voting. Without a physical record, there’s no way of verifying whether anyone was disenfranchised. We may one day look back on the “hanging chad” as a bulwark of democracy.

The Obama campaign has made early in-person voting part of its end-game strategy, rushing supporters to the polls before they have a chance to change their minds. This, too, is an invitation to fraud. Human Events reported that non-English-speaking Somalis were being taken by the busload to vote early at Ohio polling places, shepherded by Democratic minders.

Via: Washington Post

Continue Reading...

OBAMA CAMPAIGN SCRAMBLES TO DISCREDIT ROMNEY'S 'JEEP' AD

President Barack Obama's campaign went apoplectic Monday over a commercial by Mitt Romney's campaign that alleges Chrysler, despite Obama's bailout, was sold to the Italian company Fiat that intends to build Jeeps in China. 

Obama's campaign manager Jim Messina said "everyone" just had to know the ad is false. And the campaign ran a commercial of its own trying to tear down Romney's commercial. Except Romney's commercial is correct. 

The New York Times reported Romney's commercial says, “Who will do more for the auto industry? Not Barack Obama.” The commercial continues: “Fact checkers confirm his attacks on Mitt Romney are false. Obama took G.M. and Chrysler into bankruptcy, and sold Chrysler to Italians who are going to build Jeeps in China. Mitt Romney will fight for every American job.”

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

Chairs, Debates, Hurricanes and The Man Who Never Was

After many months of campaigning, Mitt Romney has finally taken the lead in polling for the election.  But why has it taken so long for the American people to catch onto the Mittmentum?  It begins with two key events:  the Republican National Convention and the Presidential debates.  And interestingly, Hurricane Sandy also shows us some interesting insights about how the mainstream media has dealt with Barack Obama – The Man Who Never Was.

One of the seminal events of the election season was Clint Eastwood’s appearance at the RNC.  Granted, the Eastwood “speech” was a bit odd.  But something happened in those moments that had previously not been seen by most Americans:  the mocking of Barack Obama.  Prior to that moment, the American media had a slobbering lovefest with the President and has consistently and steadfastly refused to expose his weaknesses.  But the appearance of Eastwood at the biggest political event to date was something they could not ignore.  And Eastwood delivered a stunning blow to the media’s narrative.  He depicted Obama as “the empty chair“.

So I — so I’ve got Mr. Obama sitting here. And he’s – I just was going to ask him a couple of questions. But, you know about, I remember three and a half years ago, when Mr. Obama won the election. And though I wasn’t a big supporter, I was watching that night when he was having that thing and they were talking about hope and change and they were talking about, yes we can, and it was dark outdoors, and it was nice, and people were lighting candles. And they were saying, you know, I just thought, this is great. Everybody’s crying. Oprah was crying.

I was even crying. And then finally – I haven’t cried that hard since I found out that there’s 23 million unemployed people in this country.

Now that is something to cry for because that is a disgrace, a national disgrace, and we haven’t done enough, obviously – this administration hasn’t done enough to cure that. Whatever interest they have is not strong enough, and I think possibly now it may be time for somebody else to come along and solve the problem.

So, so, Mr. President, how do you, how do you handle, how do you handle promises that you’ve made when you were running for election and how do you handle, how do you handle it?

I mean, what do you say to people? Do you just — you know — I know — people were wondering. You don’t? You don’t handle it.

Well, I know even some of the people in your own party were very disappointed when you didn’t close Gitmo. And I thought, well closing Gitmo — why close that, we spent so much money on it. But, I thought maybe as an excuse.

Oh, What do you mean shut up?

OK, I thought it was just because somebody had the stupid idea of trying terrorists in downtown New York City. Maybe that was it.

Prior to Eastwood’s Obama “interview”, had we seen that kind of public ridicule of Barack Obama?  Of course the MSM did their sworn duty and tried to write it off as Eastwood being crazy and senile.  But people heard it.  They were watching the convention to see the mystery guest.  And he delivered. The press couldn’t bury this one on page C6. It was front and center, in front of millions of voters.

Via: Red State

Continue Reading...

Virtual tie in … Minnesota?

I’d be the first to tell people that my state is a quadrennial sucker bet for Republicans.  In 2008, no one thought we had a prayer, but in 2000 and 2004, Republicans actually thought they had a chance to break the Democrats’ presidential winning streak, as the state last went to the GOP in 1972.  I’ve been hearing Republicans get optimistic here again, but I’ve been highly skeptical of the prospects for Mitt Romney to even get close here.

