Showing posts with label 2012 Elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2012 Elections. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Quotables: On Election 2012

The first instinct of some will be to blame the voters — to say they just don’t “get” it — or to imply the “takers” simply outnumber the “makers.”

After all, Americans should have been outraged by what happened in Benghazi. Americans should have been outraged by the increasing debt — and by the fact that the unemployment rate actually rose during Obama’s first term.

But it is the job of politicians and parties and movements to persuade Americans to buy into their vision. And they clearly aren’t buying what Republicans are selling. It’s time for the GOP to do some serious soul searching.

# # #

That reality presents a challenge to the GOP and to conservatives.  We do not need to change our values, but we do need to find ways to communicate them in an engaging and welcoming manner.  We need to think creatively about big issues, philosophy, and how we can relate conservative values to the needs of a wider range of voters.  Conservatism cannot become constrictionism, or the realignment will continue, and it will become ever more difficult to win national elections.

This will require a new set of national leaders for the Republican Party and conservatism.  We need men and women who can think creatively, produce a positive agenda that isn’t defined by an oppositional nature, and who can eloquently communicate that agenda and the values that drive it.  That should be our focus over the next two years before we start thinking about who to nominate as the party’s presidential nominee — and if done properly, that process will naturally produce the right leader for conservatism.  And if that is done properly, too, perhaps we’ll be in position for another realignment four years from now.

# # #

While I am not the very first person to question the credibility of everything I hear in the news media, having once worked for a polling institute and having commissioned several high profile national polls myself, I understand that polls, while hardly perfect, should not generally be thought of as part of the biased news propaganda machine (which is why, ironically, the Fox News poll is often not at all favorable to conservatives).

But because conservatives are understandably so distrustful of everything they are told by the media, it becomes easy for them to fall into the trap of assuming that polls showing Obama winning are inherently flawed. They are even able to come up with enough real numbers to make arguments which appear to be based in intellect, even though they are really being driven by emotion and self interest.

This phenomenon was made even more pervasive because to the conservative political junkies who spend their lives absorbing every possible news item with the assumption that it is simply not possible to comprehend how anyone would vote to reelect Obama. This fed into their fervent belief that the polls must simply be wrong (as did their forgetting that, when nearly everyone votes in a swing state, it really doesn't matter how much more enthusiastic one side is than the other).

# # #

On the bright side, Barack Obama now inherits the problems created by Barack Obama, including Obamacare.  We’ll know a lot about how he’s going to approach those challenges by what happens in the next two months.  Will he be a doctrinaire Socialist Marxist progressive, or will he tack a few degrees right in order to save himself from the ignominy of being known as the president who presided over America’s suicide?

If he proposes that the Bush-era tax rates stay as-is before they expire January 1, we’ll know that he understands a little something about the nature of capitalism, and there will be cause for optimism.  If he lets them expire—well, fasten your seat belts, assume crash position, and brush up on your Greek.

My own thoughts:

We cannot continue traveling the path that we’re on. The entitlement culture must be changed and people must understand that no country can borrow and spend its way to prosperity. If we’re going to get out of this mess, then Americans of all walks, all flavors and all colors are going to have to trust one another. We are a divided people today, and a divided America cannot succeed, cannot prosper and will not last much longer.

Last night’s election was a blow to Republicans. To conservatives—and never think that these are the same animals—it was simply a setback that can and will be overcome. The non white male constituencies that reelected Barack Obama to his second term are capable of embracing conservative values, but only if those values are communicated in a way that is welcoming and non-threatening.

By its nature, conservatism is an optimistic political philosophy. The beauty of being a conservative is simply this—no matter how bad things are, no matter how many forces are arrayed against you, you will prevail. Conservatives never lose their optimism, their confidence or their sense of humor. A conservative always seeks to improve his condition by his own devices, while laughing at himself and always looking forward. 

It will be a challenge to communicate the values of self-reliance, self-governance and self-esteem to people convinced by the left and the media that conservatism is racist, hateful and exclusive. Conservatism is none of that. This is a challenge that must and will be met, or the quip about Greece from Joel Engel becomes a real threat. 

