5 Mar

The Evolution of a Phony Controversy [Reader Post]

                                       

Here is what Democrats want us to think: Republican candidates are going to take away your contraceptive pills; they are going to go on some jihad against you in the bedroom, and the only salvation is reelecting Barack Obama.

First of all, Obama cannot run on his record. The last thing that he wants you to think about is what he has done while in office. He does not want you to think about Obamacare, because it has continued to remain unpopular, even to today. Now, they will continue to try to sell Obamacare is becoming more popular, but Democrats do not want to carry this flag into the main election.

Whereas Newt Gingrich is going to tell you over and over again that he is the only person on the ticket to ever balance the budget in our lifetimes, Democrats are not going to tout the passage of Obamacare as a great reason to vote for them.

What else have they done? They passed the Stimulus package, which was supposed to reverse the recession. More people believe that Elvis is alive than believe that the Stimulus package worked. Democrat Evan Bayh, when retiring said that if he created one job when he entered into the private sector that would be more than Congress has created in the previous six months.

Are Democrats going to run on the various omnibus bills that they have passed? Yes, at $1.1 trillion for one 2010 bill alone that was 2000 pages long, Dems do not want you to think about that.

Can Obama run on ending the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq? These wars have degenerated into chaos under his watch.

Most people who pay some attention to politics know the numbers:

2009 2012
UNEMPLOYMENT 12M 13.1M
GAS PRICES $1.85 $3.59
FED DEFICIT 10.6T 15.2T
FOOD STAMP RECIPIENTS 32M 46M

It doesn’t matter if Obama is at fault here or not; under his watch, things have gotten worse, not better, and he has spent huge sums of money from many generations to come in order to “fix” the U.S. economy.

Both the media and the Obama administration have tried to paint the economy as improving, but a lot of Americans aren’t buying it.

So, what remains are wedge issues and personal attacks. The media managed to drive Herman Cain out of the Republican race and Sarah Palin out of elective office and apparently, out of elective office aspirations.
What the democratic party knows is, there are a lot of voters out there who barely pay attention. Huge numbers of people voted for Obama, and yet had no clue about him or the other candidates. Some young people simply voted for Obama because he was cool and McCain was this doddering old man.

So Obama needs to capture these votes and to do it with manufactured controversies.

The controversy of the last month has been contraception.

Although Republicans are continually blamed for raising this issue, it actually first occurred in a Republican debate, brought up by George Stephanopoulos on January 7th, a former Clinton aide.

He said the question was a joke. He and Diane Sawyer had a bet that Stephanopoulos could make Romney say, “Contraceptives are working just fine.” A few days earlier, ABC’s Jake Tapper asked Rick Santorum questions about state regulation of birth control.

And then, seemingly out of nowhere, President Obama made to sovereign decision that some Catholic institutions must pay for forms of birth control including the morning after pill. When this became plainly unpopular, the President proposed a compromise, which did not come from any sort of discussion with the Catholic entities about a compromise.

The compromise is, insurance companies will now give out free contraception, which is essentially free to the insurance companies, even though it costs a huge amount of money to individuals (which stories generally ignore that contraceptive pills from WalMart can cost as little as $5–$15/month). And, to liberals, this makes complete sense. If the government requires it to be paid, then it’s free; if a person pays for it individually, the costs are beyond that person’s ability to pay.

Then there is the liberal operative at the Georgetown School of Law, Sandra Fluke [pronounced flook]. There are all kinds of law schools out there and there are a number of different medical plans, yet this woman chose to go to Georgetown, where there are some limits on contraceptive coverage. She said she is attending Jesuit Law School in her testimony. She is concerned that she and others who have spoken to her must come up with $3000 for contraception (which appears to be over the period of time that she is enrolled in school). She claims that contraception is not easily available elsewhere, that they are under crushing demand.

Fluke is a reasonable speaker, but her examples were weird. One woman, after being raped, did not go to her medical provider because she figured they would not help her. Another example was a woman who used birth control for other reasons, and received the birth control, even though maybe it might be denied.

