New White House 2012 Projection Has Romney Winning By 24 Electoral Votes

  Bookmark and Share With 29 days remaining in the race for President, White House 2012’s latest analysis of polls, circumstances, and conditions, concludes that there is a swing towards Mitt Romney in the Electoral College that is so pronounced that the Romney-Ryan ticket has increased its lead over the Obama-Biden ticket by at least 24 electoral votes.  The last White House 2012 projection had Mitt Romney winning 273 electoral votes to the presidents 265 electoral votes.  Today Romney stands at 281 electoral votes to 257 for the President.

For the first time, the latest projection gives Romney the all important state of Ohio, which up to now has been written off by White House 2012 as an almost certain win for President Obama. However, small shifts which have revealed themselves in most of the polls figured in to the Real Clear Politics average of polls since Romney’ stellar debate performance last Wednesday, now indicate that if the numbers hold up, Romney will win Ohio, a change that significantly increases the number of ways that Romney can reach the magic number of 270 that is needed to win the presidential race in the electoral college.

While Romney seems to be gaining momentum, it is too early to call it a steady trend, especially given the fact that while Romney has picked up Ohio in the newest projection, New Hampshire and Nevada which Romney did have in column last week, have flipped back to President Obama today.  The good news is that combined, New Hampshire and Nevada have a total of only 10 electoral votes while by itself Ohio has a total of 18 electoral votes.  So even if Romney did lose Nevada and New Hampshire, he stands on better ground after picking up the Buckeye State.  However; it is important to note that White House 2012 is being very conservative by flipping New Hampshire and Nevada to the Obama-Biden ticket.  While the RCP average has pushed the President’s lead in those two states to be in excess of the 3.7% margin of error which we give to Mitt Romney to compensate for each polls poor judgment in the use the 2008 turnout models, other factors prove to be working in Mitt Romney’s favor and allow us to give the President those states by only the slimmest of margins. So both New Hampshire and Nevada are now only barely light blue for the President and they could easily turn pink for Romney at a moment’s notice.

While most states are clearly leaning towards one candidate or the other, White House 2012 is currently only considering there to be seven battleground states.  They are Colorado, Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, Ohio, and Virginia.  Of those states, White House 2012 currently projects the following outcomes;

White House 2012 does see the potential for Romney to become much more competitive in Wisconsin, New Mexico, and possibly Michigan but for now, we do not consider them to be battleground states.

Other Favorable Indicators for Romney

As the race continues to evolve, this projection will change, however; at the moment the race is shaping up to be one that is moving in Mitt Romney’s direction.

For instance, it is with good reason that we continue to forecast Romney victories in the critical states of Florida and Virginia.

While some polls show small Romney leads in those states, most all other polls show Romney to have at least closed the small previous gap that existed between him and the President by as much as half or more.  For example, the latest number from PPP, a Democrat leaning polling outfit, shows that in Virginia, Obama’s lead has shrunk from +5  to +3.  While that Obama lead might not seem like good news for Romney, it is actually very good news when you consider the fact that by using the same turnout model from 2008, the PPP sampling finds this smaller Obama lead even after still giving Democrats a +6 advantage over Republicans.

Furthermore; it is that same Democrat advantage that polls are giving to the President which we see in other states such as Ohio, Florida, New Hampshire and all the other critical swing states.  Yet despite this Democrat advantage, Romney is gaining on the President.  So much so that WH12 sees evidence that indicates the Romney-Ryan ticket will probably not only win the election, they will probably win it by an even wider margin than anyone thinks possible.

Adding to this positive direction for Romney are indications that his own internal polling in at least two states. Currently, those internal polls are said to show Virginia and Ohio show him beating Obama by as much as 3.0% and 4.5%, respectively.

Conclusion;

The recent questionable jobs report has provided a slight spike in consumer confidence but it has not yet translated in to a bounce for the President.  At the same time, President Obama’s approval ratings continue to remain at or below 50%, a position not conducive for reelection of an incumbent President. 

