Predicting the Politically Unpredictable in 2012

2012 will see liberal extremism leading the way for wins by Romney and Republicans and  losses for Obama and Democrats, and an  electoral college decision that leaves the left more disgusted than ever.

Bookmark and Share   When it comes to 2012, the only prediction that I am fully confident in is that the unpredictable will continue to dominate and shape politics.  It always has and always will.  Be it unanticipated scandals, of the real or manufactured kind, or be it the unforseen events and circumstances which are thought to be impossible realities on the national and international stage, or random personal events in the lives of  the players on those stages, it is the unexpected which will ultimately create our reality and determine that which in the future, will be history.

However, until those inevitable unknowns reveal themselves, the best each of us can do is project the logical progression of events based upon that which we do already know.  For instance, while I may not know with certainty who will win the Republican presidential nomination, I can confidently predict that if the nominee is Ron Paul, you can rest assured that a Democrat will occupy the White House come 2013.  But one need not be Nostradamus to make that prediction.  So many rational Republicans and conscientious conservatives understand that inevitability, that it makes it impossible for Ron Paul to win the Republican presidential nomination.

A bolder prediction is that come September of 2012, Mitt Romney will be making an acceptance speech at the Republican national convention.  But that too is hardly seer seeing and it should not be hard to understand why he will be the nominee.

Romney is quite a capable conservative and while there are legitimate reasons to question his conservative credentials, the facts are that you can not find anything that is not conservative about his stated vision for America.  The only real reason he has not yet locked up the nomination is not because he is not conservative enough, but because he has not been bold enough.  It it is my hope that this will change once Romney’s lock on the nomination becomes undeniable.  At that point, I believe we might very well see Mitt Romney go from playing it safe with his longstanding Republican frontrunner status and begin taking some risks with semi-bold reform proposals designed towardsd providing  TEA movement types and the significant portion of the electorate that shares anti-establishment sentiments,  a reason to believe that Romney will, at the very least, be better for America than Barack Obama.

That leads me to my second prediction and the one that I most confident of.

Come September of 2012, Republicans and even conservatives will have a hard time remembering exactly why the dislike Romney so much.  Many will still be too stubborn to admit that they like Romney, but by the time the Republican convention is over, they will indeed like him.  People do not realize the magic that is a good, well run campaign, but they soon will.  Therefore I am confident when I state that Romney will be far more liked in the latter part of 2012 than he is in the earlier part.

As the groundwork for such an emergence of a new impression of Romney is laid, speculation about who he will choose as his running mate will take on a life of its own.  The undeniable reality of the value that the obvious choice, freshman Florida Senator Marco Rubio,  will dominate, but the likelihood of his willingness to be a vice presidential candidate will probably deny Romney and the G.O.P. the benefit of his place on the ticket.  This will force Mitt Romney and Republican powerbrokers to look for the next best thing.  That search will force the likes of Virginia’s Bob McDonnell, Louisiana’s Bobby Jindal, and New Jersey’s Chris Christie to be given serious consideration and lead to a media firestorm around their possible candidacies.

Other names that will receive vast attention will come from those who were or are still competing against Romney for the top spot on the ticket. Most of that speculation will swirl around such names as Newt Gingrich, former Minnesota Governor and rival Tim Pawlenty, and former Arkansas Governor and 2008 Romney rival Mike Huckabee.

That will be followed by the names of individuals who were onceconsidered potential Romney rivals for the presidential nomination.

That list will include Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, and South Dakota Senator John Thune.

Then there will come the dark horse contenders.

As the process of picking a runnignmate that can help Romney create the type of balanced ticket which can hammer together a winning electoral coalition entertains such factors as sex, ethnicity, and the need to attract votes in regions that Romney will need to shore up, names like Tennessee’s Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn, New Mexico’s Governor Susana Martinez, Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval, and the darkest of all horses, Puerto Rico Governor Luis Fortuno, will all receive a good degree of attention.