Her primary point was, she should be able to get the coverage that she wants—including free birth control—at a Catholic University, no matter what.

I am certainly not an expert in the female reproductive system. However, it would make sense that, if a woman needed birth control pills for a reason other than birth control, that would be easily verifiable. It appears as though that was not really an issue, even though many people are arguing that is the main issue, where one person actually argued that more people took birth control to prevent ovarian cancer than took it for birth control.

What we have here is a typical Democratic issue. “I am a victim; my friends are victims. This is what we want; we should get it without any hassle or any extra cost.” And Democrats come to her aid, thankful to talk about anything other than the debt, the deficit and unemployment.

As a side note, Rush Limbaugh made light of this, which he often does, illustrating absurdity by being absurd (Rush has since formally apologized for his language and characterization of Fluke). However, in between the absurdity, Rush also throws in some actual information.



Now, it is doubtful that the Democrats can run with this for the next 10 months. However, expect there to be victim after victim, wedge issue after wedge issue, with a little class warfare thrown in. But do not expect Democrats to tout what Obama has accomplished (and he has accomplished a lot) and do not expect them to talk about Obama’s actual record.

As Rush Limbaugh said 2 weeks ago: “The Democrats don’t have one thing they can run on. There’s not one aspect of Obama’s first term that they can say, ‘If you want four more years of this, vote for us.’ They have to create fear, hatred, loathing, impugn the character, all that, of Republicans — and that’s what they do.”

This will be in Conservative Review #218

About Gary Kukis

A retired math teacher who spends most of his time exegeting the Old Testament and, once a week, puts out an ezeen.
This entry was posted in Barack Obama, Conservatism, Deception and Lies, Feminism, Health Care, Media, MSM Bias, Politics, Socialized Health Care and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Monday, March 5th, 2012 at 12:00 pm
| 1,023 views

85 Responses to The Evolution of a Phony Controversy [Reader Post]

  1. MataHarley says: 51

    There is also a shared commonality between Paul and Gingrich as well, Gary. What proves to be somewhat head spinning is that both of their supporters (altho Paul is still a candidate) don’t necessary race to Newt as the “other” candidate. So what I’m most interested in seeing, at the end of the day and at the Tampa Convention, is the shared delegate count for Paul and Newt.

    I think every one has “dream tickets”… I’ve even carried mine further, picking EPA, CIA, FBI, SOS, Treas Sec’y, Defense Secy, and Fed Chair in my mind. LOL Absolutely pipedreams all the way. My only criteria was that, for my “dream team”, I had to use one of the four existing candidates as POTUS. Otherwise the sky was the limit.

    Often pondered, just to see where everyone’s heads were at, putting up a post asking “What’s your Dream Team”… starting with one of the four candidates as POTUS. Be an interesting potpourri of answers, I wager.

    ReplyReply
  2. MataHarley says: 52

    Still detest Hannity with a passion. Can’t abide O’Reilly either. Always disliked Ann Coulter. Tho really funny and quick witted, never took her seriously. She was a “shock jock” columnist who, apparently, never was really a conservative but a GOP’bot. I just viewed her as a political comedienne who like to use inflammation for self promotion.

    Dick Morris? I find him entertaining. I think he knows his pollster data, definitely has great Clinton stories and a past history of working for politicians of both parties. He’s no “architect”, or a phrase creator like Carville. He’s no rock stage design specialist and sleaze ball like Axelrod. Basically, Morris is entertainment… nothing more. No opinions either way, and could take him or leave him on the political landscape.

    ReplyReply
  3. MataHarley says: 53

    Gary, if you do your homework on Rubio, you will know he is in no position to be taking a Veep position at this time. Not unless, like Palin, you want to put in another conservative VP that’s having to juggle both ethics complaints about campaign funds, plus an IRS tax investigation.