Meanwhile, after his initial debate performance Mitt Romney has established himself as a real threat to the reelection of President Obama.  For the first time since their conventions, Romney is seeing evidence of his base becoming excited with his candidacy and there are signs that undecided voters are moving in his direction.  But Republicans must be careful to not consider this a trend until and unless future polls over the course of the next week show these recent numbers to still be moving in the right direction.  However; at the moment the Romney-Ryan ticket seems to have blocked President Obama’s own forward momentum in the polls and at the same time has finally gotten his campaign moving at pace that could turn the tables on the Obama-Biden and make them the ones with fewer paths to victory.  But to do that, Romney must be sure to keep the momentum moving in the right direction and at the right pace.  To do that, Romney must avoid any stumbles on the campaign trail and he must make sure that an endless repetitive stream of his well crafted 30 second ads are driving home his message and allowing it to sink in among the voters who have a new found respect for Romney after his first debate and are now more receptive to his message than they have been at any other point in this election.

The Projection Formula

The White House 2012 projection takes the Real Clear Politics average of polls and compensates for the outdated 2008 turnout models being used in each in poll by compensating for the under-counting of Republican turnout by adding to Romney’s total, the 3.7% average margin of error in the seven key swing states of Colorado, Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, Ohio, and Virginia.  Then along with a dose of personal political instinct, our projection incorporates other factors in to the equation such as the unemployment rates of individual states and the organizational strength of each state’s Party. 

Bookmark and Share

First Reliable Post Debate Polls Shows the Momentum Behind Romney

  Bookmark and Share   Rasmussen Reports has released the first major polls for the critical swing states of Florida, Ohio, and Virginia since Romney’s masterful debate performance on Wednesday night.  The surveys seem to indicate that the first presidential debate has provided Romney with some of the forward momentum that previous polling indicated he needed in those states as Romney closes the gap in each of the three states to within either a percentage point behind or ahead of President Obama.

While all of this is good news for Mitt, the best news of all is in the Ohio numbers.

  • FLORIDA:    Romney 49% – Obama 47%
  • OHIO:            Obama 50%   – Romney 49
  • VIRGINIA:  Romney 49% – Obama 48%

Up to now, White House 2012 has largely concluded that Mitt Romney was likely to become the first Republican to win the White House without winning Ohio.  Barack Obama knows that without Ohio, Romney has significantly fewer paths leading to the 270 electoral votes needed to win the election.  For that reason, the Obama-Biden ticket has targeted Ohio and made it the key to their own reelection effort.  So far they have done so with success by exploiting the President’s bailout of the auto industry which in one way or another, employs a significant number of Ohioans.  But these new numbers may now show that the Obama strategy to deny Romney Ohio is going to be tougher than heretofore believed.  Apparently, Romney’s debate performance swung at least some minds in his direction.  But the apparent turnaround in Ohio and Obama’s struggle to deny Romney the state is a problem for the President that is only compounded by the fact that the latest Rasmussen poll now also shows Romney ahead in Virginia and Florida.

If this trend continues, the tables can quickly turn and President Obama can find himself the one losing the number of paths available to reelection.

On Monday, when these and other polls are figured in to the  RCP average of polls, White House 2012 will be updating its own Electoral College projection which currently gives Romney an 8 vote lead over President Obama.  (See the current WH12 Electoral College Projection here.)

The White House 2012 Electoral College projection is based upon a formula which uses the average margin of error in all the polls that Real Clear Politics uses to reach its average of polls.  This formula compensates for what we believe is the undercounting of the Republican voter that most polling outfits are using by basing this election on the 2010 turnout models.  Under this formula, White House 2012 currently adds 3.7% to Romney’s RCP average in each of the swing states of Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and Virginia….  the six  states we believe are still undecided.  North Carolina which is considered a swing state by the mainstream media, is not considered such by White House 2012.  We believe that Romney will win North Carolina and have put that state and its 15 electoral votes in Romney’s column.

As indicated in the map below with blue states being for Obama and red states being for Romney, most other states are clearly in the column of one candidate or the other.   A few exceptions could present themselves though in the coming weeks.  White House 2012 suspects that Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and New Mexico could open up and become much more competitive for Romney than it currently is.  If that happens, WH12 will consider them toss-ups and apply the 3.7% formula to their RCP average.

 

Bookmark and Share

Obama’s Race Based Hate Speech Isn’t Really News

  Bookmark and Share  As the sun set on our nation last night, an exclusive video unearthed by Daily Caller Editor-In-Chief Tucker Carlson was aired on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity”.  It was a video of a speech being delivered by then Senator Barack Obama back in 2007.  In it, Senator Obama who was campaigning in a tough race against Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination, addresses a predominantly African-American audience which he tries to fire up by essentially telling them that the federal government hates black people.  Of course the President didn’t use those exact words.  Instead he painted a picture of a federal government that doesn’t care as much about minorities as it does for other people.