In the end, I believe Rubio and Ryan will not accept the nomination, Gingrich will be passed up because of too much perceived baggage and not enough realized popularity, and the final short list will leave Romney choosing from Haley Barbour, Mitch Daniels, Bobby Jindal, John  Thune, Susana Martinez, Bob McDonnell, and Chris Christie.  Like Rubio, Jindal will probably reject the offer and  it will most likely come down to Daniels, Thune, Martinez, and Christie.  My instincts suggest that it’s an even chance for either Thune or Martinez to win out over both Christie and Daniels.

Amidst all that drama will come the multiple fights for control, of Congress.

In time, many of the  hard fought individual fights will also take on lives of their own that will grab national headlines and influence national opinions which will ultimately keep Republicans in control of the House.

On the Senate side, I see the G.O.P. taking control by picking off three of the Democrats five most vulnerable incumbents in Michigan, Missouri, and Montana.  They could also possibly take down Bill Nelson of Florida.   Additionally, the G.O.P. will pick up 4 or 5 of the open Democrat seats, winning in Nebraska, North Dakota, Virginia, and Wisconsin.  A big surprise gain could also come from Connecticut where Joe Lieberman is retiring.  This means a net gain of anywhere from 7  to 9 senate seats and a solid majority of anywhere from 54 to 56 senate seats.  But before Republicans realize those gains, they will get some much needed help from the Democrats that they will fight to take that control from.

I expect several liberal candidates for the House and Senate to generate the type of attention and controversy that will energize conservatives and turn many independent and moderate candidates off and prevent them from getting caught up in any wave of enthusiasm for Democrats. The three liberal candidates who will go too far in their rhetoric and create the type of controversies that will produce a backlash against Democrats in general, are Florida’s Allan Grayson, Wisconsin’s Tammy Baldwin, and Massachusetts Elizabeth Warren.

Grayson,  a Florida liberal, was defeated  in his first attempt at reelection to the House in 2010.  In 2009, his first year in office, Grayson famously took to the floor of the House and claimed that Republicans want senior citizens to to drop dead.  A year later, Floridians told him to drop dead as they gave him the boot and elected conservative Daniel Webster to replace him.

In 2012, Grayson is trying to recapture the seat and while he will fail to do so, he will again go too far and provide fodder for Republicans to use against Democrats.

In Wisconsin openly gay Rep. Tammy Baldwin is running to replace retiring Senator Herb Kohl.  Baldwin’s homosexuality is not necessarily what will make her candidacy so controversial.  However the extremism of the loyal liberal, militant, homosexual lobby that will swoop down upon Wisconsin to influence her election, coupled with Baldwin’s own liberal extremism, will undoubtedly become the epitome of liberal lunacy in the 2012 election cycle.  As such, it will go a long way in providing conservatives with the type of material that can be used nationally as examples of how out of touch President Obama and his Party are with most Americans.

Another campaign that will generate a negative national reaction to the liberalism of today’s mainstream Democrats will be the Senate campaign of Massachusetts liberal Elizabeth Warren.

Warren will be a stereotypical socialist whose extremism will help moderate incumbent Republican Senator Scott Brown stay in office for his first full six year tem in the upper federal legislative chamber.

Brown’s 2009 upset victory in the special election to replace the seat long held by Ted Kennedy and his brother before him, was an early indicator of national sentiments that revealed themselves in the 2010 general election.  However, given the ideological bend of the usually deep blue Bay State, in 2012, with an incumbent Democrat president running at the top of the ticket, Scott Brown, even as a moderate Republican, should not have much of a chance for reelection.  But thanks to two factors, he will be reelected.

One of those factors is the lack of popularity for President Obama, even in Massachusetts, and Mitt Romney’s presence on the top ticket for Republicans.  While Romney will still likely lose Massachusetts to Obama, his presence on the ticket will be enough to have a positive effect further down the Republican line.  The other factor will be Warren herself.

Like Baldwin and Grayson, Warren will go too far and become a national example of the dangers of unrestrained liberalism.  In the end, that will be enough for voters of Massachusetts to want to restrain liberal extremism by reelecting Scott Brown.

Another plus will be that Elizabeth Warren will come off as so extreme and arrogant that conservative Republicans will be willing to go out of their way to support Scott Brown over her.  Even those who believe that Brown is little more than a RINO, will find Warren to be so sickeningly left-wing that even a Republican in Name Only will be prefered to the socialism that Warren represents in every way.