The path is hard, but we can do it. We have to.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.

Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Early exit polling data are in, and…

http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/o-grim.jpgWe have some exclusive shocking news to share with IBCR fans nationwide.

  • 100% of those who entered the polling booth exited.
  • In the state of Alabama, 54% identify themselves as bammers. Barney gets 27% and the other 19% are fans of Princess Vespa, daughter of Roland, King of the Druids.
  • A majority of those not declaring themselves Bama fans believe Nick Saban grows football players like Saruman grew orcs in the bowels of Isengard.
  • Among Auburn fans, a stark minority voted for retaining current head football coach Gene Chizik. Only 28% think Frank gets another chance to wear the barber shirt on the sidelines.
  • Nationally, @LSUFreek is the favorite farker on the innerwebs.
  • @Banditref is a rising favorite parody filmmaker among a solid majority of voters.
  • Gary Danielson is tolerated by a plurality of voters. Both Verne Lundquist and Tim Brando are clowns.
  • Alabama is a solid favorite to repeat as BCS Champions in a historic run.
  • However, if the BCS included a game of Quiddatch, Chip Kelly’s Oregon Ducks win in a landslide.
  • Our polling analysis indicates that Anakin Skywalker wouldn’t have turned to the dark side if Sara Jean Underwood played Padme.

Go vote. And if you bump into an exit pollster, tell them you voted for Dave because he is da bombz.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.

Monday, October 1, 2012

Non-sports: Univision’s expose’ of Fast and Furious is an unmitigated disaster for the Obama administration

Mash here. Operation Fast and Furious is a scandal that US media outlets have largely ignored. Outside of the LA Times and one CBS reporter, no one has really focused on the plan to allow thousands of high-end weapons to cross the border between the US and Mexico, ostensibly to track the weapons and catch Mexican drug cartel members.

The plan was an unmitigated disaster and to date, possibly thousands of Mexicans have died in hails of gunfire that came from US made weapons. Democrat talking heads and their major media mouthpieces have tried to claim that this was a program begun under the Bush administration, but Univision completely destroys that meme in an investigative piece that aired last night.

According to documents they obtained from their own sources, Univision says that the Obama Administration lost nearly and order of magnitude more weapons than the Bush-era pilot project initially tried to track.

Here is an ABC News segment from Univision’s bombshell last night, with English subtitles.
Video removed due to scripting errors from the host
So, why is this such a program for the Obama Administration?

Simply put, Mexicans are scared witless of the drug cartels, who are better funded, better armed and better trained than the Mexican Federales. The notion that the US Government would allow thousands of weapons to fall into the hands of these thugs is appalling and infuriating to Mexicans and Mexican-Americans living in the US.

Obama is thought to to have a lead pipe lock on the Hispanic vote. Maybe he still wins a majority of them, but those who have lost family, friends and former neighbors to the violence in Mexico are legitimately outraged.

Would you vote to reelect an incumbent whose actions let your friends and countrymen die in gruesome massacres like the one shown above? Blood in the streets is always a problem for an incumbent. This incumbent has a big one, and the largest Spanish language network on the planet just exposed it.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.


Sunday, July 1, 2012

Sources: Alabama Senators Jeff Sessions and Richard Shelby considering retirement after 2012 elections

image Multiple independent sources tell IBCR that both Alabama Senators Jeff Sessions and Richard Shelby are “seriously” considering retirement following the 2012 elections.

Sources in Montgomery, Mobile and Birmingham indicate that both of the long-serving Senators are considering stepping aside, with Sessions being the most likely to announce his decision.

Sessions, first elected to the US Senate in 1996, has been one of the most outspoken and fervent conservatives in the upper chamber. He rose to the rank of Captain in the US Army and served as the US Attorney for the Southern District of Alabama, then served as the Attorney General for the the state of Alabama before being elected to the Senate.

Sources also indicate—albeit with a “50/50” degree of confidence—that Sessions is on Mitt Romney’s short list as a running mate in the 2012 election.