The President made his charge in this speech by trying to claim that that the federal government is unwilling to help minorities who are victims of disasters such as those in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina back in 2005 (see video of the remarks below).

And while he did not exactly say that the federal government is  a bigoted extension of the white man, he tried to explain that survivors of Sept. 11 and Hurricane Andrew received generous amounts of aid while residents of majority-black New  Orleans did not because according to him, the federal government considers those victims in Florida and New York to be “part of the American  family” but it does not considers the minorities of New Orleans to be “family”.

He reached that conclusion by falsely stating that the federal government refused to issue the same fund-matching waiver to the mostly minority communities torn apart by Katrina Katrina that were offered to more affluent and caucasian communities such as the one in Manhattan which was destroyed during the attacks of 9/11 on the Twin Towers.  In addition to being irresponsibly inflammatory, the charge was also false.  As it turns out, the federal government did issue the same fund-matching waiver to Katrina-torn regions that it offered to the victims of other disasters throughout the nation.

As seen in the clip below, Tucker Carlson sums the video up probably better than anyone else.  According to him, Obama’s words were “shocking”, “divisive”, “demagogic”, and “untrue”.

Since the initial reporting of the story, conservative activists have been a buzz. For some, like Tucker Carlson, the story has the makings of that oft mentioned “October surprise” that every campaign hopes to avoid but prays to see their rival’s campaign have to figure out how to recover from.  The problem is that this conservative activist doesn’t see it that way.  Unfortunately, I don’t believe this speech will have any impact on the election.

While the video most certainly shows the soon to be President lying and while it also reveals him to be speaking in what is described as a highly “urbanized African-American accent” which is undeniably uncharacteristic of Barack Obama, what the video does not do is present anything new to us.

We have already seen President Obama launch into his chameleon-like ethnic accents that are designed to endear him to the audiences he addresses.  It is practically a standard operating procedure for the Obama-Biden campaign.  It was perhaps best displayed back in August when Vice President Biden stood before another predominantly black audience in Danville, Va. and shouted with an exaggerated Southern drawl… “They’re going to put y’all back in chains.”

This latest Obama video also does not make news by revealing to us that President Obama is a liar.  Many of us already know that President Obama lies. We know that he lies straight to our faces.  Recent events in Benghazi have made that more than obvious.

Furthermore; we  also know by now that President Obama is anything but a uniter.  We have long understood that this President has built his entire political career on a divide and conquer strategy.  And it has long been understood that this President’s entire reelection effort is based on  a class warfare strategy designed to pit some against others.

If there is anything worth reporting here it is that Mitt Romney raised this very issue back in August while speaking at a rally in Chillicothe, Ohio.  It was there that Romney first told us the following;

“Over the last four years, this president has pushed Republicans and Democrats about as far apart as they can go. And now he and his allies are pushing us all even further apart by dividing us into groups. He demonizes some. He panders to others,” Romney said. “His campaign strategy is to smash America apart and then try to cobble together 51% of the pieces.”

He then added;

“Mr. President, take your campaign of division and anger and hate back to Chicago, and let us get about rebuilding and reuniting America.”

So I repeat… President Obama’s hate filled, lies in this speech are nothing new and as such, nothing new will come from this latest example of his deceitful, race baiting tactics and divisive political tendencies.  The truth is that the 47% of the electorate that opposes Barack Obama knew this about him long ago.  So this video will not change their votes.   The other 47% knows Obama is a divisive liar but they refuse to admit it.  So those Obama supporters will also not be changing their vote because of this video.

As for the remaining 6% who describe themselves as undecided, they will be seeing this video through the filter of a  primarily pro-Obama, biased media that will excuse the President’s comments away.  As they get fed the liberal spin on the President remarks, these six percent who claim to be undecided but whom I see as simply slow, dazed, and confused , will accept the liberal narrative given to them.  As such, most of these “indecisive” voters will never realize how much the President’s past words undermine his attempts to portray himself as a unifying force in American politics.  Because of the media’s biases, this swayable six percent of the electorate will probably never allow themselves to accept the fact that President Obama is playing us all for fools.  They should, but they probably won’t.

Bookmark and Share

New Romney Ad Ties Obama to Pelosi and Middle Class Tax Hikes

   Bookmark and Share                A new 30 second commercial being run by the Romney-Ryan ticket finally begins to interject a narrative into the presidential race that can effectively counter the Obama class warfare strategy being aimed at middle class Americans.  (see ad below this post)

While the ad is far from groundbreaking what it does do is cast a large shadow of doubt over President Obama’s policies by pointing out that not only will they lead to higher taxes on the middle class… they ‘already have’ raised taxes on the middle class.

The ad which is aptly titled “Already Has” bases the claim on a very reliable and non-partisan report issued by the Congressional Budget Office back in July.  The report essentially concludes that between Obamacare and Obama economic policies the federal government will spend more money, raise more tax revenue, and reduce the deficit by much less than the President claims.

According to the C.B.O. revenue increases built into in the Obamacare law would essentially lead to a trillion dollars in higher taxes.  These taxes include revenues from Obamacare-driven individual and employer mandates, combined with a so-called “Cadillac tax” on high-cost benefits and additional taxes on drugmakers, medical device manufacturers and insurers.   All of which in addition to raising medical costs will also place direct and indirect tax increases on middle class taxpayers and their families.  The report also concludes that this would all result in  a net increase in federal budget deficits of $109 billion over the 2013–2022 period.

All of this spells disaster for taxpayers and the American economy and none of it should provide thinking Americans with  good reason to reelect President Obama but to really drive the point home, the ad goes a step further by featuring a picture of the President with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.  The image is a politically damaging reminder of just how ideologically close Obama and Pelosi.  It is a point that can only help to turn the stomachs of any fiscally responsible voter.

Unfortunately, most casual observers will not want to get into the nuts and bolts that explain the charges in Romney’s new ad.  However, by just bringing it to the attention of the 6% or so of the independent voters out there in the six swing states that will determine who the next President is, Romney is finally on track to establishing a narrative in this campaign that could provide him with the momentum he needs to turn those currently uncommitted voters in to committed Romney voters.

Bookmark and Share

Romney’s Rosy But Bumpy Road To Victory

   Bookmark and Share  According to most of the latest data made available to the public through the mainstream media, there is no denying that President Obama holds an upper hand in his reelection effort. In fact, according to most pundits, pollsters, and network political prognosticators, President Obama is almost certain to be reelected.  However, given a number of factors including the depth and duration of our dire economic condition, a proliferation of polls that are based on a 2008 voter turnout model which overestimates the enthusiasm that exists for President Obama in 2012, and a growing trend toward Mitt Romney among the critical independent voting bloc , I am not convinced that this election can be called for President Obama just yet.

It’s The Economy Stupid! Maybe?

As for the economy, now over 5 years since the recession began, over 25 million Americans remain unemployed or underemployed  and despite approximately $800 billion in Obama deficit spending meant to stimulate the economy, the government’s official but undercounted unemployment rate remains above 8.0%  for 43 consecutive months.  And at the same time, all other economic indicators remain so sluggish or stagnant that it is clear that our  job growth and overall economic growth fails to even keep pace with the existing population growth rate.  Yet regardless of these glaring facts, polls would have us believe that a majority of Americans do not hold this worst economy since the Great Depression against President  Obama.  It is a conclusion which I find hard to fathom.  Especially given that if reelected to another term, the only solution President Obama seems to be offering is more of the very same Keynesian, deficit spending mentality which has sustained and prolonged the worst economic recovery in American history.  Still though,  even with history as a guide, I can not state for sure that a majority of Americans will blame the poor economy on the President.  During the Great Depression, voters did not blame FDR for the very slow recovery he commanded over, but in 1980 angry voters did hold Jimmy Carter responsible for inflation, stagflation, unemployment, and the misery index which he presided over.

The optimist in me wants to believe that most Americans do believe that President Obama should be held accountable for his failing economic policies which seem to lack the ability to turn the economy around.  However, the pessimist in me fears that the socialist tendencies promoted for generations through FDR’s New Deal, LBJ’s Great Society, and now BHO’s blatant focus on the redistribution of wealth, have finally been accepted by a majority of Americans as the new norm… a norm that has a majority of Americans proudly dependent upon government.  It is a mentality demonstrated in the clip below.

If a majority of voters agree with that woman, then Barack Obama will be a two term President.  But I am not yet ready to believe that the views held by the slave to government in that video clip are the views held by most respectable and  learned American voters.

Slanted Polls and the Blatant Media Bias

The second area of doubt that I have regarding the certainty of a successful reelection effort by President Obama is based upon the polls and the interpretations of those polls being offered to voters by the mainstream media.

