POLITICO: ROMNEY UP 4 IN 'TOSS UP' STATES

This week, Politico released its latest Battleground poll of the presidential race. Despite coming from the left-wing news site, the poll is one of my favorites. Its put together by respected pollsters from both parties, makes available its full cross-tabs and uses a very modest and reasonable turnout model for its sample. Including leaners, the sample in the poll is D+2. Nationally, Obama leads by 2-3 points, but, in the critical swing states, Romney now has the edge.

Each candidate leads in states considered "safe" for their party. In safe GOP states, Romney leads by 8. In safe Democrat states, Obama leads by a massive 22 points. But, in the more numerous and more important "toss up" states, Romney leads by 4, hitting the critical 50% threshold. 

In the slightly different category of "battleground" states identified by Politico, Romney leads by 2, 49-47. Romney's lead over Obama is powered primarily by his edge with independents. Romney leads Obama by 4 among the important swing voters. By 11 points, these voters think Romney would do better on the economy than Obama, 51-40. 

Romney also has a big edge with middle class families, who prefer him over Obama by 15 points, 56-41. 

The media has anxiously portrayed tonight's debate as a critical moment for Romney to propel his campaign into the final stretch. They have built their analysis around the false narrative that Romney is losing ground against Obama. The Politico poll, however, shows that it is Obama who is losing ground in the campaign. The President needs a knock-out punch tonight.

Via: Breitbart Continue Reading...

FLASHBACK: JournoList plotted to kill Jeremiah Wright story in 2008

Now that The Daily Caller has uncovered and published video of President Barack Obama’s “other race speech,” liberal media figures are once again trying to quell coverage of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright story — just like in 2008.

Records obtained by TheDC in mid-2010 showed that “at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate,” after ABC News’ Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos asked then-Sen. Obama about his controversial reverend during an April 2008 debate.

“Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage,” TheDC’s Jonathan Strong reported.

Among those who were uncovered to be part of the plan to quell Wright coverage were Richard Kim of the Nation, Michael Tomasky of the Guardian, Thomas Schaller of the Baltimore Sun, Holly Yeager of the Columbia Journalism Review, Slate magazine contributor David Greenberg, columnist Joe Conason, Chris Hayes of the Nation, and Spencer Ackerman — then of the Washington Independent.

Strong reported that Ackerman even once “urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, ‘Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.’”

Before TheDC even released this new video, the Democratic Party tried to discredit it by citing JournoList members like the Huffington Post’s Sam Stein and Ben Smith — now the editor of BuzzFeed but formerly of Politico — commenting on the video before they had seen it.

Via: Daily Caller

Continue Reading...

MEDIA POLLS: THE NEWEST NEGATIVE CAMPAIGN AD

Over the years, I've generally had little patience when partisans make the "polls are wrong" argument. I've usually found it to be the last refuge of campaigns which were clearly struggling. Sure, individual polls can be wrong, and some can occasionally produce a crazy outlier, but a collective average of polling produces a roughly accurate snapshot of the state of a race. This year, however, is different. The overwhelming majority of media polling this election employ such absurd assumptions about turnout this November that they not only misrepresent the presidential race, they are actively distorting it. I also believe it is intentional. 

In 2008, the electorate that elected Barack Obama was 39% Democrat, 32% GOP and 29% Independent. This is what we call a D+7 electorate. Obama defeated McCain by 7 points, the same margin. In 2004, the electorate was 37% Democrat, 37% Republican, and 26% Independent, in other words D/R +0. Bush defeated John Kerry by 3 points nationally. 

Yet, virtually every big media poll is based on a model in which Democrats equal or increase their share of the electorate over 2008. Beyond simple common sense, there are many reasons this won't happen. The Dem vote in '08 was the largest in decades. It came after fatigue of eight years of GOP control, two unpopular wars, a charming Democrat candidate who was the Chauncy Gardner of politics, a vessel who could hold everyone's personal dreams and hopes for a politician. It was a perfect storm for Democrats. 

None of the factors driving Democrat turnout in '08 exist today. Recent polls from AP, Politico and the daily tracking polls from Rasmussen and Gallup, all of which assume relatively lower Democrat turnout in November, show the race essentially tied. Only those polls showing an electorate with equal or greater numbers of Democrats show Obama with any sizable lead. 

Yet, it's these polls that are driving the political narrative. Every day the media launches a number of stories about Romney's "struggling" campaign. They cite anonymous GOP sources who wring their hands that the campaign is losing ground. The only real evidence of this, however, are the polls which heavily over-sample Democrat voters. Without these skewed polls, the media's narrative would be untenable. 