    Rubio knows what he’s doing. He needs the time to not only learn his chops and get a record, he has to go thru the hoops and get these Palin’esque type events behind him. Not drag them into the 2012 POTUS arena.

    While there is nothing sure in life, I’d be highly surprised to see Rubio as the Veep… unless his request for the complaints to be dismissed actually happen prior to the convention. Been a few years now. Even then I’d be surprised.

    As for Rand Paul? Doesn’t surprise me in the least that he’d want it. And nope… don’t buy that ticket either. I also don’t buy that being the reason for Paul’s attacks on Santorum, and not Romney or the others. Fact is, Paul just doesn’t like Santorum, and never has. That’s personal.

    ReplyReply
  4. Gary Kukis says: 54

    @MataHarley:

    Often pondered, just to see where everyone’s heads were at, putting up a post asking “What’s your Dream Team”… starting with one of the four candidates as POTUS. Be an interesting potpourri of answers, I wager.

    Either I thought of doing this as well, or there was a break out from some thread at some time. I did have a list as well, but nowhere near extravagant as yours. Palin for Energy secretary.

    ReplyReply
  5. Gary Kukis says: 55

    @MataHarley: Romney will get a strong conservative, I believe, in the veep slot, to pander to the conservatives in the Republican party that he does not quite understand. Maybe Ron Paul as Treasury Secretary or head of the fed?

    Maybe I am being to conspiratorial, but it really seems like there is a Romney-Paul connection, as if Ron Paul was doing some of Romney’s slashing and bashing for him (like a veep would do).

    As for Rand Paul, I think he would take the long view that, maybe Romney will kick the debt can down the road, even with Rand as veep, but that he would be at the end of that road.

    With Rubio, despite his lack of experience, he does at least speak and understand conservatism (like Allen West).

    Liberals have been quite successful at getting groups to function as a group (Blacks and Hispanics). We have to have a considerable piece of one of those groups in order to be viable 10-20 years hence. 90+% of blacks voting for one party is insane. In fact, that was one of the reasons I wanted Cain to win; if there was a debate between Cain and Obama, blacks would watch and be forced to think about issues that they have not thought about before). I think dems understood this as well and had to take Cain out, just as they took out Palin (and Cain was much easier to take out than Palin was).

    ReplyReply
  6. AMERICA WON’T REELECT OBAMA, and more of is that he will be prosecute by the future PRESIDENT TEAM,for having done many decisions to prevent the AMERICANS to live their dreams of success,
    bye imposing and blocking with obstacles the lives of AMERICANS, and many other un-american actions to use their money unwisely to help foreign causes he favored over
    THE PEOPLE IN THE COUNTRY HE WAS SUPPOSE TO PROTECT, that is THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    and circumvent the laws of the land to achieve his goal of declaring war to another SOVEREIGN COUNTRY
    ecetera
    they just will have to pick which one first to choose out of many,

    ReplyReply
  7. johngalt says: 57

    @Richard Wheeler:

    B-BALL question directed at J.G. but appreciate your input.

    I just now got back online, but yes, I am a fan of college bball. Watched UM win in overtime tonite. On to the semi’s, probably against Ohio State. UM should be a strong #3 seed right now, even if they lose the next game.

    ReplyReply
  8. Richard Wheeler says: 58

    J.G. Every Repubs. favorite pollster Rasmussen has Romney +5 over BHO today. Santorum+1 Paul-4 and Gingrich-8. All trail BHO on RCP average.
    Looking to future primaries it would appear Romney secures nom. with winner take all 172 N.Y and 50 N.J. on 5 June. If just short he’ll surely secure by winner take all 40 in Utah the final primary. Mormon Tabernacle Choir sings? Hail To The Chief.

    Looking at E.C. map shows wins in Fla N.C and Va. secured by Rubio as Veep brings Romney very close to being POTUS. A win in Ohio or Pa. gives it to Them.

    Congrats to UM. Kentucky coached by Calipari looks strong.Louisville and mentor Pitino my longshot.