Now to be clear, I am convinced that most reputable polling outfits want to be accurate in their polls.  Although the current regime in Washington, D.C. finds the free market to be an enemy of the people, the free market still drives entrepreneurs, even the political entrepreneur who wishes to make a buck by gauging the sentiments of voters.  That stated, it behooves pollsters who want to be in demand in the future to get things right in the 2012 election.  So I cannot in good conscience totally discount all the current polls that are out there.  But I can and do disagree with the decision by most pollsters to rely on the 2008 turnout model which tends to overstate the strength of President Obama’s support.

I am of the opinion that in 2012, a more accurate turnout model to base this election on is the turnout seen in 2010.  I see little reason to believe that the massive anti-Obama sentiment which existed in the 2010 midterm elections does not continue to exist in 2012.  In my view even those voters who are not quite excited by Mitt Romney will still be coming out to cast their ballot for Mitt if for no other reason than to vote against President Obama.

Independent Voters

Combine those two factors with the lack of appropriate reporting regarding the fact that the all important independent vote seems to be breaking for Mitt Romney by as much as 14 to 20 percent and I believe that the Romney-Ryan ticket is on the verge of establishing an Election Day lead over  the Obama-Biden ticket.

While an undeniably polarized electorate consisting of the 94% of voters who are firmly planted on one side of the political and ideological spectrum or the other make it certain that states like California and New York will be voting for Obama while states like Missouri and Texas will be going for Romney, the six percent of the undecided independent voters in the middle will make all the difference in the remaining states that are toss-ups… particularly Colorado, Florida, Iowa, New Hamphire, Nevada, and Virginia.  If this pro-Romney trend among independent voters continues, and I believe it will, each of those states will cast their lot with the Romney-Ryan ticket.

The Results

I cautiously arrive at that conclusion through a combination of factors that include polling, reporting, and my own judgments and political instincts regarding all the available data that could and should be reasonably factored in the electoral equation.  At the moment though, even my own unique formula finds Mitt Romney at a disadvantage.   Using the Real Clear Politics average of polls in six of the seven current toss ups states, as a rule of thumb, I have adjusted for the overestimated Democrat turnout in the polls by giving Mitt Romney the benefit of the average margin of error in the Colorado, Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and Virginia.  In those six states, the average margin of error is 3.7%.   Ohio and North Carolina are also considered to be tossups  however, I believe North Carolina is a reliable state for Romney and that Ohio may be out of Romney’s reach at this point.  Therefore; I have taken both of those states out of the toss-up category.

According to my formula, the adjusted 3.7% margin for Mitt Romney would swing Colorado, Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, and Virginia to Romney, giving him a total of 267 electoral votes.  At the moment though, President Obama holds an RCP average lead over Romney in Nevada that stands at 4.%.  That is 0.3% outside of the existing margin of error which I give to Romney.  Unless Romney closes the gap, President Obama would win Nevada and reelection to the presidency with a total of 271 electoral votes… one more than needed.  However, given the closeness of the race in  Nevada and the momentum Mitt Romney has among independent voters, I see the Golden State as being quite winnable for Romney.  If that is the case Romney will defeat President Obama in the race for President with 273 electoral votes to Obama’s 265 electoral votes.

The Problem(s) Produced By a Race That is Too Close For Comfort

As politically divided as Americans are in 2012, a very close election result is fraught with problems that could trigger historic constitutional measures into action and lead to a level of discourse not seen since the Bush v. Gore case in 2000.

Thanks to the already incredibly polarized electorate and the left’s continued desire to exact revenge for the Supreme Court decision that thew the election to George W. Bush in 2000, if the presidential election turns out to be as close as it seems to be, we could easily another case of a Republican winning the White House by losing the popular vote but winning the Electoral College vote.   The ensuing tensions from such a result could reignite a popular backlash that will lead to varying degrees of civil unrest that have the potential to linger on for at the very least, a few months and possibly spark a very real attempt to do away with the Electoral College… a cause that would consume the national agenda for quite some while.

With extraordinarily large pluralities being produced for President Obama in some of the most densely populated states in the nation, i.e.: California and New York, it is quite likely that much smaller pluralities for Romney from less populated states such as Montana, New Hampshire, Utah, and Wyoming, will not be enough for the Romney-Ryan ticket to overcome the total popular vote that the Obama-Biden ticket receives but could easily allow the Romney-Ryan ticket to reach the 270 votes required to win the presidency in the Electoral College.

Making matters worse, is the fact that if the election is actually as close as the above projection indicates, in  addition to Romney losing the popular vote but winning the election in the Electoral College, if each state goes the way I predict but New Hampshire happens to go for Barack Obama instead of Mitt Romney, there would be a 269 to 269 vote tie in the Electoral College and with both candidates 1 elector short of the 270 needed to win the presidency, the election would be forced into the House of Representatives.  In that event, thanks to a likely makeup of each state’s congressional delegation, Republicans would have control in at least 26 states, enough to assure a Romney victory.  A result that will please conservatives like myself but which will send liberals running through the streets screaming.

Those are just some of the situations that could drag this election out if it remains as close as current data indicates.

But there still remains the possibility that this election will not be as close as we are led to believe it is.

With less than five weeks remaining, I contend that Mitt Romney will surprise many with a well coordinated and highly targeted campaign that will have the ability to attract the type of heavy Republican turnout that we saw in 2010.  Of course being a presidential election year, the Democrat turnout will be much higher than it was in 2010 and that will compensate a bit for the wide gap that existed in 2010, it will not be enough to overcome the anti-Obama sentiment that I believe still exists.  So much so that Romney may even be able to actually make a run at winning a state like Wisconsin and possibly also avoid becoming the first Republican to win  the White House without Ohio.  Unfortunately I do not yet see Romney winning either of those states yet though.

Bookmark and Share

#BarackWasSoPoor: Michelle Obama’s Speech Gives Birth to a Whole New Category of Jokes

Bookmark and Share  The first night of the Democratic National Convention provided liberals with a lot of Obam-like false hope for the reelection of their earth healing, sea slaying messiah.  From Newark Mayor Corey Booker, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick and Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, diehard Democrats were given plenty of red meat as they offered statistical half truths and downright distortions of history and the Obama record.  Then there was the Lilith Fair section of the night where a cavalcade of hypocritical liberal women took to the stage to deliver a hypocritically  anti-feminist message that essentially argued women are helpless without government in control of their lives and the lives of their families.

Then came the competitions.

While Republicans served up Hispanic speakers such as New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez, Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval, Texas Senate candidate Ted Cruz, Florida Senator Marco and other rising stars in their Party, Democrats did their best to upstage the G.O.P. with an even longer list of liberal Hispanic speakers.  In addition to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa who chairs the convention, the DNC featured the young Hispanic Mayor of San Antonio, Texas, Julian Castro.

On it’s own Castro’s speech was a solid statement of Democratic dogma which nailed the left’s dependency on government by mixing it with the American dream and making big government the source of that dream.  For those on the left it was an inspiring articulation of their principles.  But for those of us who believe that the American dream is based not upon government but rather upon personal freedom and liberty and an opportunity society, Castro’s speech was a watered down version of the speech Marco Rubio delivered last week when he introduced Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney at the G.O.P. convention in Tampa.

Both men focussed on the plight of their immigrant parents and grandparents but coming after Marco Rubio’s speech, Castro’s keynote seemed to simply mimic Rubio’s.  The most notable occasion came when Julian Castro remarked that his mother held a mop so that someday he could hold the microphone that he was addressing convention goers from.  On Thursday night Marco Rubio put it this way;  “My father stood behind that bar in the back of room so that someday I could stand behind this podium at the front of the room.”

But after the DNC turned the night into a competition of which Party had leaders who came from poorer immigrant roots than the other, Michelle Obama took to the stage to deliver a speech that tried to take control on the market on which Party had the presidential candidate who was raised under the poorest conditions.

Last Tuesday, Ann Romney told listeners about how when she and Mitt were married they moved in to a small basement apartment where they ate off an ironing board that doubled as their kitchen table and how they sat at a desk that was a door which straddled atop two saw horses.  Last night Michelle Obama told listeners a story about how when she was first married, Barack Obama’s best pair of shoes were half a size too small, and how in their first apartment the two of them sat in front of a coffee table which Barack found in the dump.  She spoke of the two having a crushing college tuition debt and how in trheir first car she could see the tar  of the road pass beneath them.