Sessions’ strong conservative credentials and deep popularity in the southeastern US are seen as positive attributes as a running mate, and his military and law enforcement expertise are seen as providing balance to Romney’s private sector and business acumen.

Shelby was originally elected as a Democrat in 1986. He famously switched to the Republicans following the 1994 “Glorious Revolution,” when the GOP gained the majority in Congress midway through President Bill Clinton's first term. He was re-elected in 1998 and has faced no significant electoral opposition since.

Both US Senators have been strong conservative voices in the Senate.

In the 2010 elections, Republicans won a majority of both the Alabama Senate and the House of Representatives as well as the Governor’s office and all other state-wide offices of significance. Even many local seats switched hands and provided the Alabama GOP with the best “ground game” since the Reconstruction Era.

With Alabama safely in red hands for at least the foreseeable future, both of the highest profile statewide elected representatives see the 2012 through 2016 elections as opportunities for fresh faces to emerge.

Sources indicate that current Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange and former GOP gubernatorial candidate Bradley Byrne are quietly assembling campaign apparatus for runs at either or both seats.

Developing…

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.

Thursday, June 28, 2012

SCOTUS just handed the White House to Mitt Romney

Watch former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney’s response to the US Supreme Court’s opinion upholding the key part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka, Obamacare.



Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, which held that Congress could not use the commerce clause of the US Constitution to compel individuals to participate in a market for any good or service, but that it could impose a tax on those who didn’t. Despite the government’s position in court and in selling PPACA on the grounds that the mandate wasn’t a tax, the Court found that it was.

Which means the passage of Obamacare was a fraud. Here’s Barack Obama, vehemently denying that a penalty to be collected via the Internal Revenue Service is a tax:



Barack Obama has just become a one-term President.

Why? Four reasons:

1. Obama now has to defend the largest tax increase on the middle class in the history of middle class tax increases. Poor people won’t have to pay the penalty tax and the wealthy can easily afford health insurance.

2. Obama can’t run against the Supreme Court now. John Roberts joined the liberal wing of the Court and authored the majority opinion. So much for the “five Republicans in black robes taking away your healthcare” campaign meme.

3. A clear majority of the American people deeply oppose Obamacare without realizing that it was a tax increase.

4. Public revolt. The Supreme Court decision puts Obamacare right back on the public’s radar screen. It was the TARP, auto company bailouts and stimulus spending that gave rise to the Tea Party movement. In late 2009 and early 2010, the Taxed Enough Already Party was a loosely organized grassroots movement. By Election Day 2012, it had morphed into a political force that not only swept Democrats out of the House of Representatives, it ended Democrat rule in many states as well.

In 2012, Tea Party activists are now well organized. The takeover of so many state and local offices now gives Republicans a ground game they’ve never had before, and Obamacare is back on the menu.

Obama’s not only going to lose his reelection bid, it could be the biggest ass kicking since 1984.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.

Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Non-Sports: Union households in Wisconsin handed Walker the win yesterday

You could make this statement about any group that represented a significant portion of the electorate in yesterday’s Wisconsin recall election. This is especially true when some part of that group breaks one way or the other. You need not get a majority; only enough to make the difference.

When the key voting bloc is the one responsible for having the recall election called in the first place, it’s the height of cruel political irony.

The data show that had union households marched lockstep with their leadership and rejected the Governor accused of everything but eating the firstborn children of public employee union members, Milwaukee’s Tom Barrett would be making the news show rounds and the media would be trumpeting how the election was a victory for labor, Obama and the Democrat Party.

It was not to be, however.

In the screen snippet below, The numbers for Walker are on the left, Barrett in the middle and an independent candidate on the far right.

image

When 100% of the precincts were in, a total of 2,496,300 votes were cast for the two candidates, with 1,334,430 going to Walker and 1,161,870 going to Barrett.

The exit poll data show that the electorate consisted of approximately 33% union households and 38% of them voted for Walker.