    ReplyReply
  9. MataHarley says: 59

    What part of Rubio will not be Veep escapes you, richard?

    ReplyReply
  10. Richard Wheeler says: 60

    Mata No Rubio no win. I believe he’ll accept if asked. Romney is beholden to Christie. Longshots–Santorum and Rand Paul.

    ReplyReply
  11. DiveCon says: 61

    @Richard Wheeler: actually wouldn’t the NM Governor(Susana Martinez) be a better pick than Rubio(given his MANY statements of not wishing to be picked for VP)

    ReplyReply
  12. MataHarley says: 62

    There will be no Rubio, and I don’t believe he would accept for fear of long term damage, just as Palin has suffered. In case you’re behind the time, Obama’s Media Matters run SuperPAC – American Bridge to the 21 Century – has already been proactive in destroying Rubio. He would be a fool to carry his ethics charges and recent IRS investigation into this election. And Rubio is no fool. Thus the reason he says no Veep slot for him, and will wait until 2016.

    Those, like you, who suggest this is the path to go are either deliberately, or out of ignorance, setting up another unwanted RINO (McCain/Romney) with a pairing of a media vulnerable Veep (Palin/Rubio). I’m sure you’d love nothing more than to repeat 2008 with the same scenario.

    Rand Paul? I doubt it. Just as I doubt Santorum. While Rand may add some economic/fiscal credibility to Romney’s ticket, he doesn’t feel he’s deficient in that with his own skillset. Santorum? Another highly doubtful moment. Santorum’s social conservative record, and it’s possible negative impact on women who fear his views on contraception and abortion – way outside the mainstream – is more a detriment than an aid.

    Last October, Romney’s short list included Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, Governor Christie of New Jersey and Marco Rubio of Florida. With Rubio out for inconvenient timing, that leaves McDonnell and Christie. As of Oct 2011, Christie was still there. Later reports show that Nikki Haley may have made a more current short list. That goes a long way in explaining why she turned her back on the TP supporters to endorse Obama’lite Romney. Others of that same cloth might include New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte and South Dakota Sen. John Thune… also endorsers.

    Romney is not likely worried about carrying the south, if the choice is between him and Obama. What he is more likely to view is IL, IN, OH and PA. But considering he took OH, he may not be too concerned about that area. And in that area, he has Governor Tom Corbett of Pennsylvania, Kasich and Mitch Daniels… the latter floated as an anti-Romney alternative to be drafted. (ick..) But then, it’s hard to say if Daniels would even go there. Kasich has some troublesome approval numbers that may deter Romney, which may not put him at the top of the list. But none of them – Corbett, Daniels or Kasich, all midwest powers, have Santorum’s religious/abortion/contraceptive baggage.

    There is also a possibility that he turns his attention to Congress members, such as Cantor. But I don’t think that will happen because it interferes with his self-presentation of an “outsider” administration.

    Bottom line, at this moment in time, I’d say that Christie or McDonnell are the two most likely culprits. There will be no West, Bachmann, Gingrich, Santorum, Rubio, Cain or others who he will find more “extreme” right than him, and risk his moderate appeal creds.

    ReplyReply
  13. MataHarley says: 63

    @DiveCon, so sorry for the delayed response to your observation:

    Mata, do you actually think they aren’t already on the re-elect Obama team?
    because i do believe they have been for 4 years… snip…

    I don’t have any argument that the majority of the MSM are blatant apologists for Obama, DiveCon. My point was few… outside of Media Matters’ David Brock… will abandon the “appearance” of being neutral (yeah, I know… it’s laughable), and trading it for outright campaigning for him.

    It is for this reason that I think that Palin, still salaried as a FOX contributor to my knowledge, doesn’t step into active campaigning/endorsing mode. But then, you can say the same about Palin as you can about Soledud O’bimbo… that it’s quite clear she is biased in her beliefs when acting as a commentator/contributor as well.