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

Israeli Government Tweets Article Critical Of Obama…

An official Israeli government Twitter account linked to an article critical of President Obama in a Tuesday tweet, in another sign on ongoing differences between the Obama administration and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government.

"Israeli official: Obama doesn’t give us same sense Clinton did that he’ll be there if things go bad - Times of #Israel," the government press office's official Twitter account wrote.

The Times of Israel article it links quotes an anonymous government official attacking Obama's policies towards the region, while simultaneously praising former President Bill Clinton.

“Clinton made us feel like he had our back," the official told the newspaper about the 1990s Camp David accords. "When we made concessions that were greater than anything an Israeli government had ever offered, we felt he’d be there if things went bad. Would he have been there? I don’t know. But it felt that way, and it put us in a different frame of mind. President Obama doesn’t give us the same sense that he’d be there.”

In a statement, the Israeli embassy in Washington said that the tweet did not constitute an endorsement — something that the Twitter account makes clear with a disclaimer that "tweet/RT does not constitute endorsement of view."

"The GPO distributes links to various articles to members of the press community and does not represent the government policy," the embassy told POLITICO. "The quote in this article doesn't reflect the position of the government of Israel. Israel deeply appreciates President Obama's commitment to its security and the superb defense cooperation between our two countries."

Still, the anonymous Israeli official's take on the current security situation contradicts the official line of the Netanyahu government. On the record, the Netanyahu government has said that Obama has given the Jewish state every security assurance on Iran's nuclear weapons program.

"President Obama has said that he’s determined to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons and I appreciate that and I respect that.  I think implicit in that is that if you’re determined to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, it means you’ll act before they get nuclear weapons," Netanyahu said recently on NBC's "Meet the Press."

Pelosi claims 60 percent chance she’ll return as speaker despite polls to the contrary

In the end Pelosi will be the big loser and so will the party 

Nancy Pelosi told reporters Friday that she has a 60 percent chance of retaking the speaker’s gavel from John Boehner come January due to Republican plans to restructure Medicare for those 55 and younger.

“The momentum is coming our way,” Politico quoted Pelosi as saying.

Yet Pelosi’s rhetoric fails to square with polling data suggesting Democrats may pick up four seats and fall far short of the 25 seats Democrats need to reclaim the majority.

“[O]verall conclusions are pretty similar — modest Democratic gains, but continued Republican control,” Kyle Klondik, House editor for Larry Sabato’s “Crystal Ball” writes.

Other political pundits see similar wishful thinking in Pelosi’s comment.

“With the economy soft and 25 seats needed to retake the chamber, Democrats face considerable odds,” theBoston Globe reported Thursday . “Even as polls show public approval of Congress sinking to an all-time low, the vast majority of incumbents will win easy reelection.”

Pelosi also repeated her contention that Romney will go down in flames against President Obama.

“I don’t think there’s any way on the face of the earth that Mitt Romney wins the presidential,” Pelosi said.

Via Red Alert Politics

Continue Reading...

POLITICO: 'OCCUPY UNMASKED' BREITBART'S 'LAST MAJOR PIECE OF WORK'

Today, Politico interviewed the two of the chief creators, along with Andrew Breitbart, of Occupy Unmasked, the new documentary examining the origins, motives, and effects of Occupy Wall Street. Citizens United President David Bossie and writer and director Stephen K. Bannon sat down with Politico’s Patrick Gavin, who rightly called Occupy Unmasked Andrew Breitbart’s “last major piece of work.”

The film, says Gavin, “portrays the occupy movements in such cities as New York, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., as dirty and dangerous encampments that exploited the grievances of average Americans.” Bossie described the movement as “this very well-organized machine, very much the hard-core left, the anarchists movement,” which “utilized the people who kind of felt put upon, or that their American dream or their hope of an American dream had been taken away: College kids that weren’t finding work, middle age folks who were out of work for a long period of time.”

Bannon added that the attitude prevalent in Occupy Unmasked – what he called “the fighting spirit of Andrew Breitbart” – is missing from the political debate today. “You just need that,” he added. “He was a unique guy at a unique sense of time. The conservative movement has really never had a guy who was that physical and that magnetic …. We’re really missing that.”

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

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. denies premeditation report in Libya attack

A U.S. official told POLITICO: “There's no intelligence indicating that the attack in Benghazi was premeditated.”

The newspaper, The Independent, plastered its cover with the headline, “Revealed: inside story of US envoy’s assassination,” and reported inside: “The killings of the US ambassador to Libya and three of his staff were likely to have been the result of a serious and continuing security breach … American officials believe the attack was planned."