Until now:

As the presidential race tightens across the country, a new Star Tribune Minnesota Poll has found that it is narrowing here as well, with President Obama holding a 3-point lead and Republican Mitt Romney making gains in the state.

The poll shows Obama with support from 47 percent of likely voters and Romney earning backing from 44 percent — a lead within the poll’s margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

Last month, Obama had an 8-percentage point advantage in the Minnesota Poll. Romney has apparently cut into the Democrat’s advantage among women since then and picked up support from Minnesotans who were previously undecided or said they would vote for a third-party candidate.

Independents, on the other hand, are leaning more toward Obama. Barely a third supported him last month, but that number has grown to 43 percent. Romney’s support among independents remains virtually unchanged, with 13 percent of that group remaining undecided.

Bear in mind that this is the Star Tribune’s Minnesota Poll, which has a long and (un)glorious history of leftward tilt.  Mitch Berg has long documented this trend.  One has to wonder whether we’ll need to send paramedics to his house this morning after he reads Rachel Stassen=Berger’s report from the survey.

Snark aside, this looks like a relatively solid poll.  The sample is D+5, with a D/R/I of 38/33/29.  In 2008 when Obama won by 10 points, it was D+4 at 40/36/22, and I suspect that Republicans are going to be more motivated this time around. Obama wins the core counties in the Twin Cities, but only by a relatively weak 57/35.  Romney wins the Metro suburbs with a majority 51/39 and edges Obama 46/44 in the rest of the state.

In 2008, Obama had a 19-point edge in the gender gap, +3 among men and +16 among women.  This time, Obama has only a +1 — he’s up 14 among women but down 13 among men.  Obama still leads by 6 among independents, which he won by 17 points in 2008, but he’s only got 43%.  Late breakers are not likely to flow to the incumbent at this stage of the election; if the were inclined to support Obama, they’d already be in his corner now.

That’s true of the overall number as well. If Obama can only get to 47% in the Star Tribune poll with nine days left to go before the election in Minnesota, which has gone Democrat every presidential election over the last four years, this state is in play — and that’s why both campaigns are suddenly starting to spend money here.

Via: Hot Air

Continue Reading...

The Des Moines Register endorsement: Mitt Romney offers a fresh economic vision

Ten months ago this newspaper endorsed former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination for president. An overarching consideration was which of the party’s candidates could we see occupying the White House, and there was no question that Romney was qualified for the job.

Now, in the closing days of the general election campaign, the question is which of the two contenders deserves to be the next president of the United States.

Both President Barack Obama and Governor Romney are superbly qualified. Both are graduates of the Harvard University Law School who have distinguished themselves in government, in public service and in private life. Both are devoted husbands and fathers.

American voters are deeply divided about this race. The Register’s editorial board, as it should, had a vigorous debate over this endorsement. Our discussion repeatedly circled back to the nation’s single most important challenge: pulling the economy out of the doldrums, getting more Americans back in the workforce in meaningful jobs with promising futures, and getting the federal government on a track to balance the budget in a bipartisan manner that the country demands.

Which candidate could forge the compromises in Congress to achieve these goals? When the question is framed in those terms, Mitt Romney emerges the stronger candidate.

The former governor and business executive has a strong record of achievement in both the private and the public sectors. He was an accomplished governor in a liberal state. He founded and ran a successful business that turned around failing companies. He successfully managed the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City.

Via: Ten months ago this newspaper endorsed former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination for president. An overarching consideration was which of the party’s candidates could we see occupying the White House, and there was no question that Romney was qualified for the job.

Now, in the closing days of the general election campaign, the question is which of the two contenders deserves to be the next president of the United States.

Both President Barack Obama and Governor Romney are superbly qualified. Both are graduates of the Harvard University Law School who have distinguished themselves in government, in public service and in private life. Both are devoted husbands and fathers.

American voters are deeply divided about this race. The Register’s editorial board, as it should, had a vigorous debate over this endorsement. Our discussion repeatedly circled back to the nation’s single most important challenge: pulling the economy out of the doldrums, getting more Americans back in the workforce in meaningful jobs with promising futures, and getting the federal government on a track to balance the budget in a bipartisan manner that the country demands.

Which candidate could forge the compromises in Congress to achieve these goals? When the question is framed in those terms, Mitt Romney emerges the stronger candidate.

The former governor and business executive has a strong record of achievement in both the private and the public sectors. He was an accomplished governor in a liberal state. He founded and ran a successful business that turned around failing companies. He successfully managed the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City.