On other fronts, the political atmosphere for the White House will continue to sour as circumstances involving Fast & Furious and Solyndra turn in to scandals that help establish strong evidence of the Administration’s incomptenece and lack of ethics.

The economy will also remain a main issue but it is likely to bottom out during 2012 and after four years, a resilient and innovative American population will have begin to move beyond the dismal economy that has become the economic norm under Barack Obama.  With no thanks to liberal economics and governance, the natural ability for Americans to adapt and to overcome hardship will begin to lead the way for a mild, citizen backed recovery of sorts that is based on American’s inherent ability to deal on their own with economic stagnation, high unemployment, and federal obstacles to growth.  This will not be enough to make most people feel secure enough about the economy, but it will provide enough stabilization for Democrats and President Obama to try to exploit by claiming they have guided us through the worst part of our most difficult economic times since the Great Depression.  The case will not be a strong one, but with a campaign war chest of nearly a billion dollars, it will be one that G.O.P. will have to strongly counter or else they will risk the possibility of having too many voters actually believing the claim.

But Republicans will get some help when the Bush tax cuts that Democrats caved in to extending, but for only a year, come back up for debate.  The timing during the course of the election will give Obama and Democrats the opportunity to again overplay their class warfare arguments and overextend themselves in their committment to being the Party of big government and big spending.

Then there are the supreme court cases that will help polarize the electorate and motivate both sides of the spectrum.

How the Supreme Court will rule in both the case of Arizona’s creation and enforcement of tough new state anti-illegal immigrant laws and on the new national healthcare law, will have at least a minimal effect on the election but even just a minimal effect could be enough to swing the electoral votes of critical swing states.  In the case of the Arizona anti-immigration law, a Supreme Court ruling in favor of Arizona could unleash an unprecedented mobilization  against Republicans by Hispanic voters who happen to heavily populate swing states like Colorado, Nevada, and maybe most pivotal of all, New Mexico.   ‘

In consideration of the Obama national healthcare law, a Supreme Court ruling in favor of the law, would go a long way in producing a strongly motivated anti-Obama vote in the general election and help swing critical states like Ohio and Florida to the Republicans.

The way I see it, the Supreme Court due in large part to Justice Anthony Kennedy’s own swing vote,  will rule against  Arizona’s anti-immigration laws based primarily on the argument that  it is preempted by federal law and foreign policy, and violates the Supremacy and Commerce Clauses of the Constitution.   That ruling will subsequently motivate the anti-Obama vote more than the anti-Republican vote.

On Obamacare, I am totally in the dark.  How that will go is in great doubt given Antonin Scalia’s previous interpretations of the federal commerce clause.  President Obama could actually benefit if he were to lose the case on the grounds that the national healthcare law exceeds the constitutional powers of the federal government and that it can not in fact force Americans to purchase something.   Such a ruling would remove some of the motivational momentum behind President Obama’s limited government enemies and his liberal base may become more fired up to turn out and vote for him.  Winning the case would simply be added stimulation for his opposition.  But which way Scalia and Kennedy go on that one is anyone’s guess.

While I am too unsure to go out a limb on those court cases, I am not too unsure of the outcome of the general election.

By the time the new political year begins to close this November, I do predict that the presidential election will be far closer than some may think, at least as far as the popular vote goes, but it will not necessarily be so close in the electoral college vote.

The way I see it, Republicans will have a lock on 258 electoral votes while President Obama will only have a likely 222 electoral votes readily available for him.  In between the two will be 5 undecided states with a combined total of 58 electoral votes.  Those states will be Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.  The only way for President Obama to win will be by winning a combination of 4 states that inlcludes Ohio and Pennsylvania.  Those two states will be must wins.  That leaves him with three winning combinations.

For Republicans, they will have any one 4 winning combinations available to them. And two of those winning combinations do not require either Pennsylvania or Ohio.  I am  not quite sure what combination they will end up with but I am confident that they will win with at least 272 electoral votes and possibly as many as 316 electoral votes.  However, I think there is a very good possibility for this to be another rare presidential election that sees the candidate who receives the most popular votes, be on the losing end of the electoral college.

Given the existing imbalance in popularity that President Obama experiences in densely populated states like New Jersey, and urban dominated states such as New York, and California, the chances of him receiving more popular votes than a Republican candidate racking up big majorities in many relatively sparsely populated, rural states like Montana, Utah, and Idaho, but losing the electoral college,  is becoming increasingly likely .

Given that possibility, I can only be certain that if my prognostications which are more suspicion than prediction, happen to come to fruition, the only real certainty we can predict is that after the 2012 elections, the American electorate will be either just  as polarized as it is now,  or even more so than it currently is.

Bookmark and Share

The Importance or Lack of Importance of Iowa to Each of the Candidates

Bookmark and Share    While readers are free to disagree on this point, it is nonetheless a political reality, that the Iowa Caucuses will bolster or diminish the chances of several candidates but in the end will do little to determine the ultimate Republican nominee.

The fact of the matter is that the lack of an undeniable favorite consensus candidate among Republicans and a higher than average number of undecided voters at this stage in the game will allow for wide swings in popularity for one candidate or another based upon regional idiosyncrasies and local influences in ways that are far more significant than in recent presidential nomination contests.

With the economy still proving to be the issue at the forefront of the election,  Mitt Romney and his succesful background in such things as business and even his incredibly well engineered turnaround of the 2002 Winter Olympics, has allowed him to squeak by as one of the most promising figures when it comes to that critical issue.  However; Romneycare and doubts about his committment to social conservatives issues have prevented Romney from capitalizing on his positive economic credentials as much as he could have.  Meanwhile, social conservatives have failed to find a single figure that they can comfortably get 100% behind.

Given these circumstances, Iowa’s results will still leave the field with very inconclusive results that will not begin to get any clearer until South Carolina and Florida hold their primaries. Nevertheless, at this point in time, the stakes are higher for some than others in Iowa.

Do or Die:

For Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, and Rick Santorum, anything less than a third place showing will leave them struggling for relevance, a position that will only be compounded by the difficulty they face in New Hampshire where Mitt Romney’s victory is a foregone conclusion and which is the only state that longshot candidate Jon Huntsman finds himself to be much of a factor.  This will make South Carolina Bachmann, Perry, and Santorum’s only hope of becoming viable candidates as the nomination contest moves ahead.  So for these three candidate the race is on for third place.  Anything better than that would be considered a surprising finish tha will give them a brief opportunity to take advantage of the spotlight.

Establishing Themselves as the Clear Alternative to Romney:

Newt Gingrich is the candidate who has the best chance of truly establishing himself as the alternative to Mitt Romney, in order to do this he can ill afford anything less than third  a place finish.  Short of that, Newt will have a hard time maintaining momentum as he heads in to South Carolina and Florida.

Saving Face:

There is a low bar for Mitt Romney to meet in Iowa.  He merely needs to avoid being embarrassed with a finish any lower than third place.  But even if he did happen to finish towards the very bottom of the pack, chances are he will still win in New Hampshire and go in to South Carolina with a strong organization and the backing of the state’s popular Tea Party Republican Governor, Nikki Haley.  But on the flip side, a first place showing by Romney will go a long way establishing the type of impression of inevitability that could stymie the momentum that other candidates may be establishing in their plight to become the candidate with the best chance of beating Romney.

Mattering:

Jon Huntsman is considered the top of the bottom tier candidates that consist of Gary Johnson and Buddy Roemer. However being slightly ahead of two candidates who nobody really knows is running for President or really cares if they are running for President, does not say much. And Iowa is a state that that Huntsman simply ignored in order to focus on New Hampshire.  For this reason, Jon Huntsman is essentially of no consequence in the Iowa Caucus and just wont matter.  The only way his name will even be mentioned is if he somehow manages to beat anyone else and not come in last place.

Achieving Undeniable Viability:

Ron Paul’s rise in statewide polls of Iowa has now put him in the unenviable position of needing to meet very high expectations.  With such high expectations anything less than second place will generally be seen as a setback and will do little to help Ron Paul to begin turning around his numbers in other states, most of which place him in the middle of the field.  But if Ron Paul does meet current expectations with either a first or second place finish, he will merely remain a significant barrier between Romney and the emergence of a viable alternative to Romney.