The article continued: "According to senior diplomatic sources, the U.S. State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and ‘lockdown’, under which movement is severely restricted."

Shawn Turner, spokesman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, emailed: “This is absolutely wrong. We are not aware of any actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent.”

(Also on POLITICO: Top lawmakers briefed on Libya attack)

The Drudge Report gave the story banner, red-type, siren treatment, with a photo of President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: “PAPER: U.S. WARNED OF EMBASSY ATTACK BUT DID NOTHING.”

Via: Politico

Continue Reading...

Biden says 'I' more than any convention speaker

BIDEN SPEAKS “I,” “I’ve,” “I’m,” “I’ll,” “my,” “mine” and “me.”

Over the past two weeks, politicians at both the Democratic and Republican conventions spoke of health care policy, taxation and every other hot-button issue under the sun.

They also, it turns out, talked about themselves. A lot

Using the transcripts produced by Federal News Service, POLITICO examined the speeches of the conventions’ most prominent speakers and counted the number of instances the following words were employed: “I,” “I’ve,” “I’m,” “I’ll,” “my,” “mine” and “me.”

The results? Joe Biden took first place by a wide margin. With his primetime — and personal — speech, the vice president racked up 135 mentions of himself. He was followed by first lady Michelle Obama, with 112. Mitt Romney took top honors among Republicans with 91 mentions of himself, as compared to 103 for his opponent, President Barack Obama.

Other notable speakers — and top self-mentioners — included Chris Christie (73), Ann Romney (67), Clint Eastwood (63), Paul Ryan (62), Mike Huckabee (56) and Marco Rubio (47), Julian Castro (43), Elizabeth Warren (37), Charlie Crist (33) and Lilly Ledbetter (32).

Despite Bill Clinton’s stem-winding speech in Charlotte, he clocked in with a relatively modest 30 mentions of self.

Via: POLITICO

Continue Reading...

Wasserman Schultz Says She’s Not Detested By The American Public: “I’m The President’s Most Prominent Surrogate”…

TAMPA, Fla. — Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz said Thursday that “Obama’s Last Stand” the e-book published in a collaboration between POLITICO and Random House “had about the same credibility as a National Enquirer story.”

She was responding to a question about the book’s claim that some within the Obama campaign had doubts about Wasserman Schultz’s effectiveness as a campaign surrogate.

POLITICO reporter Glenn Thrush reported that a commissioned poll by David Binder put Wasserman Schultz dead last in a ranking of the popularity of the Obama campaign’s top surrogates — behind all the familiar faces on the Obama campaign trail.

“With all respect to Glenn Thrush, his e-book was, had about the same credibility as a National Enquirer story. There wasn’t a shred of truth to a lot of what I saw,”Wasserman Schultz told POLITICO. “I didn’t read his book, but the clips that I’ve seen have no resemblance to the relationship that I have with the campaign. 

I’m the president’s most prominent surrogate and have proudly been asked by the president to chair the DNC, and look forward to the next 68 days and I’m sure that we can bring him across the finish line, which is what he asked me to help him do.”

Via: Weasel Zippers

White House Hasn’t Released Biden Transcripts in Months

No, not his college transcripts . . .

The Los Angeles Times has a story today about Joe Biden’s lack of verbal dexterity:

Most candidates give the same stump speech over and over, putting reporters if not the audience to sleep. But during any Biden speech, there might be a dozen moments to make press handlers cringe, and prompt reporters to turn to each other with amusement and confusion.
Any such moment can be quickly edited down, posted online and relayed to blogs and inboxes — and some will stick, but many more are just ignored or saved for a Biden blooper reel.

Joe Biden’s speeches are apparently so off-message that the White House “press office has not released a complete transcript of any Biden speech, whether campaign or official, in more than two months. Transcripts for all of Obama’s speeches, however, are distributed quickly, as they are for many of the first lady’s events.”

This comes after news broke that Joe Biden’s aides have tried on at least two occasions to edit press pool reports, which are used to inform national reporters. From Politico’s story, “Mission Impossible: Managing Joe Biden”:

But on two occasions during Biden’s Virginia trip, his staff sought to have certain elements in the reports highlighted while reporters drafted them and discussed the contents with the reporters after the summaries had been sent but before they had before sent to the broader media.

Appearing on MSNBC, the author of the piece, Jonathan Martin, said, “The Biden staff is determined to police him and to really save him from himself.”

Via: The National Review