Doing the math: 0.33 x 0.38 x 2,496,300 = 167,338

If those voters had gone with Barrett, the outcome would have been 1,329,208 votes for the Democrat challenger and 1,167,092 for Walker, representing a nearly 180-degree difference from the actual outcome.

So, if you happen to live in the Badger State and bump into a union member today, be sure and say THANKS.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

What’s next for Bob Riley: A 2012 run at the White House?

image Published today in the Mobile Press-Register, a story from George Talbot discussing the buzz about outgoing Alabama Governor Bob Riley’s plans for the future. Five words that accurately describe the former rancher, Alabama business school graduate, US Congressman, and two-term Governor: Folksy.  Intelligent. Capable manager. Staunch conservative. Political opportunist.

There’s one more that friends and political observers like to toss around: Reaganesque.  This one fits primarily because Riley’s political interests were sparked by the charismatic President who served from 1981 through 1988. Riley was first elected to Congress in the 1996 election, served a self-imposed three-term limit and left in 2003.

His 2002 election as Governor was by a 3,000 vote margin, the closest in the history of the state.

Riley’s reputation as a capable manager is impeccable. His handling of the Hurricanes Ivan and Katrina disasters was praised by local and federal emergency management officials, and his management of the Gulf Oil Spill crisis of 2010 was similarly lauded. To this day, Riley remains a fierce antagonist of current Oil Spill Claims Czar Kenneth Feinberg and his handling of compensation payments to affected residents and business owners.

At 66, Riley says he’s still got some “racing” in him:


A national run for Riley, 66, would in some ways be easy. His children are grown and his schedule is open. Experts are predicting the Republican primary could swell to include a dozen or more candidates. In such a large field, the race essentially becomes a beauty contest.

Early voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina would quickly narrow the contest to three or four candidates. Make the cut, and you could be on the fast track to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

For now, however, the road leads home to Ashland.

“I’m tired. I’m ready for a break,” Riley said between meetings in New York. “Patsy told me I need to do something, or else I’ll get bored. And I told her I’d like to try doing nothing awhile and just see.”

He is tinkering with the idea of a cross-country motorcycle trip -- perhaps to Alaska -- in springtime. The long ride would allow him to clear his mind and make a decision about his future. But for now there’s still work to be done.

“I had an old track coach who taught me to run through the tape, not to it,” he said. “I’ve still got a little race left to run.”


Wait. What? A road trip to Alaska?  What could he possibly hope to achieve by visiting Alaska?

Should Riley decide to enter the race, he’ll almost certainly be up against a formidable opponent in the form of neighboring Southern Governor, Mississippi’s Haley Barbour, whose potential 2012 run was analyzed here, back in June 2010. Or perhaps Barbour would be content to team up with Riley and use his considerable political network to give the Reaganesque Riley a leg up in the 2012 beauty contest.

 

 

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Alvin Greene for President!

 Go, Alvin! GO!

In an interview outside a Columbia, S.C. courthouse – where he was being tried for allegedly showing pornographic material to a college-aged girl – Greene said he would sue the Columbia Free-Times newspaper if he read an account of the legal proceedings.
Instead Greene suggested the media focus on his presidential potential before claiming to be the "greatest person ever."
“I’m the next president,” Greene said. “I’ll be 35 … just before November, so I was born to be president. I’m the man. I’m the man. I’m the man. Greene’s the man. I’m the man. I’m the greatest person ever. I was born to be president. I’m the man, I’m the greatest individual ever.”
According the Free-Times account, Greene's lawyers were supposed to show to court at 9:30 a.m. and still had not arrived at the court by 2:30 p.m. Greene indicated he wanted to plead "not guilty" to the charges as well as a jury trial, which Assistant Solicitor Andrew Rogers said would not begin until after the holidays.

Why is his defense team not using an insanity plea?
Maybe it’s because he’s completely serious. Hey, he managed to not only get on the ballot for the Democrat US Senate primary, he won the nomination.  Handily.
Who’s to say he couldn’t put together a national network of fundraisers, caucus goers and primary voters and make a serious run at Obama in the 2012 primary?
Heh…

Monday, November 8, 2010

Oh My: Did George W. Bush say Sarah Palin isn’t qualified to be President?

From the New York Daily News comes this bombshell of a revelation. Given the passion of the former Alaska governor and Tea Party power broker’s followers, this is the equivalent of sticking a broom handle into a hornets’ nest.


WASHINGTON - Two years of retirement haven't dulled George W. Bush's political zest - and President Obama and Sarah Palin are among his under-the-radar targets.

The 43rd President has told friends the ex-Alaska governor isn't qualified to be President and criticizes Arizona Sen. John McCain for putting Palin on the 2008 GOP ticket and handing her a national platform.

"Naming Palin makes Bush think less of McCain as a man," a Republican official familiar with Bush's thinking told the Daily News.

"He thinks McCain ran a lousy campaign with an unqualified running mate and destroyed any chance of winning by picking Palin."


I have reservations about the accuracy of this report. While Bush and McCain are superficially friends, the two are old political rivals dating back to the 2000 Presidential primary campaign. But Bush, like his father, is unlikely to question McCain’s “manhood” by criticizing the choice of running mate, and is even more unlikely to have allowed comments questioning Palin’s qualifications to reach the public ear, whether he holds that opinion or not. Questions about the quality of the McCain 2008 Presidential campaign are equally suspect.

The 2008 election was Obama’s to lose, not McCain’s to win. It wouldn’t have mattered if McCain had a solid gold campaign staff and strategy, the mainstream media had Obama already penciled in as the 44th President of the United States. McCain’s choice of Palin for Vice President had no impact at all, if exit polling examined after the election are accurate.

This appears to be a political “false flag” operation, designed to stir up an otherwise united Republican front going into the lame duck session of Congress. While the Palinistas are guaranteed to get fired up about this, perhaps its best if few take the bait.

Bush is certain to be asked about this as he kicks off his book tour this week. Stay tuned—my best is that he denies ever making the comments and questions the source of the material.

Thursday, November 4, 2010

Oh My: Obama trails Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney in 2012 hypothetical

image In a new CNN/Opinion Research poll released this morning, President Barack Obama trails the two putative leaders for the GOP 2012 presidential nomination. He trails former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee by 52-44 and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney by 50-45.  Those are troubling numbers so soon into the still fluid 2012 race, because both of the two top GOP hopefuls are already hitting 50% figures.  Against Sarah Palin however, Obama would win 52-44.

You have to dig a little into the CNN.com article to find the numbers, as the piece initially sounds as if Obama’s sitting well for 2012, then starts off the matchup discussions with the numbers versus Palin.


In a possible general election showdown, Obama leads Palin 52-44 percent among all registered voters.

"Looking ahead to 2012, it may be too early to count Barack Obama out, particularly if Sarah Palin is his opponent," said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "The former Alaska governor gets a lot of attention, but she is in third place when Republicans are asked to pick a presidential nominee, and in a hypothetical matchup with Obama she is arguably the weakest candidate of the top-tier GOP hopefuls."

In a hypothetical 2012 matchup, Huckabee leads Obama 52-44 percent, while Romney has a 50-45 point advantage, which is within the poll's sampling error. Obama holds a 49-47 percent margin over Gingrich.


The poll, conducted prior to Tuesday’s midterm elections, may have some sampling bias issues.  Of the registered voters sampled, 500 identified themselves as Republican or leaning Republican and 453 as Democrats or leaning Democrat.  That’s probably oversampling Republicans a bit, so the gaudy numbers of Obama vs Huckabee and Obama vs Romney are probably a little too rosy for the GOP. But by the same token, if they are oversampling the GOP, it shows just how steep the hill is for Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich.

And given the sour mood of the electorate just before the election, these results may simply reflect an attitude of “Anybody BUT Barack Obama, EXCEPT Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich.”

We’ll see.  The fluidity of the 2012 candidate pool will start to solidify right after Christmas.

Sunday, October 31, 2010

Looking ahead to 2012 in the U.S. Senate

The New York Times has a short piece today, looking ahead to the 2012 election cycle and the U.S. Senate seats currently held by each party.  The outlook for the Democrat Party for Tuesday’s 2010 midterm looks positively rosy, compared to their prospects in 2012:


The results of this year’s Senate elections are not even in the books, but senators and political analysts are already looking ahead to 2012, when the Senate math adds up to a daunting prospect for Democrats.

The numbers are stark. Democrats will be forced to defend 24 seats in the 2012 election, including those of two independents aligned with them, compared with just 9 seats for Republicans.

Even if Republicans fall short of capturing control of the Senate on Tuesday, Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, has expressed confidence that his party will finish the job in 2012. The numbers seem to bolster his case.


Unfortunately, the Times article doesn’t get into the numbers.  It touches on a few key races but doesn’t define the whole playing field.  That gives me an opportunity to do so.  In 2012, the Democrats will attempt to defend the following incumbents:

  • Dianne Feinstein, CA
  • Tom Carper, DE
  • Bill Nelson, FL
  • Daniel Akaka, HI
  • Ben Cardin, MD
  • Debbie Stabenow, MI
  • Amy Klobuchar, MN
  • Claire McCaskill, MO
  • Jon Tester, MT
  • Ben Nelson, NE
  • Bob Menendez, NJ
  • Kirsten Gillibrand, NY
  • Jeff Bingaman, NM
  • Kent Conrad, ND
  • Sherrod Brown, OH
  • Bob Casey, Jr., PA
  • Sheldon Whitehouse, RI
  • Jim Webb, VA
  • Maria Cantwell, WA
  • Open, WV
  • Herb Kohl, WI

In addition, there are two Independents who caucus with the Democrats.  These are:

  • Bernie Sanders, VT
  • Joe Lieberman, CT

Unless my 1st grade math teacher was wrong, or unless I’m missing someone, this makes 23, not 24, seats to be defended by those who are or vote with the Democrats. There are two seats being decided in a 2010 special election, NY and WV.  Those two seats will be up for grabs again in 2012.

Early betting would probably have Bill Nelson (FL), Stabenow (MI), McCaskill (MO), Tester (MT), Ben Nelson (NE), Conrad (ND), Brown (OH), Casey (PA), Webb (VA) and Kohl (WI) as the most endangered incumbents.

By contrast, the Republicans will attempt to defend the following incumbents:

  • Jon Kyl, AZ
  • Richard Lugar, IN
  • Olympia Snowe, ME
  • Scott Brown, MS
  • Roger Wicker, MS
  • John Ensign, NV
  • Bob Corker, TN
  • Kay Bailey Hutchison, TX
  • Orrin Hatch, UT
  • John Barrasso, WY

I’m counting 10 here.  Are you?  Are we really that much better at counting toes than the New York Times? At any rate, only Scott Brown (MA) is from a traditionally Democrat state and would be the most competitive of the races for incumbent seats.

Hutchison (TX) still hasn’t said whether she’ll seek reelection.  If she decides to retire, Democrats would probably run hard for that seat. I think the effort would be futile. Snowe (ME), Ensign (NV) and Hatch (UT) are also likely targets for conservative/Tea Party primary challenges. Of the three, Snowe losing a primary would put that seat at the highest risk of flipping. Depending on the outcome of the special election in West Virginia, the GOP might also be defending that seat, and it too would be a high value target for the Democrats.

I’m counting ten races that will be highly competitive and difficult for the Democrats to defend, and maybe two competitive races that would be a challenge to hold for the Republicans.

If the GOP takes say, eight Senate seats on Tuesday night and then takes eight more in 2012, it would give the GOP a 57-43 majority in the Senate.  If conservative Democrats like the Nelsons in Florida and Nebraska and Tester in Montana can be persuaded to invoke cloture, a lot of good work can be done dismantling the structure the left wing has assembled in the 111th Congress.

Is it too early too look ahead to 2012?  Perhaps.  But it’s still fun to speculate while pointing out that liberals—like the staff at the New York Times—are bad at math.