A first or second place finish for Paul in Iowa will make him an undeniably significant candidate who can not be ignored, even by me, a die-hard anti-Paul conservative, or as Pauliacs call me, a neo-con.  However; as Newt Gingrich stated, it will be hard to imagine that Ron Paul will fly among mainstream Republicans and “decent Americans”.   While his limited government views are applauded, his isolationist tendencies which he denies having, will ultimately disqualify him in the eyes of voters who understand that the first constitutional responsibility of an American President and our federal government, is our national security and foreign policy.  Ron Paul’s unwillingness to come up with a proper defense and foreign policy, will ultimatelylead to the type of conclusion of Ron Paul that  Newt Gingrich expressed in his Tuesday afternoon interview with Blitzer, when he stated;

“As a potential President, a person who thinks that the United States was responsible for 9/11, a person who believes,…who wrote in his news letter that the World Trade Center bombing in ’93 might have been a C.I.A. plot,  a person who doesn’t believe that it matters if the Iranians have a nuclear weapon, I’d rather just say, you look at Ron Paul’s record of systemic avoidance of reality,”

Ultimately, I believe rational Republicans will come to the same conclusion that Newt believes they will.

The But:

Given the incredible anti-establishment sentiment within the electorate and a deep TEA movement-like desire to send a message to both Republicans and Democrats, and the lack of a singular candidate with very strong support behind them, even I can’t be sure that Ron Paul will fail in his attempt to draw the nomination down to a contest between himself andMitt  Romney.  If there is one thing I know in politics, it is that you never say never and given the volatility and indecision of the Republican electorate, Ron Paul might benefit from a social conservative vote that is deeply divided by far too many candidates, and an unusually high desire by voters to cast a protest vote for Ron Paul and make him the vessel through which they make their anger known.  Realistically, such circumstances will merely help assure Mitt Romney of the nomination in the end but it will still make Ron Paul a far more significant figure in the 2012 election than many other than Paulites, assumed possible.

Key Factors in the Closing Days

In these final days of the Iowa Caucuses, several factors will have a significant effect on the results.

A very large undecided vote can be swayed  in to the camp of one candidate or another by any number of things.  Most powerful of all would be an embarrassing last minute disclosure that could cost the unlucky victim support they already have and the support of those who were leaning towards them.  The other would be a successful pitch that inspires social conservatives to get behind one candidate and that candidate’s ability to coordinate the type of Get Out the Vote operation that delivers that social conservatives support to their caucus locations on Tuesday night.

Organization and momentum will be key and anyone who inspire and channel that momentum in these closing days, could pull off a surprise finish.  The two candidates with the greatest potential in that area are the two Ricks.  Both Perry and Santorum are best situated for such a result.

The final influence over the results in the Iowa Caucus will be something that no campaign can really effect……..the weather.

Bad weather favors Ron Paul.

His supporters are fanatics who will not allow anything to prevent them from voting for him.  If there is 6 feet of snow falling and a windchill factor of 6 below, expect Ron Paul to land a big win.

Others who would benefit from bad weather, but to a lesser degree than Ron Paul, are Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum.

Their supporters tend to be more deeply committed than are those of Romney, Perry, and Gingrich and they too will show up in significant numbers despite any foul weather.

Good weather favors Romney and Gingrich.

Both these men have established relatively wide support that does not run very deep.  This means with good weather, their large but not highly motivated number of supporters will actually show up to cast their caucus vote for them.  Such would not be the case if  bad weather made getting to their caucus location seem more trouble than that it was worth to them.

At the moment, it looks like the weather in Iowa on the day of the Caucus will be cold but clear.

Bottom Line:

Iowa will will have at best, a minimal effect on the race.  Just as it did in 2008 when the eventaul Republican nominee, John McCain, came in fourth place behind Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, and Fred Thompson, and just as it did in 1988 when then Vice President George H. W. Bush found himself in third place behind Bob Dole and Christian Broacast Network founder, Rev. Pat Robertson.  And it will probably matter as much in 2012 as it did in 1980 when George H. W. Bush defeated Ronald Reagan in that year’s caucus.

The start of the real race won’t occur until January 21st.  It is then that South Carolina’s primary will set up the race between Mitt Romney and one other candidate as they race moves on to Florida which holds its primary on January 31st.  And it is Florida which will produce the best indication of who the ultimate nominee is likely to be.

Bookmark and Share

Trunkline 2012: Sunday Election News Review-12//11/11

Bookmark and Share Sunday’s Trunkline 2012 offers you a picure that is worth more words than Obama stimulus package, a video that summarizes the Obama Adminstration up quite well, the DNC’s attacks oln Newt, Bachmann’s attacks on Newt and Mitt, Perry’s poke at Romney’s deep pockets, Santorum’s telling interview with bloggers, a recap of last night’s debate, and more.  All for your information and consideration here at White House 2012, where being American and believing in American exceptionalism is a good thing.

Hat Tip To MoonBattery.com

  • Video of the Week:
Bookmark and Share

Trunkline 2012: Friday’s Campaign Trail News Wrap-Up from White House 2012 – 12/2/11

Bookmark and Share  On this day, Trunkline 2012 delivers to you a dose of suspense involving Herman Cain’s campaign and his personal life, Palin’s wink and nod to Rick Santorum, the case for Newt, questions about Ron Paul and antisemitism, a poll question, the final calendar dates for the Republican presidential primaries and caucuses, and much more.

 

White House 2012′s Morning Memo: Tuesday’s Election News Briefing for 11/15/11

Bookmark and Share   While you were asleep, the political world kept turning and tried to cast its perpetual spin on reality.  So set the record straight with White House 2012’s Morning Memo as we bring you  Gloria Cain’s interview, Polls that have Newt soaring and Americans doubting Cain, as well as stories about the end of Rick Perry’s campaign, strange emails from the First Lady, the stage being set for the Supreme Courts hearing on Obamacare, the shaping of the 2016 presidential election, notes about the Abuser in Chief, and much more. 

Bookmark and Share

White House 2012: See the Entire Gloria Cain Interview

Bookmark and Share   In her first major national interview (see the interviews and the complete transcript below this post),  the wife of Herman Cain, ably defended her husband against allegations of sexual harassment. 

Gloria Cain insisted that her husband  “totally respects women“, and claims that her husband of 43 years would have to have a “split personality” to do the things that Ms. Bialek the only accuser to go public, alleged.  Gloria Cain also stated;

“To hear such graphic allegations and know that that would have been something that was totally disrespectful of her as a woman and I know that’s not the person he is”.

During the nearly 30 minutes of the interview that aired on Fox News and was conducted by Greta Van Susteren, Gloria Cain came across as genuine, sincere and in many ways, like her husband, warm, friendly, and personable and her interview was a refreshing change of pace from the performances often given by the wives of politicians.  While Gloria Cain was articulate, she lacked the polish that can often produce an air of artificial and scripted emotion.

The interview is well worth viewing. During the course of discussion, she discusses the accusations and then even discusses the courtship between her and husband in a way that was quite endearing.

 While I believe Gloria Cain was effective, I have to say that once again the Cain campaign proved to lack the ability to handle the politics which they have jumped in to.  Given Gloria’s Cain’s effectiveness, one must ask why it took the Cain campaign so long to get her out there?  Last week, White House 2012 noted that if ever there was a time when a wife needed to show her support for husband it was then.   Yet as more and more allegations kept on unfolding, and as Herman Cain stumbled in his handling of them, the story gained momentum.  That momentum could have been stymied had Gloria Cain been allowed to defend her husband at the peak of the scandal.  Now more than two weeks in to the story, just as it seemed to be slightly fading, the Cain camp revived it.  Still itis  probably safe to say that Gloria Cain’s appearance was better late than never.

All things considered, Mrs. Cain’s interview was a positive event for her husband’s campaign and seeing and hearing more of her could only help him.  But Gloria made it clear that that is not her.  She is a much more private person than her husband and does not seek or like the limelight.  That being the case, I believe Gloria Cain deserves our respecting her wishes.

You can Watch the video here  or by clicking the images below.

A complete transcript of the interview can be found here

Bookmark and Share

Mrs. Cain on Harassment Allegations: ‘This Isn’t Herman’

The Courtship of Mrs. Cain

Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com

%d bloggers like this: