Archive for the ‘Election 2012’ Category
Time Magazine political writer Mark Halperin released the scoop of the century: Everyone knows President Barack Obama is in over his head.
Now he tells us.
Just when you thought Jimmy Carter (aka: Ex-President Superior) was our nation’s most (in)famous example of the Peter Principle*… along comes Barack Obama (aka: The One We Weren’t Waiting For Afterall).
Well Mr. Halperin, at least 47% of us knew that back in 2008. Welcome to the club.
Although the author tries to disprove the incompetence charge, he still reports quite accurately on the rational perception. Hey, the guy still has to work with his liberal Old Stream Media colleagues. They throw great cocktail parties. Or so, I’ve heard.
Here are some of the “money quotes”:
With the exception of core Obama Administration loyalists, most politically engaged elites have reached the same conclusions: the White House is in over its head, isolated, insular, arrogant and clueless about how to get along with or persuade members of Congress, the media, the business community or working-class voters. This view is held by Fox News pundits, executives and anchors at the major old-media outlets, reporters who cover the White House, Democratic and Republican congressional leaders and governors, many Democratic business people and lawyers who raised big money for Obama in 2008, and even some members of the Administration just beyond the inner circle.
Moreover, there is a growing perception that Obama’s decisions are causing harm — that businesses are being hurt by the Administration’s legislation and that economic recovery is stalling because of the uncertainty surrounding energy policy, health care, deficits, housing, immigration and spending.
And that sentiment is spreading. Many members of the general public appear deeply skeptical of Obama’s capacity to turn things around, especially, but not exclusively, those inclined to dislike him — Tea Partyers and John McCain voters, but also tens of millions of middle-class Americans, including quite a few who turned out for Obama in 2008.
In politics, perception is reality. And, in this case, the perception and reality mesh quite easily.
Obamanomics has been an abject failure. Yes, President Obama inherited a recession. The economy is basically cyclical and self-correcting. But, our impatient (and economically ignorant) president implemented policies which made it the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. His happy band of Democrat congressional enablers (aka: Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi) cracked the whip and herded their super-majority to enact job-killing laws.
Obama campaigned as a post-partisan pragmatic centrist. He then proceeded to govern as a hyper-partisan dogmatic leftist. Americans have an inherent “Don’t Screw Me” attitude. It is in our DNA. We do not subscribe to “live and let live” fatalism. Americans are willing to give you the benefit of the doubt… the first time (read: Porkulus). Try and fool us the second time (read: ObamaCare), and we get mad… and then, we get even.
Now, Obama and the Democrats will reap the political whirlwind they have sewn. Halperin even admits it is too late to undo the electoral damage. The House is certainly gone and the Senate is tottering. Obama may have aided American conservatism more than William F. Buckley and Milton Friedman… combined.
Is that irony or just desserts? Historians and political scientists can debate the point ad infinitum. I for one don’t care, as long it produces the same result.
The price being paid by the American people is far higher than that of the Obama Administration and the Democrat Party. And, they will soon render unto the young Caesar and his equestrian order what is justifiably their due… a good old-fashioned whoopin’ come Election Day.
It will not end Obamaism. But, if the GOP does not blow the opportunity, it is a beginning.
© 2010 by kens*ten. All rights reserved.
* The Peter Principle was made famous by Dr. Laurence J. Peter in his book of the same name published in 1969. The principle is that in a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to the level of their incompetence. He sure pegged Carter and Obama.
The Fray / “(Everyone Knows I’m In) Over My Head”
The United States Constitution mandates a national census every ten years. The reason: the apportionment of seats in the House of Representatives among the various states. This redistribution is based on population. As states gain or lose population in proportion to the other states, their respective shares of the 435 House seats changes.
A review of preliminary 2010 Census data by Election Data Services (EDS) points toward a Republican advantage in the 2012 election. The Census Bureau releases their official report in late December.
EDS projections suggest gains by “Red States” such as Texas (+4), Florida (+2), Arizona (+1), Georgia (+1), South Carolina (+1) and Utah (+1). “Swing State” Nevada and “Blue State” Washington also may gain one seat each.
When some states gain, other states must lose. The brunt of the lost seats will occur in Blue States: New York (-2), Illinois (-1), Iowa (-1), Massachusetts (-1), Michigan (-1), New Jersey (-1) and Pennsylvania (-1). Swing States Ohio (-2) and Missouri (-1) are expected to lose seats along with Red State Louisiana (-1).
The net results: Red States +9, Blue States -7 and Swing States -2.
The impact these gains and losses will have on the House in 2012 is more problematic. Each state is responsible for dividing their geographic area into districts of nearly exact population. The ensuing re-districting battles — especially in states losing one or more seats — will largely hinge on which party controls the state legislature. The vast majority of states are holding state legislative elections in November. With the GOP riding a nationwide wave of frustration, they are poised to capture many legislatures from the Democrats. When the GOP lacks a majority, Republican governors can often use the threat of veto to leverage a more beneficial map. But, much will depend on local political conditions.
As the number of Electoral Votes per state is the sum of its House seats plus two (for their Senators), this reapportionment makes it a little easier for the GOP presidential candidate to reach the 270-EV majority. Assuming they run a candidate that can win in 2012.
© 2010 by kens*ten. All rights reserved.
When Senator John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign was in the midst of the doldrums, they decided on a bold play to stave off defeat. McCain (R-Az) selected Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) as the vice presidential nominee.
The effect was immediate and electric among the Republican base. McCain’s poll numbers surged upward and he took a small lead. Conservatives who were skeptical about McCain saw hope in the Palin selection. Now the ticket was truly maverick.
Seeing the GOP candidates rise in the polls, the media sought to destroy Palin to sink McCain’s chances. Then McCain botched his response to the TARP bailout.
The die was cast. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) easily defeated McCain. And, bitter staffers from the McCain campaign blamed Palin for the loss.
But, conservatives never did. McCain did a good job with his “stand up for America” nomination acceptance speech. But, that passion was never seen again from McCain — in speeches or in his debates with Obama. Palin provided the only passion and outdrew McCain at campaign appearances.
For conservatives, Palin was the primary reason they voted Republican. Many had resigned themselves to not voting for McCain, voting third-party or even staying home. One can make a compelling case that Palin made the race closer than it would have been with Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee as the running mate.
Unlike most unsuccessful Veep candidates, Palin did not go quietly away. Despite the media attacks, she struck a resonant chord with many Americans. That explains her continuing popularity while McCain had to fight to win a primary challenge for his Senate seat.
Palin scored very well during the recent primary season. Most potential 2012 GOP presidential hopefuls refrained from endorsements to avoid either public embarrassment or burning political bridges. Not Palin. She injected herself into several high-profile races, more often with success than not. She even showed political acumen by the timing of some endorsements.
Sarah Palin may be the major political player in America after November 2010. She may run for president. She may not. But, Palin’s power will be demonstrated either way.
© 2010 by kens*ten. All rights reserved.
I wasn’t in the Oval Office when President Obama recently met with former President Bill Clinton. They were ostensibly discussing “energy efficiency” – a pet project of some foundation from which Bubba draws a six-digit annual salary. But, in your heart you just know they were talking politics. Certainly, Election 2010… and perhaps Campaign 2012 as well.
I think it probably went something like this:
Bill: Now Barry… er, Mr. President… you’re in deep caca de toro… and you need my help.
Barry: Well, I… uhh…
Bill: Look, I’m willing to forget all that crap you pulled when Hillary ran. I mean everyone knows I was the first black president. But, I’m gonna need some props from you, if you want my help.
Barry: I didn’t… uhhh approve of … uhh… all that stuff. It was… uhh… below my paygrade. So, you can’t… uhh… hang that…
Amid plunging poll numbers and the failure of “Recovery Summer”, President Obama has called upon a certain predecessor to throw him a political lifeline. Campaign 2010 has now become: The Return of Bubba.
Under the guise of a meeting to discuss energy efficiency, former President Bill Clinton (D-AR) was invited to a face-to-face Oval Office meeting. Given the past Obama and Clinton share, the meeting had to be somewhat humiliating for the president… the current one.
Political junkies… yours truly included… typically find presidential politics irresistible. We wouldn’t mind talking/blogging about it 24/7/365. However, the thought occurs that right now is not the time to start fighting the Republican presidential primaries.
An anonymous Mitt Romney “adviser” told Time that Sarah Palin “is not a serious human being”. Another anonymous Romney “intimate” told the magazine:
If (Palin is) standing up there in a debate and the answers are more than 15 seconds long, she’s in trouble.
The quotes were designed to generate press interest. And, they did.