    ReplyReply
  14. Richard Wheeler says: 64

    Mata Next to Rubio John Thune my favorite Conserv. and a great campaigner but S.D. adds nothing to ticket.
    Fla. is not “South” and BHO polls well there and will win if no Rubio. Ill. is Dem. and Ind. Repub. This would leave necessitative(is that a word?) wins in Ohio(ok) AND Pa(not likely with strong Bob Casey support.) I say Romney loses without Rubio and is only a 60-40 favorite with him.
    Rubio also gives Romney a shot in N.M and Col. two otherwise Blue wins.
    Corbett to make Pa. competitive would be an alternative to Rubio.
    McDonnell securing Va. and N.C and giving hope in Fla. also a good choice.

    ReplyReply
  15. MataHarley says: 65

    rich: Fla. is not “South” and BHO polls well there and will win if no Rubio. Ill. is Dem. and Ind. Repub.

    ???? duh…. who suggested it was? Neither has anyone floated Rubio as Veep as a reason to get FL, a state that Romney already bought for $15 mil. He’d have to purchase votes again in the general.

    Rubio has been suggested, erroneously and repeatedly, by those like you as an avenue to the disgruntled conservatives, like me, to accept a watered down moderate as POTUS. That’s the same gameplan as McCain/Palin in 2008.

    I think Romney is apt to do is something no one else has done before… a ticket of just governors… in order to play up the “outsider” angle.

    As DiveCon suggested above, Martinez of NM may be a second tier choice. But since she’s pretty new and untested, Romney risks another perception that he is picking a woman who may be considered unprepared for VP. One bad performance (i.e. Katie Couric moment) out of the gate, and Martinez is toast. I don’t think Romney would go that route.

    Also, you cannot equate Cubano with Mexican Hispanics, and assume that the common base language is a guarantee of Hispanic vote.

    But in the end, I think it will come down to Christie and McDonnell, or perhaps Corbett, in the end. One thing Romney will not do is pick an obvious conservative. Pipedream. Doesn’t matter who you think Romney’s pick would be. My thought is he’s going to lose if he picked Jesus himself as Veep.

    ReplyReply
  16. DiveCon says: 66

    LOL Jesus would decline

    ReplyReply
  17. MataHarley says: 67

    Well, I would have said Joseph Smith as a Veep, DiveCon but that wouldn’t appeal to the social conservatives. LOL

    ReplyReply
  18. Richard Wheeler says: 68

    Mata It seems you’re so personally anti-Romney you don’t see an avenue to his victory. J.G. appears to feel the same.
    Obama was unbeatable in 08. That is NOT the case in 2012. A reasonably social moderate with strong business credentials can beat BHO if and only if the ENTIRE party gets behind him.
    Like it or not (you and I both do) the Electoral College selects the POTUS which in a close election puts only 8-12 states in play. In this election,as you know, most important will be Fl.,Oh.,Pa.,Va.. If Romney can win 3 of those he will be POTUS. He has small margin in Va.,very close in Oh. and Fl. and trails slightly in Pa. He’s got a puncher’s chance. Not so with Santorum and Repubs. don’t want Newt.Personally don’t think social Conservs. like Palin or Cain could have won.
    Having lived in Fl. I understand staunchly Conserv. Cubano vote. vs. Mexican Hispanic vote but Latin pride will bring some votes nationally.Fla.strong Jewish pop. will continue to vote Dem.

    Question If you think Fl. in the money bag for Mitt why Can’t he win POTUS based on E.C.?

    ReplyReply
  19. MataHarley says: 69

    rich: Mata It seems you’re so personally anti-Romney you don’t see an avenue to his victory. J.G. appears to feel the same.

    There ya go with those “ass”sumptions and substandard translations, rich.

    I don’t see an avenue to Romney’s victory because Romney cannot show significant difference between he and da Zero on the largest issues… O’healthcare, mandates, AGW and energy. Why vote for Obama lite with you can have the real thing?

    I don’t see an avenue to Romney’s victory because the O’campaign plays on the “middle class is being destroyed by evil 1%ers and capitalists”… a piece of BS rhetoric that appeals, even when not based much on truths. Romney is the poster child for everything Obama campaigns against.

    I don’t see an avenue to Romney because even if every Republican and every conservative got behind Romney, he still needs independents and young voters. He still needs some Hispanic support. He doesn’t appeal there either because… well, see above #2. And if that were the case, than any GOP candidate could win… Ron Paul, Newt or Santorum… using the same argument.

    I don’t see an avenue to Romney because he will not be able to outspend Obama in the general, and will not have the ability to purchase the swing states. Therefore if he has no genuine appeal as a better political way, he won’t even have the resources for bribery and commercials filled with lies.

    Having lived in Fl. I understand staunchly Conserv. Cubano vote. vs. Mexican Hispanic vote but Latin pride will bring some votes nationally.

    Having grown up in Florida, and with relatives still there… including Cubano via marriage… I don’t see any “Latin pride” alignment between Cubans and Mexicans. In fact, they detest being mistaken for being anything other than Cuban. They have different views on how to handle Cuba, immigration laws, etc. You might as well say that Japanese are going to have “Asian pride” and vote just like the Chinese or Vietnamese. Good grief, rich…

    ReplyReply
  20. Richard Wheeler says: 70

    Mata I didn’t suggest the Cubanos would show pride in a Mexican-American candidate. I suggested those of Mexican heritage would show pride and respect for Rubio’s immigrant story and his willingness to deal humanely with immigration.You are guilty quite often of misunderstanding or misrepresenting my intent. Oh well.
    You are over complicating this contest.What states will Obama win that Mac. won in 2008. NONE. Can Mitt win Obama states Ohio, N.C. Va. Ind.. and red Iowa? You say he buys FL. This makes Romney POTUS.

    ReplyReply
  21. THE LIBERALS WHO HAD THE GAWL TO GET OBAMA ELECTED IN TOP POSITION,
    Richard Wheeler
    the DEMOCRAT PARTY, will all loose IN 2012, THOSE DEMOCRAT HAVE DECEIVED THE GOOD PEOPLE OF AMERICA, THEY DIVIDED AMERICA, HURTING HER SO BAD FOR THEIR LUST OF POWER,
    THE CONSERVATIVES WHERE WATCHING THEIR DOUBLE STANDARD SINCE THE BEGINNING,
    and they where right on the button, they knew he was a deceiver, not qualified for AMERICA NEEDS,
    THE DEMOCRATS COVERED THE TRUTH TO THE PEOPLE WHO ELECTED THEM ALL,
    THOSE VOTERS ARE SO ANGRY NOW, THEY WILL TAKE BACK THEIR VOTES THIS TIME AND JOIN THE CONSERVATIVE SIDE AS ONE TOGETHER, AS NEVER BEFORE DONE.
    wait and see for yourself the guilty will be far gone in 2012, and nothing OBAMA AND HIS MINIONS
    CAN DO WILL prevent it to be happening,

    ReplyReply
  22. MataHarley says: 72

    @Richard Wheeler: I didn’t suggest the Cubans would show pride in a Mexican candiddate. I suggested those of Mexican heritage would show pride and respect for Rubio’s immigrant story and his willingness to deal humanely with immigration.You are guilty quite often of misunderstanding or misrepresenting my intent.

    Am I? Or are you all over the map in your communications, rich? Hummm let’s look at that “you don’t understand I was talking about Mexicans having Latin pride defense” bit.

    In the pertinent comment above you said:

    Like it or not (you and I both do) the Electoral College selects the POTUS which in a close election puts only 8-12 states in play. In this election,as you know, most important will be Fl.,Oh.,Pa.,Va.. If Romney can win 3 of those he will be POTUS.

    Then you end with:

    Having lived in Fl. I understand staunchly Conserv. Cubano vote. vs. Mexican Hispanic vote but Latin pride will bring some votes nationally.Fla.strong Jewish pop. will continue to vote Dem.

    So if we are discussing “Latin pride”, and in all cases in your comments, you are referring to the important swing states, why would I not think you are referencing Florida swing state Cubans will have that “Latin pride”, and not talking about Mexican hispanics in general everywhere in the nation? Most especially when you follow with the FL Jewish vote. Were you, or were you not speaking of Florida?

    So if I misunderstood your bizarre statement, I’m sorry. But for you to now say it was about Mexicans across the nation, voting for a man of Cuban descent, when your comment was all about swing states (FL being the most obvious for the “Latin” vote in the mix), seems a bit far fetched.

    But then, maybe your mind was bouncing around like silly putty.

    ReplyReply
  23. Richard Wheeler says: 73

    Mata WOW enough about Cubans vs. Mexicans. What about my very simple query re. state specific Electoral College path to victory for Mitt?

    Ms. Bees Slow down and read what I’ve been saying.I’m projecting the distinct possibility that your nominee, Mitt Romney, will beat Barack Obama.

    ReplyReply
  24. MataHarley says: 74

    rich, as even Business Insider pointed out about a week ago, Romney is weaker in the midwest swing states than Santorum.

    So in your specific scenario, I do not think he can win IA – and area dependent upon big farm subsidies. I also think he’d lose both OH and VA (which is where McDonnell would come in handy). I don’t think he can afford to buy FL in the general, but that will come down to whether or not the FL seniors see Mitt as negatively affecting Medicare. Right now, I’m inclined to think FL would lean towards Obama because of O’healthcare rhetoric, but could certainly change. Even AARP sends out stuff monthly, supporting O’healthcare.

    So that leaves the only two likely (IMHO) as NC and Indiana. Both states were extremely tight in 2008, so it’s a real toss up with no guarantees. NH is a swing possibility, but only 4 delegates.

    So nope… just don’t see it happening.

    For your amusement, two links:

    1: The 2012 predictions from David Leip’s election atlas. That’s got a generic GOP candidate taking FL, but still losing to Obama by 68 EC delegates. Considering I’m not in the least bit sure about Florida, losing those 29 delegates would increase the Obama win to 97 delegates.

    2: To play with results, CNN has an interactive EC map.

    ReplyReply
  25. Richard Wheeler says: 75

    MATA Appears you agree Mitt holds all Mac states and wins back Ind. and N.C. I believe he wins traditionally Repub. Ohio and Va. squeeks by in Iowa and with Rubio as VEEP wins FL. 272 with 270 needed to win. President Romney.

    ReplyReply
  26. MataHarley says: 76

    rich: Appears you agree Mitt holds all Mac states and wins back Ind. and N.C.

    ??? You really need to slow down in your reading, rich. What I said was… read s-l-o-w

    So that leaves the only two likely (IMHO) as NC and Indiana. Both states were extremely tight in 2008, so it’s a real toss up with no guarantees.

    Now, pray tell, how does that translate, in rich’speak, to “appears you agree Mitt…. wins back IN and NC”?

    ReplyReply
  27. Richard Wheeler says: 77

    Mata And you call me “snide” or something similar. lol You say Ind and N.C, “extremely tight in o8″ ?Do you believe any chance Obama wins in either of these two? Not a chance.

    I’ll stick with Romney/Rubio 60-40 over BHO
    Romney/McDonnell toss up

    ReplyReply
  28. Richard Wheeler says: 78

    Mata In #72 you ref. David Leip I’m in total ageement with exception of traditionally Repub.Va and Ohio to Romney— leaves Iowa winner claiming Presidency.Gonna be a heavily visited little state.
    BTW Romney has outside shot at Nev.with it’s substantial Mormon population.

    ReplyReply
  29. Gary Kukis says: 79

    @DiveCon: Good call. Woman and hispanic all in one.

    ReplyReply
  30. Gary Kukis says: 80

    @MataHarley:

    I’d say that Christie or McDonnell are the two most likely culprits. There will be no West, Bachmann, Gingrich, Santorum, Rubio, Cain or others who he will find more “extreme” right than him, and risk his moderate appeal creds.

    Interesting take. If Romney does not get all of the delegates, then he has to deal. If he gets them all, I still think he will choose a more conservative veep. It won’t be Christie.

    ReplyReply
  31. MataHarley says: 81

    Gary, if Romney doesn’t sweep all the rest of the states with majority wins over 45%, he will most likely come short. But not so much short that he will still consider himself the crowned winner because of the spread between he and the other also rans. I don’t see Romney feeling any obligation to appease with a more conservative candidate, since he considers himself “seriously conservative” already.

    And speaking of delegates, it might be pointed out that since there is a difference between bound and unbound delegates, Newt’s actually in second place, and his popular vote is only about 150,000 less than Santorum’s. Ron Paul’s last with delegates and popular vote is about half of Newt and Santorum’s.

    Yet they want Newt to leave the race? There’s lots of political workings behind the scenes here. In a one on one race, I don’t see Santorum beating Romney. Toe to toe, the harder one to beat would be Newt… unless, of course Romney’s wallet stays filled with wads.

    ReplyReply
  32. Darbie says: 82

    @ilovebeeswarzone:

    I agree with everytjing you are saying. I know many people who believed Obama to be a great candidate in the beginning, so they voted for him. And now every single person I know that voted for him takes it back. They don’t plan on re-electing him, and they can’t believe they did it in the first place. I say that Obama needs to learn how the people of America work because right now he is failing at being a president in my standards.

    ReplyReply
  33. Darbie
    very good to hear that you are seeing the change of heart taking place, I thank you for coming to tell us about it as clearly,
    we are trying to expose the fail actions to be the reason why every one of having been close to it
    tell us to that this next ELECTION WILL BE THE MOST IMPORTANT THAN ANY OTHER ELECTIONS SINCE THE BIRTH OF THE UNITED STATES OF THIS BEAUTIFUL AMERICA, WHERE THOSE WHO LOVE THEIR COUNTRY ARE LIKE YOU AWARE AND READY FOR ANYTHING, ANY OBSTACLE THE ADMINISTRATION
    SAID TO BE PUT IN ACTIONS TO PREVENT THE VOTES TO APPLY THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE OF COURAGE LIKE THEIR ANCESTORS HAVE SHOWN ALL ALONG THE ROAD TO THESES TIMES.
    BYE

    ReplyReply
  34. Darbie says: 84

    @ilovebeeswarzone:

    Yes this is true. I think many fellow americans are realising their mistake, and in this next election they plan to fix it.

    AMERICA MAKE ME PROUD!

    ReplyReply
  35. Darbie
    yes, and the liberals are under estimating the power of the PEOPLE IN AMERICA,
    HILLARY WAS TALKING ABOUT THE WOMAN BEING TARGETED, BUT SHE FAIL TO SAY IT’
    COME FROM THE WHITE HOUSE DIRECTLY USING WOMEN TO BE SET UP TO SERVE THEIR INTENT TO TURN THE WOMEN against the CONSERVATIVES REPUBLICAN PARTY
    that ‘s all they have left to gain votes, can you imagine how low they have gone,
    they cannot use the other cards because the PEOPLE HAVE ENOUGH OF IT, so now they use woman,
    watch will come next. they even are turning against each other now, the fear tactic on the DEMOCRATS WHO WANT TO EXPOSE THEM.
    WHO WANT THAT KIND OF GOVERNMENT FOR AMERICA,
    THE MOST TOLERANT GIANTS EVER, BEING SUBJECT TO SUCH HUMILIATIONS BY THE MULTIPLE AGENCIES THAT OBAMA HAVE MANDATE TO DICTATE CONSTANTLY TO IMPLEMENT
    THEIR LAWS
    BYE

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>