From the onset it became quite obvious that the Obama’s did not want people to think that the Romney’s were ever poorer than them.  For the Romney’s the telling of the humble beginnings of their marriage was designed to convey a sense of a man who is self-made and who understands how people struggle with the responsibilities of life.  It was a necessary move to humanize Mitt Romney in the face of a liberal class warfare strategy being waged by the President and his supporters.  But the Obama’s were obviously threatened by Ann’s ability to portray Romney as a man who created his own wealth.  So Michelle told Americans a story about an impoverished young man who picked himself up by his own bootstraps to become a champion of the poor.

In the wake of Ann Romney’s speech, the rekindled Obama narrative was so pronounced that it sparked a new hashtag specifically for jokes about how Barack Obama was.  A visit to #BarackWasSoPoor on Twitter now show tens of thousands tweets mocking Michelle’s attempt to lay the groundwork for her husband’s next round of class warfare.  There you will find  such gems as #BarackWasSoPoor  He could only afford to date composite women”, and #BarackWasSoPoor that he is making up for it now spending your money”.  Another example of the creative spin on the theme came from LiberalsRdouchebags who wrote; #BarackWasSoPoor he wants to turn America into a 3rd world country so he feels at home”.

The reaction which led to this new line of political humor was a direct response to the utterly ridiculous premise that Michelle tried to create for her husband regarding his background.  Contrary to the Dickens-like portrayal we saw from the First Lady on Monday, both Barack and Michelle Obama were actually raised in conditions that were far from what could be described as impoverished.  Michelle attended a magnate school for Chicago’s rich and famous called Whitney Young.  At the same time, young master Barack was not exactly running around in the tough poverty riddled streets of Hawaii.  Instead, back when his mother was earning a $160,000 a year salary, he was hidden behind the sheltered walls of Punahou,  a private preparatory school comprised of Hawaii’s blue blooded elitists.    That is hardly a convincing argument when trying to demonstrate how in touch with the average middle class American the President is.  But they were also facts which were deleted from the First Lady’s speech last night.

Meanwhile as the spontaneous flow of the internet’s maze of social networks began to flood the web with a mix of negative and positive reactions to the introductory night of the Democratic National Convention, the mainstream media mainly gushed with praise of the entire first night of the convention.  Few if any news outlets produced true news stories that lacked any spin or featured “fact check” headlines which clarified the First Lady’s mischaracterizations of some kind of less than humble beginnings that she and her husband shared.  Instead what we saw from the lamestream media was unequivocal high praise for every word, distortion, and misleading message the left fed to voters.

The liberal dominated pre-fabricated news media even saw fit to attempt to proclaim that Democrats in Charlotte were much more enthusiastic and energized by their convention than Republicans who attended their own convention in Tampa.

CNN political reporter Peter Hamby, tweeted the following;

To which I replied ;

Other media outlets ranging from MSNBC and their merry masters of misinformation including Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow echoed similar sentiments and so did those at Al Gore’s dyeing cable station Current, where disgraced former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer claimed the energy at the DNC far surpassed the energy level he believed that Republicans had at the RNC.   No one is quite certain what those assertions were based upon other than the wishful thinking of demoralized leftists who are in desperate search of good news for the President’s reelection effort.  But the truth flies in the face of wishful Democrats who would like us to believe that Republicans are not very enthusiastic about their presidential ticket.  As usual the fact indicate just the opposite of what liberals propose to be true.  Poll after poll has shown that Republicans are more enthusiastic about their presidential ticket than are Democrats with the Obama/Biden ticket.

And to add insult to injury for Obama boosters, political analyst Charlie Cook has demonstrated that Democrats are suffering from multiple enthusiasm gaps.  The two most noticeable manifestations of this problem for the President exists among Hispanic and young voters, two of the groups most responsible for President Obama’s 7% margin of victory in the popular vote during the 2008 election. That spells trouble for Democrats and it also explains the need for leftists media mouthpieces to argue that Republicans are not as supportive of Romney as Democrats are of President Obama.

Bookmark and Share

“We’ve Heard It All Before”

As Democrats kickoff their convention and try to make the case for President Obama’s reelection, Republicans have released a video reminding voters that they’ve heard it all before.

The video offers a compelling comparison of the words used by President Obama in 2008 when trying to explain why he should be elected and the words he is using now, four years later in his attempt to explain why he should be reelected in 2012.  As it turns out, they are the same words.

It helps to emphasize the fact that with the President offering us more of the same rhetoric, is there any reason to believe that his next four years will offer us any results that are different from those which are different from the ones he achieved in the last four years?
Bookmark and Share

%d bloggers like this: