Out With The Old. In With The New.

ImageLast week should have been a wake up call for the GOP.  They received more positive press than they have in a very long time on the heels of Senator Rand Paul’s 13 hour ‘fillibuster’ in which he ranted and raved against the vague policy of the use drones on American soil.

Standing with Senator Paul and lending their assistance to the filibuster were a couple of the newer members of the GOP Senate.  Most notably Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz.  Young Senators who seem unafraid to take on the establishment.  The next day the ‘establishment’ was markedly upset and doing what they could to disparage the younger Senators stand against an administration who felt the need to not only not define a very dangerous policy, but who refused to answer simple questions regarding it when asked.  I am of course speaking of Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham.

What, I asked, would drive 2 influential Senators such as McCain and Graham go on the offensive against members of their own party who had taken a very popular stance and received more positive press for the Republicans than they have had in a couple of years?  Could it be jealousy?  McCain and Graham were both at a dinner with President Obama at the time of the filibuster reportedly trying to iron out a compromise to end sequester spending cuts.  Were the established GOP lead dogs upset that they were upstaged by their younger counterparts?  Whatever the reason for their attacks and name calling the day following the filibuster one thing became clear.  The old dogs need to retire to a shady spot under the porch if the GOP is to ever shed the “Old white man’s party” perception that it has. 

Youth and newness can be a good thing for a party that needs to do some serious reputation rebuilding after years of a war of rhetoric for the public perception that they have been losing and losing badly.  I find it reprehensible for Senators with the clout within the party that McCain and Graham have to try and make illegitimate the best positive polling the party has had in recent memory.  I have to wonder.  Are they dumb, senile or so full of themselves that they feel the need to take shots at their own when the spotlight is shone elsewhere within the party?

Regardless of the reasoning for their name calling outbursts, what happened with the filibuster should serve as notice the the GOP leadership.  There is a youthful movement within the party.  That movement is part constitutionalist, part libertarian, part tea party and part conservative.  If you don’t come to grips with it and learn to embrace what it brings to the table in regards to helping erase the perception of the ‘old white man’s party’ then be prepared to stare at the outside of the White House for a very long time.

Advertisements

Republicans Announce the Theme and Speakers for the Third Night of the Convention

   Bookmark and Share   The third night of the Republican National Convention offer a powerful presentation of the promised path for prosperity that can result from the Romney-Ryan policies that the G.O.P. will lining up behind in November.  Behind the backdrop of the evenings theme……”We Can Change It”, Republican powerhouses such as Condoleezza Rice, Jeb Bush, John Thune, Puerto Rico’s Governor Luis Fortuno, and Florida’s Attorney General Pam Biondi are scheduled to speak on the conventions’ third night and demonstrate exactly how “we can change it”.

According to TNC Chairman Reince Priebus “We want to remind Americans that we don’t have to settle for four more years of high unemployment, low pay and deep debt,” He added  “We will devote Wednesday night to showing the country that Mitt Romney’s ‘Plan for a Stronger Middle Class’ will restore our country as the best place in the world to find a job, start a business or hire a worker.”

Priebus said the Wednesday night program “will show that the Romney approach is both optimistic and achievable.”  The Romney plan will work toward energy independence, ensure that middle-class Americans have the skills to succeed, pursue trade that works for America, cut the deficit and champion small business.

“Having suffered through the longest sustained period of high unemployment since the Great Depression, Americans already know we can do better,” said Republican Convention CEO William Harris.  “Next Wednesday, Republicans will lay out Mitt Romney’s plan to do just that.”

Also speaking on Wednesday night will be Tim Pawlenty, Ohio Senator Rob Portman, and ending the night will Congressman Paul Ryan.

GOPElephantRight.jpg GOP Elephant Right image by kempite Stars01.gif picture by kempiteGOPElephantLeft.jpg GOP Elephant Left image by kempite

Wednesday Convention Schedule

7:30 p.m.: Convention convenes

  • Call to order
  • Introduction of Colors
  • Pledge of Allegiance
  • National Anthem
  • Invocation
  • Remarks by Senate Republican Leader and Convention Temporary Chairman Mitch McConnell (KY)
  •  Performance by Beau Davidson
  • Segment to be announced
  • Remarks by Senator John McCain (AZ)
  • Video
  • Remarks by Attorney General Pam Bondi (FL) and Attorney General Sam Olens (GA)
  • Remarks by Senator John Thune (SD)
  • Remarks by Governor Jeb Bush (FL)
  • Remarks by Senator Rob Portman (OH)
  • Remarks by Steve Cohen, Screen Machine
  • Remarks by Governor Luis Fortuño (PR)
  • Remarks by Governor Tim Pawlenty (MN)
  • Remarks by Condoleezza Rice
  • Video
  •  Remarks by vice presidential nominee Rep. Paul Ryan
  •  Benediction by Archbishop Demetrios
  • Adjournment

Bookmark and Share

In 2012 Barack Obama Is Campaigning Against All He Campaigned On In 2008

  Bookmark and Share  In 2008, Barack Obama dismissed  every question about him by calling them distractions.  Each of his speeches were carefully laced with attempts to claim his opponents were trying to distract voters from the issue of the economy.

No matter what the issue, it was a distraction.  To question his  relationship to domestic terrorist Bill Ayers was a distraction.  To question how Senator Obama could have sat in the pews of Rev. Wright’s church for decades and not once hear or denounce the reverend, anti-American, anti-Semitic, anti-Caucasian, race-baiting  hate speech, was a distraction.   Requesting him to produce his birth certificate was a distraction.  Even questioning whether or not Senator Obama, a young man with no executive or private sector experience had any substantial qualifications to be President of the United States were deemed to be a mean spirited, Republican distraction.  In fact in July of 2008, Senator Obama responded to such a questions by stating;

“When we get distracted by those kinds of questions, I think we do a disservice to the American people.”

This strategy prompted then Senator Obama to include in almost all his speeches, the charge that any question or discussion that did not involve the economy was an example of Republicans trying to avoid the economy as an issue altogether.

For instance, in March of 2008 candidate Obama stated;

“We knew that the closer we got to the change we seek, the more we’d see of the politics we’re trying to end — the attacks and distortions that try to distract us from the issues that matter.”

In April of 2008, it was;

“It’s easy to get caught up in the distractions and the silliness and the tit for tat that consumes our politics.”

In May of 2008 he declared;

” Yes, we know what’s coming. … The same efforts to distract us from the issues that affect our lives by pouncing on every gaffe and association and fake controversy in the hope that the media will play along.”

Then of course there was my favorite Obama distraction accusation which came in October of 2008 when the young, energetic man who was filled with so much hope and change stated;

“Sen. McCain and his operatives are gambling that he can distract you with smears rather than talk to you about substance. … I’m going to keep talking about the issues that matter — about the economy and health care and education and energy.”

Four years later and the question now is where is all this talk about substance that President Obama promised?

So far President Obama, his surrogates, and his team of political Chicago hitmen have spent most of their time distracting us from the very same issues he claimed to want to discuss in 2008.

While the President goes out on the campaign trail and tries to claim that his endless spending will eventually solve our problems, his strategists are busy trying to insure that the non-issues are being aired on television and radio, and by his surrogates in the Senate and House.  Instead of producing a plan to grow our economy or trying to pass at least one federal budget before his first and probably last term in office is over, the President’s campaign and his supporters have done nothing but dominate the news with false accusations and ludicrous charges against Romney that are designed to specifically distract voters from the issues and the Obama record.

So far the most substantial knocks against Mitt Romney to come out of the Obama campaign have included such charges as his wife never having worked a day in her life, that Romney is a felon, that he hasn’t paid his taxes, and that he was responsible for the death of a woman who had cancer.  And to establish all this, President Obama has officially spent more than any other presidential in history.  And the official campaign which does not really start until both Parties officially nominate their candidate hasn’t even begun yet.

After four years in office President Obama who came to the White House on the promises of “hope” and “change” has delivered on only one of those themes –change.  As for hope, he has cretaed a government run econmy that has turned into despair and although he has delivered on change, it was not the change that many had hoped he intended.

In 2008, then Senator Obama left many voters believing that he would change the partisan atmosphere in Washington, D.C..  They tended to believe him when he promised to unite our nation.   Back then many believed President Obama when he promised to have the most transparent Administration in the nation’s history.  Fast forward four years and here we are a nation that is more polarized than ever before as President Obama tries to exploit the less fortunate in our society with a mean spirited class warfare strategy that suggest to them that the most fortunate in our society are to blame for their lot in life.  Here we are with a President who has declared that Republicans are waging a war on women.  And here we are waiting for that promised transparency in government on things such as the botched Fast & Furious operation that Obama’s Attorney General has been secretive about that he became the first person in his position to be held in contempt of Congress.  Here we are waiting to find out who from the White House has been leaking sensitive national security secrets in order to boost the President’s reelection chances.

The only change the President has delivered exists in the national debt which in the less-than-three-years. President Obama increased by $4.212 trillion–more than the total national debt of about $4.1672 trillion accumulated by all 41 U.S. presidents from George Washington through George H.W. Bush combined.  And that was not a change in the direction we need or can afford.

The presidential candidate that we saw in 2008 is long gone.  He has been taken away from us through a disastrous series of economic policy failures, and a string of constitutionally questionable partisan power grabs.  From appointing dozens of unaccountable czars that were granted extra-constitutional powers without congressional oversight, to hammering together an entirely partisan healthcare bill that puts one third of the American economy under government control, and to the passage of executive orders that granted amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants and created unenforceable regulations, this President has taken any of the possibly promising aspects of his 2008 candidacy and threw them out the door.  And so now today, the Barack Obama that stands before us is  not the Barack Obama who asked us for our votes in 2008.

The Barack Obama before us today is a shell of the man he once was.  And whereas President Obama once stood before us and declared his opponents were about to “distract us from the issues that affect our lives by pouncing on every gaffe and association and fake controversy in the hope that the media will play along”, today he is the one responsible for those distractions and for using those same tactics.  Today we have a President who is campaigning on all that he campaigned against four years ago and who is trying to run away from his record.  So I ask you this.  Can we afford to a reelect a President who if given the chance, would have to campaign against all that he says he stands for now, in another four years?

Bookmark and Share

The Herd: A Look at The Republican Vice Presidential Candidates. Puerto Rico Governor Luis Fortuno

Bookmark and Share   The Herd is a special White House 2012 series covering the obvious and not so obvious potential choices to be selected as Mitt Romney’s vice presidential running mate on the Republican presidential ticket.  Each day, White House 2012 will introduce you to one the many Republicans which we believe will be at least considered for for the vice presidency by the now inevitable presidential nominee, Mitt Romney.

In addition to a biographical information and a brief assessment of each potential nominee and their chances of being selected by Mitt Romney, White House 2012′s coverage also includes each potential nominee’s voting records, as well as a listing of their public statements and links to their web sites.

Today White House 2012 takes a look at  Puerto Rico Governor Luis Fortuno.

Born: October 31, 1960, San Juan, Puerto Rico

Spouse(s): Luca Vela

Children : Mara Luisa, Luis Roberto, Guillermo

Residence : San Juan, Puerto Rico

Alma mater: Colegio Marista, Georgetown University, Univeristy of Virginia School of Law

Profession: Lawyer

Religion: Roman Catholic `

Political Career :

  • 1993 – Executive Director of the Puerto Rico Tourism Company
  • 1993 – President, Hotel Development Corporation
  • 1994 – Became Puerto Rico’s first Secretary Puerto Rico Economic Development and Commerce
  • 2004 -Elected to the U.S. House of Representatives which in Puerto Rico has the title, Resident Commissioner and is a four year term
  • 2008 – Elected Governor of Puerto Rico

(Click here for Fortuno’s WH2012 presidential contender page)

Photobucket

Luis Fortuno’s name is not just one of those names , it is undeniably one of the most likely names to come up in the veepstakes, even if just briefly.

Largely unknown to most Americans, Governor Luis Fortuno has been on White House 2012′s radar for over two years now. Many have mocked such talk, ( you should see the comments on his WH2012 page) , but White House 2012 may very well have the last laugh. Take that from a friend of White House 2012, Adam Brickley. Adam recently told WH12 that although it may sound “off the wall”, consideration of Luis Fortuno for VP is very possible. Who is Adam Brickley? Adam is the man who created the Draft Sarah Palin for Vice President effort in 2008. He began the effort before we knew John McCain was going to be the nominee, well before most Americans heard of Sarah Palin, and long before John McCain even considered her for the job. So Adam has a good sense for these things.

As Governor of Puerto Rico, the first remarkable thing about Luis Fortuno was that he got elected. He is the first Republican to be elected Governor of Puerto Rico since 1969 and only the second one since 1949. The second remarkable thing about Fortuno is the way in which he has handled Puerto Rico’s budget. Between Fortuno’s ability to appeal to those beyond the Republican base, his fiscal conservatism, and his Hispanic ethnicity, he could make for an interesting choice for a Republican Party that must appeal to the rapidly growing Hispanic vote in the United States.

And when it comes to the primary issues facing our nation, limited government, less spending, and controlled federal budgets, Adam Brickley describes Fortuno to White House 2012 by saying “It’s like he’s the love child of Chris Christie and Marco Rubio.”

Fortuno trult is a Reagan Republican whose conservative thinking and record will have plenty of traction among Americans of all persuasions. Fortuno states that Reagan was “clear in what he envisioned, a party that is open to ideas, the free flow of ideas and goods and services”, and he has added that he believes “we have to go back to those principles.

As Governor, Luis Fortuno has been practicing those core Republican principles to tackle a record $3.2 billion deficit. He has cut expenses across the board, cut the size of Puerto Rico’s government and reduced its number of employees, while also instituting salary reductions of 30 percent for himself, department heads and political appointments. All this while implementing policies that include cutting taxes and creating new private-sector jobs in the place of government handouts.  Does this not sound like the opposite of what our nation’s President is doing?  And does this not sound like a model roadmap for our federal government?

At the moment, a G.O.P. ticket with Puerto Rico’s Governor Fortuno on it may seem far fetched, but it’s called history folks, and stranger things have made history and have eventually come to be seen as quite natural.

In conclusion, as for those of you who claim a native citizen of Puerto Rico can’t be eligible to be Vice President or President of the United States, it must be understood that all persons born in Puerto Rico between April 11, 1899, and January 12, 1941, are automatically conferred citizenship as of the date that such law was signed by the President on June 27, 1952. Furthemore, all persons born in Puerto Rico on or after January 13, 1941, are considered natural-born citizens of the United States.

Pros:

  • Fortuno could help appeal to Hispanic voters better than just about any other Republican in the Party and he could cut in to the Obama-Biden tickets lead among Hispanics in ways so significant that it could cost them several key battleground states
  • The selection of Fortuno as Vice President would have historic value and soften the perception that the G.O.P. is anti-immigration
  • Although Puerto Rico’s economy is by no means quite strong, the mess Fortuno inherited and the measures he took to correct decades of wrongs, helps to starkly contrast the tax and spend policies of the Obama Administration with the Republican philosophy that government is not the solution, it’s the problem, in a way that can define the race in a clearly positive way for Republicans

Cons:

  • It might be viewed as an overly blatant attempt to appeal to Hispanic voters
  • Many voters may be quite uncomfortable with the prospects of what they might perceive as a foreigner being Vice President and a heartbeat away from the presidency
  • Puerto Rico’s high unemployment and struggling economy will provide Democrats with an easy attack line that utilizes the anger of anti-Fortuno factions in Puerto Rico in a very effective way, despite all of Fortuno’s hard and successful work to turn things around there
  • Fortuno’s foreign policy and national security credentials may be questioned endlessly and viewed with skepticism by may voters
  • While Fortuno’s Spanish will help him appeal to Hispanic voters, his heavy accent does not make him the most fluid campaigners that English speaking voters will have ever seen

Assessment:

Selecting Luis Fortuno for Vice President would be one of the boldest moves that mitt Romney could possibly make. It would be a gamble that could yield enormous returns or cost Romney everything and Romney is not a gambling man (despite his desire to bet Rick Perry $10,000 during a debate). So I do not believe that Mitt will go with Fortuno. But it is such a historic and game changing move that seeing Romney pick Fortuno is not out of the question. Is it likely? No. But some of the most unlikely decisions throughout history have produced some of the most beneficial results.