Via: Des Moines Register

Continue Reading...

Report: Hillary Asked For More Security in Benghazi, Obama Said No

Last night, it was revealed that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had ordered more security at the U.S. mission in Benghazi before it was attacked where four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens were murdered by Al-Qaeda but President Obama denied the request.

The news broke on TheBlazeTV’s “Wilkow!” hosted by Andrew Wilkow, by best-selling author, Ed Klein who said the legal counsel to Clinton had informed him of this information.

Klein also said that those same sources said that former President Bill Clinton has been “urging” his wife [Hillary] to release official State Department documents that prove she called for additional security at the compound in Libya, which would almost certainly result in President Obama losing the election.

Klein explained that everyone knew what was happening in Benghazi from the CIA to the National Security Agency and that there’s intelligence cables that have not been released.

Wilkow asked, “If everybody knew this including the White House, who would have given the order to go in and save the ambassador?”

Klein, “The President…he should have given the order to use the rapid reaction force…”

Wilkow, “Not Petraeus?”

Klein, “Well it has to come from the president.”

Wilkow also asked Klein about Valerie Jarrett who’s the Senior Advisor to Obama and Assistant to the President for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs, and her role in this cover-up.

Klein said, “We don’t know but we can only assume that every action that the president takes, and he said so, he is on the record saying “I don’t take any actions without passing it by Valerie Jarrett”... so we have to assume that Valerie Jarrett whose also by the way, hooked into the Chicago campaign line…she has a direct line to David Axlerod, was a part of this whole cover-up in the White House.”

Via: Examiner

Continue Reading...

Report: Obama Has Begun Suggesting To Field Organizers In Florida Their Time Would Be Better Spent In Ohio…

Does Mitt-Mentum Signal a Surge to a Romney Win?

At this stage of a tight presidential race, a refreshing transparency reveals itself to even the casual observer. How campaigns actually view the state of the race emerges in plain sight from the long-cloaked inner sanctum of polling, focus groups, and micro-targeting of voter preferences.

When President Obama suddenly rolls out a 20-page pamphlet summarizing his second-term agenda, voters know it was because the campaign discovered a hole in its data dug by GOP nominee Mitt Romney’s monthlong criticism. Presidents don’t dance to a challenger’s tune unless the polling data dictate they must. The same can be said for Obama’s aggressive, zinger-filled performance in the third debate. He needed to challenge Romney on facts and energize the slackers in his base.

Similarly during the last debate, Romney ran away from previous confrontations with Obama over the terrorist attack in Libya that killed four Americans—the reddest of red meat for conservatives right now. Instead, he spoke plaintively of “peace” and of war with Iran being the absolute “last resort,” because he knew he needed votes from nonaligned suburbanites—especially women. Romney also ignored Obama’s taunts because one-on-one jousting cost him in the second debate.

In short, Obama is acting like a slightly irked incumbent who needs to make up ground on a challenger he thought he had put away last summer. Romney is acting like a challenger who can’t afford to risk losing what he gained in the first debate, trying to siphon off voters still loosely attached to Obama.

The central question is whether Romney is surging to victory or merely merging into a lane of GOP support observable in previous presidential elections but insufficient to overcome Obama’s built-in demographic and ground-game advantages. The Romney campaign knows it will outperform John McCain’s turnout averages in all the vital swing states. Romney also knows that Republican voters outperformed Democratic voters in 10 swing states in 2004 (50.7 percent turnout to 48.3 percent). Republicans were competitive with Democrats in 2000 (47.9 percent to 48.4 percent). The blowout year was 2008, when Republicans lost the turnout contest to Democrats 45.6 percent to 52.9 percent,

Via: National Journal

Continue Reading...

American Workers Collecting Federal Disability Hits Another Record High

(CNSNews.com) - The number of American workers collecting federal disability insurance benefits hit yet another record high in October, according to the Social Security Administration.

This month 8,803,335 disabled workers are collecting benefits, up from the previous record of 8,786,049 set in September.

In February 2009, the first full month after President Barack Obama took office, there were 7,469,240 workers collecting federal disability insurance. Thus, so far in Obama’s term, the number of workers collecting disability has increased by 1,334,095. That works out to a net increase of about 29,646 per month (1,334,095 divided by 45 months), or an average increase of about 975 per day (1,334,095 divided by 1,369 days).

During George Bush’s eight years as president, the number of workers collecting federal disability insurance increased by 2,375,258, rising from 5,067,119 in February 2001 to 7,442,377 in January 2009. That equaled an average net increase of about 24,742 per month and 813 per day. In Bush’s second term alone, the number of workers on disability increased by 1,198,575, equaling an average monthly increase of about 24,970 and an average daily increase of about 820.

Via: CNS News

Continue Reading...

AP POLL: ROMNEY ERASES OBAMA LEAD AMONG WOMEN

Less than two weeks out from Election Day, Republican Mitt Romney has erased President Barack Obama's 16-point advantage among women, a new Associated Press-GfK poll shows. And the president, in turn, has largely eliminated Romney's edge among men.

Those churning gender dynamics leave the presidential race still a virtual dead heat, with Romney favored by 47 percent of likely voters and Obama by 45 percent, a result within the poll's margin of sampling error, the survey shows.

After a commanding first debate performance and a generally good month, Romney has gained ground with Americans on a number of important fronts, including their confidence in how he would handle the economy and their impressions of his ability to understand their problems.

At the same time, expectations that Obama will be re-elected have slipped: Half of voters now expect the president to win a second term, down from 55 percent a month earlier.

For all of the good news for Republicans, however, what matters most in the election endgame is Romney's standing in the handful of states whose electoral votes still are up for grabs. And polls in a number of those battleground states still appear to favor Obama.

As the election nears, Romney has been playing down social issues and trying to project a more moderate stance on matters such as abortion in an effort to court female voters. The AP-GfK poll, taken Friday through Tuesday, shows Romney pulling even with Obama among women at 47-47 after lagging by 16 points a month earlier.

But now his campaign is grappling with the fallout from a comment by a Romney-endorsed Senate candidate in Indiana, who said that when a woman becomes pregnant during a rape "that's something God intended."

Romney quickly distanced himself from the remark by Republican Richard Mourdock. But Obama campaign spokeswoman Jen Psaki said the incident was "a reminder that a Republican Congress working with a Republican President Mitt Romney would feel that women should not be able to make choices about their own health care."

Via: AP

Continue Reading...

Barack Obama is a Liar

Calling someone a liar is a serious accusation. This is why, aside from the unwritten contract allowing for mutual prevarication, politicians are so reluctant to do it. And not just anyone is a liar. Legend has it that our first president said, "I cannot tell a lie," but, being only human, G.W. no doubt could and certainly did, at some point. A liar, however, is someone who lives and breathes the lie; someone who specializes in the art of artifice; someone to whom lying is his first recourse, not his last. Such a man is Barack Obama.

In four years, Obama has gone from "change you can believe in" to a man you simply cannot believe. And it's not just Benghazi-gate, although that's a good place to start. With the recently revealed emails showing that the White House was told a mere two hours after the attack that it was a terrorist act, no reasonable person can still conclude that the Obama administration was honest in its aftermath. And the claim that the violence was sparked by some anti-Islamic film wasn't just a lie - it was a liar's lie.

It was dumb.

It was obvious that it would eventually blow up in the administration's face and make Benghazi into the scandal it has now become. But such things are only obvious to the intellect; at issue here are instincts.

Of course, since the Obama administration had failed to provide requested security for our Libyan diplomats despite previous attacks on their consulate and the approach of 9/11's anniversary, the president had a vested political interest in suppressing the truth. This made the Benghazi-gate lie one of callousness and convenience, not malice. But then there is the matter of Hampton University in Virginia.

Via: American Thinker

Continue Reading...

Romney by a landslide

A deeply troubled and deeply troubling administration that will do anything, no matter how cynical and venal, to protect its hold on power

When it comes to predicting the outcome of presidential races most pundits refuse to go out on a limb in predicting probable outcomes. Let’s face it; it’s a risky business that could leave one’s face covered with egg. However, in the case of the current election I will happily stick my neck out and risk being seen as a blowhard who believes himself up to predicting the future.

n a word, I predict a Romney landslide and here’s why: despite the fact that the famous 47% who to whatever degree depend on the government for their daily bread is expected to look for more of the same, I believe that if this percentage could have their druthers, they’d opt for having a well-paying job that left them self-sufficient, rather than dependent on the government.

I think that at some level most people in America understand that socialization would result in an overall lower standard of living. I also believe that despite all the class envy and hatred that’s been ginned up against the 1% by this administration, there is a basic understanding that private business, not the government, creates wealth. In my experience, most Americans understand that socialism doesn’t so much “spread the wealth” as it imposes equal degrees of misery.

Obama has incurred close to $6 trillion in new debt through deficit spending, the majority of which has gone to “stimulate” the economy. Counting the massive $821 billion stimulus bill and several additional stimulus bills and three Quantitative Easing initiatives (that’s government speak for printing extra money), the net effect has been that the American economy remains in the doldrums with unemployment in real terms approaching 15%. But even that failure might be forgiven if Obama hadn’t taken his role as messiah so seriously and make grandiloquent promises that could never be kept. I recall writing in these pages on November 11, 2008:

Via: Canada Free Press

Continue Reading...

NY Times Blames Bill Clinton For Obama’s Drop In The Polls…

When the histories of the 2012 campaign are written, much will be made of Bill Clinton’s re-emergence. His convention speech may well have marked the finest moment of President Obama’s re-election campaign, and his ads on the president’s behalf were memorable.

POLITICAL TIMES

Matt Bai’s analysis and commentary.

But there is one crucial way in which the 42nd president may not have served the 44th quite as well. In these final weeks before the election, Mr. Clinton’s expert advice about how to beat Mitt Romney is starting to look suspect.

You may recall that last spring, just after Mr. Romney locked up the Republican nomination, Mr. Obama’s team abruptly switched its strategy for how to define him. Up to then, the White House had been portraying Mr. Romney much as George W. Bush had gone after John Kerry in 2004 – as inauthentic and inconstant, a soulless climber who would say anything to get the job.

But it was Mr. Clinton who forcefully argued to Mr. Obama’s aides that the campaign had it wrong. The best way to go after Mr. Romney, the former president said, was to publicly grant that he was the “severe conservative” he claimed to be, and then hang that unpopular ideology around his neck.

Via: NYT

Continue Reading...

Tingles Accuses Sarah Palin Of “Dog Whistle” Racism For Saying “Shuck And Jive”…

Liberal cable anchor Chris Matthews, who in 2010 used the phrase "shuck and jive," on Wednesday assailed Sarah Palin as racist for using the phrase "shuck and jive." Referring to a Facebook post the former Alaska governor wrote about Obama and Libya, Matthews ranted, "You know, a dog whistle is a dog whistle...A trumpet call is another."

The MSNBC host insisted that "shuck and jive" has "a particular ethnic connection" and "to throw it at the president as an ethnic shot is pretty blatant." On July 7, 2010, Matthews, while talking to Rachel Maddow and her visit to Afghanistan, wondered, "What has it been like, as you shuck and jive, hang out with the men over there, the women over there, in uniform risking their lives every day?" The late Tim Russert also used the term on July 18, 2003.

In 2008, then-Attorney General Andrew Cuomo said of Barack Obama: "You can't shuck and jive at a press conference." Steve McMahon, a Hardball regular, talked to then-MSNBC host Tucker Carlson and demurred, "Well, that's not the way I would have put it."

On September 7, 2011, Jay Carney, a spokesman for Matthews' beloved Obama, told the press corps, "Sorry. I'm going to shuck and jive! Time to shuck and jive."

Palin entitled her Facebook post, "Obama's shuck and jive ends with Benghazi lies."

On Wednesday, Hardball guest Jonathan Alter, a former Newsweek editor, railed against Palin, "...Shuck and jive, that's like talking about watermelon... for Jews, talking about Jews are greedy or the Irish are drunk."

Via: Newsbusters

Continue Reading...

JUST MORE WORDS: They Said It! Dem Pollster Says “Voters Still Don’t Know” What Obama’s Plans Are

Rasmussen Reports, the first polling outfit to release a survey from Ohio taken after the third and final presidential debate, shows that Mitt Romney has now pulled even with President Obama among the state’s likely voters — at 48 percent support apiece.  This is the first time since the summer that Rasmussen doesn’t show Obama ahead in Ohio.  In four previous polls released this fall, Rasmussen had always shown Obama ahead in the Buckeye State — by one point each time. 

Today’s release is the first Ohio poll in which Rasmussen shows each of the two candidates’ net favorability ratings, which can sometimes seem to provide an early indication of future polling movement.  The poll shows Romney with a net favorability rating of +5 points (51 percent favorable, 46 percent unfavorable) and Obama with a net favorability rating of zero points (49 percent favorable, 49 percent unfavorable). 

Ohio voters trust Romney over Obama on the economy (51 percent trust Romney more; 44 percent trust Obama more).  

In addition, as Ohio voters have shown in the past, they can’t stand Obamacare — which could give Romney an advantage if he presses that case (in person and especially on the airwaves) in the final fortnight of the race. 

Via: Weekly Standard

Continue Reading...