Photobucket

Recent Key Votes

HR 7321 – Automotive Industry Financing

Legislation (NA)

Dec. 10, 2008 – Requires the President to designate one or more officials (“Car Czars”) to be overseen by the Comptroller General in order to assess auto manufacturers’ recovery …

HR 6867 – Emergency Extended Unemployment Compensation

Legislation (NA)

Oct. 3, 2008 – – Allows an individual who has no rights to federal or state regular unemployment compensation, or who has exhausted his or her rights to federal …

HR 1424 – Financial Asset Purchase Authority and Tax Law Amendments

Legislation (NA)

Oct. 3, 2008 – -Establishes the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to allow the Secretary of the Treasury to purchase troubled assets from any financial institution (Div. A, Sec. …

More Key Votes

Photobucket

Luis Fortuno on The Issues

International Issues Domestic Issues Economic Issues Social Issues
Foreign Policy Gun Control Budget & Economy Education
Homeland Security Crime Government Reform Health Care
War & Peace Drugs Tax Reform Abortion
Free Trade Civil Rights Social Security Families & Children
Immigration Jobs Welfare & Poverty Corporations
Energy & Oil Environment Technology Principles & Values

Photobucket

Bookmark and Share

John McCain Wants the Presidential Candidates to Stop All These Silly Debates

Bookmark and Share   While defending Mitt Romney, his choice for President, in an interview on NBC’s Meet the Press,  failed 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain told host David Gregory that he wishes the Republican presidential candidates would stop participating in all the presidential debates that are taking place.

According to McCain, the debates “are driving down our candidates favorable ratings” and are making it harder whoever the nominee is to defeat President Obama in November.

The statement begs the question, is John McCain losing his mind, or has he already lost it?

McCain’s objection to the presidential candidates having as many as 19 debates in the last 8 months is both dumb and a quintessential example of establishment thinking.  Only a true established member of the political class would take issue with politicians having to discuss the issues and defend their records and policies in front of an audience comprised of the American electorate.  The political elite may not like being held accountable in a forum that is not scripted so tightly that it allows for a one way conversation of the candidate telling the voters what they think the voters want to hear, but voters do appreciate having the opportunity to see their potential President have to think on their feet.

Furthermore; even if John McCain is correct in his assertion that all the debates are responsible for driving down the favorability numbers of the G.O.P. candidates, then so be it.  If it is true that the more the candidates seeking the Republican presidential nomination talk, the more they less people like them, then we do not deserve to win the presidency in November.  If we as a Party can not find a true leader based upon the realistic expectation that they can effectively articulate our cause and the solutions to our problems, than we deserve to lose.

But what it comes down to is that John McCain can’t actually believe his own words.  He can’t really be suggesting that debates are a bad thing.

What McCain is really suggesting is that Newt Gingrich survived this campaign and surged in it because of he outperformed the man that McCain is supporting……Mitt Romney.  And it is clear to McCain that had there not been 19 debates, Mitt would not have been dominated by Newt on 19 different occasions.    So here is Senator McCain actually calling for fewer debates because they are not helping his hand picked choice for President win voters over.

What it comes down to is this.

McCain’s call for the debates to stop is offensive and counterproductive.  It is typical establishment, inside-the-beltway, thinking that is designed to shelter the political class from those whom they seek to govern and it is quite arrogant and antithetical to democratic process.  It is the type of thinking that could only come out the mouth of a from a person who has spent over thirty years in the bubble that is Washington.  They are certainly not the words or thoughts of a so-called “Maverick”.

I will concede that it is quite unfortunate that Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich have resorted to attacking one another with distortions that are absolutely over the top.  I feel it is a shame that Newt Gingrich saw fit to travel down the same low road that Mitt Romney and the establishment led us down and that Mitt Romney finds it impossible to build himself up without first tearing down everyone else down.  However I will not go so far as to say that the answer is to stop the debates and limit the discussion to sanitized forums which do not allow candidates to raise and debate legitimate issues before the American people.

To his credit, Mitt Romney has not taken the same position as his establishment surrogate, Senator John McCain.  So while I will not hold McCain’s ignorant and offensive comments against him, but as someone who can easily support Romney if he is the nominee, I would like to suggest to him that he stop trying to embrace the political establishment so tightly.  Instead of using the Dole’s, McCain’s, and Tom DeLay’s of the political world as a ladder to which he can climb to power with, Mitt Romney should be running away from the establishment and building himself up as a candidate of independent, conservative thought, who brings to the table something that the establishment doesn’t……real life and business experience.

Whether Mitt realizes it or not, the establishment support he is receiving is not helping him among the voters he needs most.  The anti-establishment voters who are far removed from the political class and who are disdainful of Beltway politics.  Another thing that Mitt should realize is that the more the political establishment attacks Newt Gingrich, the more the anti-establishment coalesces around Gingrich.

In other words, Mitt Romney should tell surrogates like McCain to shut the hell up.

While he might think that the public pitches that Washington insiders are making on Romney’s behalf are helping him in places like Florida, he should realize that every time the establishment wins, the voters rally behind the anti-establishment candidates.  So even if Romney does wins Florida, if he does so through a strategy that employs tactics designed at assassinating the character of Newt Gingrich through the political class, then the voting class will lash out against him somewhere else, primarily in Minnesota, Missouri, and Arizona, which hold their nominating contests in late february and early March.

Bookmark and Share

Is Bachmann’s Immigration Stance Electable?

One of the keys to winning the Social Conservative vote is electability.  Many voters out there aren’t asking which candidate has the best ideas.  They are asking which candidate can beat Barack Obama.  On the Social Conservative side, they are asking which candidate can beat Mitt Romney first.

Bachmann has chosen not only to level questionable attacks against Newt Gingrich for his immigration policy, but she has also taken the hardline stance that as President 11.2 million illegal aliens should be deported no matter how long they have been here, their other legal history, or their family and community ties.  With the intensity that Bachmann has attacked Gingrich, I would be comfortable assuming that this would be a national priority for her.

Mitt Romney tried to come down hard on Gingrich in the debate, but admitted himself that there must be exceptions to the rule for mass deportations.  Bachmann, who has played the role of attack dog against more than one candidate, was far more rigid in her approach.  But can a zero tolerance, deport them all approach to Illegal Immigration win in 2012?

Amnesty was a big loser for Republicans in the past.  McCain’s involvement in a potential bill to grant a path to citizenship for illegal aliens nearly ended his career.  But far too often this complex issue is reduced to a soundbite, or single word (such as “amnesty”).  What would happen in a debate between Michele Bachmann and Barack Obama where Bachmann was asked if she would make deporting 11.2 million illegal aliens a national priority and how she planned on doing that?

This issue is a loser all around for Conservatives.  Not because they are wrong, but because like so many other issues there is no easy solution, but they are willing to try.

So far, Mitt Romney has dodged a huge bullet.  No one seems to have noticed his exception caveat to his immigration hardline.  Bachmann has managed to stay on the attack, but it won’t take the media forever for someone to ask her how she plans on deporting 11.2 million illegal immigrants.  For now though, Gingrich is taking the heat just as he predicted in the debate.  As far as what Conservatives actually want, many want Michele Bachmann’s hardline and may stay home if they see weakness in a candidate on this issue.  Others will see Bachmann’s stance as making her unelectable and will avoid her because of it.  Either way, the best thing for the GOP right now is for this issue to run its course in the media cycle and go away soon.  With Bachmann’s perceived chance at spoiling another rival’s campaign, don’t count on it.

Lack of Suburban Pennsylvania Support for Obama Could Jeopardize His Reelection

Bookmark and Share   The Philadelphia Inquirer’s Jeremy Roebuck, John Duchneskie, and Dan Hardy recently unearthed a troubling sign for President Obama as he prepares for his reelection.  According to the trio “A wave of support from Philadelphia’s historically moderate suburbs helped push Barack Obama into the White House in 2008. But if the latest fund-raising totals are any indication, his grip on those crucial swing counties may be slipping.”

Through an examination of recent fundraising totals in the Philadelphia’s suburbs, President Obama is nearly tied with his Republican rivals for the presidency.

In 2008, an overwhelming amount of support from Philadelphia, helped Obama to surpass rival John McCain’s vote total in the state.  A significant additional help for then Senator Obama, was also an unusually strong show support for a Democrat candidate in the surrounding subburbs of Philly within Montgomery, Bucks, Chester, and Delaware Counties.  These areas usually help offset the large plurality of votes that Democrats normally get in Southeast Pennsylvania and if they offset them enough, Republicans have a good chance of winning the swing state.  Such was the case with last years gubernatorial election victory of Republican Tom Corbet.

The fact that President Obama is only $36,000 ahead of of Republicans in fundraising at this point in  time, is a strong indication that he is not positioned for winning Pennsylvania’s electoral votes any where near as well as he was in 2008.

Without Pennsylvania in his column, President Obama’s chances for being reelected are extremely limited.

In fact if you assume President Obama wins the typically blue states and also give him Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Illinois, and keep swing states like Ohio, Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada in the undecided column, it is virtually impossible for the President to win the 270 electoral votes needed to win reelection. [see map below] Bookmark and Share 

%d bloggers like this: