Mitt Romney’s Pessimism . . . and Mine

It should not surprise that Mitt Romney is not my flavor politically.  He’s too establishment for me.  But my respect for him has increased after reading that he gets it how bad a shape this country is in.  His thoughts on Election Night 2012 stand out in that regard:

As defeat settled in, Romney discussed what to say in a concession speech — which, for all his natural pessimism, Romney had not considered ahead of time. And it was in that moment that some of Romney's passion about the race finally came out, far from the view of voters and television cameras. Stevens suggested that the losing candidate should play an almost "pastoral" role, "soothing" the American people after a long and divisive campaign.

"I don't think it is a time for soothing and everything's fine," said Romney. "I think this is a time for [saying], 'This is really serious, guys. This is really serious.'"

"To get up and soothe is not my inclination," an obviously anguished Romney continued. "I cannot believe that [Obama] is an aberration in the country. I believe we're following the same path of every other great nation, which is we're following greater government, tax rich people, promise more stuff to everybody, borrow until you go over a cliff. And I think we have a very high risk of reaching the tipping point sometime in the next five years. And the idea of saying 'it's just fine, don't worry about it' -- no, it's really not."

Romney was right.  It is not fine.  I fear a coalition of those who loot and/or prefer Latin or European political culture to American has plunged the United States into permanent decline.

I hope I am wrong.  I do see the possibility of a backlash so strong in the 2014 and 2016 elections that it will, like the 1980 election, stop America’s decline for a generation.  In my more optimistic moments, I expect it.  (Hence, my Downfall series.)  But if the next two elections fail to do that, my view of the future is dark indeed.  Moreover, if after the abysmal performance of the Obama Administration, there isn’t the great repudiation of the Democrat Party they have earned so well, it will confirm my pessimism.

And if the establishment Republicans and Democrats succeed in importing more un-American voters and cheap labor with immigration “reform”, not unlike what the UK Labour Party did with immigration there, then America’s decline will be hastened all the more.  Legalization and importation of those who should not be here in the first place must be stopped.

More unhappy thoughts on Romney’s justified pessimism may be found over at Ace of Spades.

But my trust is in a different kingdom.  And prophecies concerning that kingdom, contrary to a few bizarre interpretations, do not seem to say much about the United States of America.  We are not as great as we think we are in God’s purposes.

And we are proving that all too well at the moment.

-----

A trivial but happier note to offset the gloom above:

Yes, I am very happy about the NFL football results this past weekend.  This earlier post will tell you why. 

Unless the refs manage to ruin it, this will be a Super Bowl I enjoy.

“Voting’s the best revenge” vs. “Love of country”

Obama has just had another moment when he’s departed from the teleprompter and let the mask down.  And I think it will sink him.  He exhorted a crowd in Springfield, Ohio not to boo, but to vote, for “voting’s the best revenge.”

Romney and his campaign have alertly jumped on this.  And the result is an ad that I think will move the election.

Something just about all people hate about our current politics is how divided we have become.  Obama has just firmly put himself on the wrong side of this and Romney on the right side.

I stand by my semi-infallible prediction.  Romney will win.

Useless(?) Semi-infallible Election Prediction

I am now prepared to predict the 2012 election almost infallibly.

Romney will win.  And it will not be that close.

The polls I put the most weight on, Rasmussen and Gallup, are breaking for Romney.  Rasmussen daily tracking this morning (but taken before the last debate) has Romney 50% to Obama 46%.  The latest Gallup polls also have Romney over 50%.  Late deciders tend to break against the incumbent, especially when the economy has been punk under the incumbent.  That is what we are seeing now, and it's not over. 

And, yes, I expect this trend to be strong enough for Romney to carry Ohio.  He has gained there, and polls have him roughly tied.  Ohio will continue to move toward Romney.

In addition, the vote for Romney (and against Obama) is more intense and angry/enthusiastic than for Obama.  One very helpful measure of this is Rasmussen’s Presidential Approval Index.  It persistently shows between 40% and 45% strongly disapprove of Obama, much more (now more than 16 more) than the percentage who strongly approve of Obama.  So I expect the turn out will be much more favorable to Republicans than 2008, though perhaps not quite as favorable as 2010.

I just do not see a big event coming to save Obama as much as a few may try to manufacture one.  In fact, Democrats are becoming so unhinged, they could easily say something to make things worse.  They are acting pretty silly already with binders and such.

Now here’s where I am a real outlier – the Republicans will take the 50 seats they need to control the Senate (with Veep Ryan providing the tiebreaking vote if needed).  This will be a ticked-off had-enough election like 1980.  Yes, Obama is Carter Redux in more ways than one. And in 1980, the big shocker wasn’t Reagan winning, but the GOP gaining twelve Senate seats.  The GOP won’t gain twelve this time, but they will surprise again and take the Senate if by the skin of their teeth.

Whether my prediction is useless or useful, I’ll let you be the judge.

Cheating Candy

During last night’s debate, we saw a brazen display of cheating.  The most egregious instance was supposed Moderator Candy Crowley intervening with her little fact check (which turned out to be an inaccurate one) in blatant violation of debate rules:

"The moderator will not... intervene in the debate except to acknowledge the questioners from the audience or enforce the time limits, and invite candidate comments during the 2 minute response period."

I don’t know how many times Obama and Biden have lied during these debates.  But not once has a moderator fact-checked them during the debate.  Nor should they.  The time for that is afterward, except for the candidates themselves who can and should fact-check each other.  Candidates are to debate the facts with each other, not the moderator.  Candidates are to give answers, not the moderator.

Last night was the last straw for me.  I am fed up with these so-called moderators from the liberal news media.  Hell, let’s give up the pretense that they are fair facilitators of debates.  Let’s give the news media a podium right up there on stage and let them debate the Republican candidate right along with the Democrat.  Because that is practically what really happened last night.  It was blatant cheating that affected the debate, and it is an outrage.

And, by the way, in all three debates, Obama/Biden was given more time than Romney.  And no wonder - the moderators keep interrupting Romney/Ryan.  Some moderators.

“Moderator” Candy was not the only one who cheated last night.  Michelle Obama applauded during the debate in clear violation of the clearly stated rules.

Thanks in large part to Candy, I consider the debate a draw.  But judging from reactions from undecided voters on Fox and MSNBC, my evaluation may be too pessimistic.

Also, it is a good thing it is a long way to sunset.  I may have a hard time not letting the sun go down on my anger on this one.

------

MORE: Crowley interrupted Romney28 times.  She interrupted Obamajust 9.

Why the heck do we trust the “mainstream” news media to provide fair moderators for presidential debates?  Oh, that’s right.  We don’t.  And Candy Crowley exemplifies why.

After the Debate (or I’m a Party Pooper)

First, let's get some things out of the way.  I am encouraged by the first debate.  There is no question Romney won.  Even some prominent Lefties concede that, and a few of them even went in meltdown mode last night, particularly Chris Matthews and Andrew Sullivan, who called it “a disaster for Obama.”  I think Obama constantly looking down and smirking while Romney spoke hurt him.  And Romney effectively called out Obama’s lies (my word, not Romney’s) yet in a winsome manner, which is not easy to do.  Moreover, Romney was likeable throughout.  I've been hard on Romney, but he did good, as we say in Texas.

One of the reasons last night may be significant is that millions of viewers found out that Romney neither has horns nor advocates any number of things Obama says he advocates.  And it could be the beginning of undecided voters moving to Romney.

However . . . Obama committed no major gaffes.  And this is only one debate with two presidential debates to go.  Sitting presidents have had weak first debates before and gone on to win the election.  The remaining debates or other events could easily undo any damage Obama sustained last night and then some.  Yes, two more debates like this one, and Obama may be done for.  But that is highly unlikely to happen.

I saw a lot of my fellow conservatives get a bit carried away last night.  I am not one of them.  Last night was encouraging and certainly a setback for Obama, but, contra Andrew Sullivan, no disaster for Obama, at least not yet.

Yes, I’m a party pooper.

Romney is Right . . . unfortunately (UPDATED)

Well.  There seems to be quite a hubbub this morning that one of the presidential candidates actually tells the truth.

And even some Romney naysayers acknowledge that he was pretty much factually on target in his already infamous “47%” remarks given at a fundraiser and secretly videotaped and given to Mother Jones, with the help of Jimmy Carter’s unemployed grandson.  How appropriate.

Mitt Romney is also right in his analysis I am very sad to say.

There has been much gnashing of teeth among us conservatives about why this election is even close now.  Obama’s record is atrocious; he should be toast already.  Some have blamed Romney’s campaign, and it certainly could be better.  But I do not think that is the main problem.

I do not think I’ve yet voiced my opinion on this on this blog, but now that Romney has . . . .

For decades, Democrat strategy has been to make more and more of the American people dependant on the federal government and thereby to buy their votes.  It took a while, but all these years and years of vote buying are succeeding.  To be blunt, a growing percentage of the electorate vote to loot the rest of the electorate. (And please note that “loot” is my appropriate and untactful word, not Romney’s.)  Almost half of the populace do not pay income taxes and receive government benefits.  And most of these who vote do so to keep taking and taking.

(An aside: I also think there used to be more belief in the value and likely success of hard work in improving one’s lot.  That this belief is less prevalent now makes matters that much worse.)

And it is becoming evident they will even vote for a President with a record of trashing the Constitution, attacking our freedoms, and hurling the nation towards bankruptcy in order to keep looting the treasury, as George Washington put it. 

Years ago, such looters would fail to re-elect the likes of Obama.  There weren’t enough of them, or at least not enough of them voted.  But, again, the Democrats have so succeeded in buying off more and more of the electorate through the years, they just might put Obama over now.

Now I do think it is possible to turn this depressing trend around.  The election is indeed close, and Romney can win this election.  And if there is a stronger economy in the aftermath, more will become taxpayers and will naturally vote against being looted.

 

I’ve seen this transformation first hand.  Once, I ran into a Duke friend of mine, and his views were vociferously more conservative than when we were both students.  I asked him what happened.  His succinct answer: “I got a job.”

But for now, the Democrats are succeeding in buying off more and more of the electorate and turning them into looters.  That this election is close is a sad reflection on that and does not bode well for the future of this nation.

Romney is right.  God help us.

---

MORE:

Here’s a chart that is all too relevant.  For much of the 80’s, less than 20% did not pay income taxes.  Today?  About half.

UPDATE: 

A new Gallup Poll is just out.  Guess how much Obama has in it? 47 percent.

High Comedy at the Republican Convention

And, no, I am not referring to Clint Eastwood’s routine.  To be honest, I found it awkward although he had his moments, particularly when he zinged Obama for attempting to try terrorists in the middle of New York City.  Still, I think those in charge trusted him a bit too much, letting him speak without a script.  But does anyone really want to tell Clint Eastwood what to do?  Be my guest!

As for Romney’s speech, I wasn’t wowed.  But it was adequate, and he came across as Presidential.  And the rest of the evening well debunked the meme that he’s a felonious unfeeling plutocrat.  And that was the sort of night that was needed.

So, anyway, what do I find high comedy about the convention?  Liberal attempts to decode the words of Republicans to find racism and other evils.   The contortions particularly MSNBC went to find RAAAAACISM were absurd.  This week they practically invented the game Six Degrees of Racism.

And last night MSNBC found Birtherism in Romney’s speech.  How?   From these words:

Tonight, that American flag is still there on the Moon. And I don't doubt for a second that Neil Armstrong's spirit is still with us.  That unique blend of optimism, humility, and the utter confidence that, when the world needs someone to do that, you need an American.

Yes.  Those are obvious code words meaning, “I am a birther!”

While analyzing Mitt Romney’s convention speech on Thursday, Schultz couldn’t help but hear a birther reference tucked within the oration.

“Here is another thing that jumped out at me. ‘When the world needs to do really good stuff, you need an American,’” he said.

He continued:

“That was the other line, you know, we’ve got to do big stuff. We’ve got big problems. We don’t have an American. How else are we supposed to take that line? To imply that the guy who’s leading the country right now is not an American, ‘when the world needs to do really big stuff we need an American.’ I felt that was below the belt, and it was a dog whistle, whatever you want to call it, a bone throw to the birthers out there that ‘I’m not that far from you.’”

Co-host Rachel Maddow was all too happy to agree.

“It struck me as the same way,” she said, “especially coming on the heels of his birther joke from this past week.” That, of course, was a reference to Romney making the comment that he doesn’t need to show his birth certificate in Michigan (where he was born).

Hey, let’s join the fun.  Readers are invited to play Six Degrees of Racism/Birtherism with my posts even. 

Here I’ll start: “fun” >> sex >> birth >> BIRTHERISM!  See, it’s easy!

Paul Ryan a Courageous Veep Pick

I was pleasantly surprised to find out this morning that Romney has chosen Paul Ryan to be his running mate. I did not expect Ryan because I expected a safer pick.  For Ryan is the premier man associated with entitlement reform.  Democrats demagogue against just about any entitlement reform every election.  It has long been one of their chief weapons.  Romney just gave them a juicy target and that willingly I’m sure.

Grandmas, you better hide . . . now.  Democrat ad men are already looking for grannies to push off cliffs in Mediscare ads.

I am gratified that Romney is serious enough about entitlement reform and willing enough to take heat for that to pick the point man for reform as his Veep.

I consider it a smart pick as well.  The Obama campaign is based on deception and lies, big lies.  Ryan has the temperament, smarts, and communication skills to take those lies apart.  It is not for nothing that he is known as a policy wonk.  He is great in dealing with facts in a clear, even tempered, and convincing way.  The Romney campaign needs that.

Also, some polls indicate that, while other potential Veep picks would not help much in delivering their states, Ryan will help in Wisconsin.

This is a smart, serious, and, yes, courageous pick.

MORE: Even before the pick was formally announced, the mediscaring began.

Obama Tries to Scare Women (and fails)

It’s not close to Halloween yet, much less Election Day.  But the Obama campaign is trying to scare women . . . literally.  From their new ad . . . which is pretty much the same as any number of old Democrat ads:

“I’ve never felt this way before, but it’s a scary time to be a woman,” says 30-something “Jenni.” “Mitt Romney is just so out of touch.”

A female narrator chimes in: “Romney opposes requiring insurance coverage for contraception and Romney supports overturning Roe vs. Wade. Romney backed a bill that outlawed all abortion, even in cases of rape and incest.”

Mitt Romney is out there and it’s so scaaaaary!  Boo!  Be scared!

Puleease.

Oh, and that claim about Romney opposing exceptions for rape and incest? Not true.  I know. A Democrat campaign lying is just so shocking.  Politifact gave that part of the ad a “Pants on Fire” rating.

As for expecting women (and men) to pay for their own contraception being “scary,” I would hope there are lot of women out there who find that part of the ad downright insulting.  The woman at the first link certainly does.

Obamacare Ruling Open Linkfest

I think what I will do (now that I’ve prayed the Litany and calmed down a bit) is link to what I find particularly relevant or interesting concerning today’s ruling on Obamacare.  I may make extended comments of my own later.  But I suspect that would be simply repeating what someone else has said, sooo. . . .

. . . . Let the links begin:

Here are the opinions.  Note that Justice Thomas joined in the dissent, but also added an additional very brief dissent at the end.  He always has been known as a man of few words.

DNC Executive Director Taunts on Twitter: “It’s Constitutional. Bitches.”  No, I am not joking.  And I saw it on twitter myself.

AND (LANGUAGE WARNING) that’s not all he tweeted.

Mitt Romney raised $100,000 in less than an hour after the ruling.


Bluegrass Pundit cuts to the chase on Roberts opinion: “What Chief Justice Roberts is actually saying is the government can not force you to buy insurance, but they can tax you if you don't.”

Charlie Martin looks on the bright side.
The Anglican Curmudgeon is sharing his usual in-depth analysis.

The Knight Blog has posted his favorite parts of the dissent.  My favorite? "Article I contains no whatever-it-takes-to-solve-a-national-problem power."

Jay Cost also looks on the bright side.

From Twitchy, here’s a sampling of the vile racist attacks on Justice Thomas and more on the reactions from those lovely people at the DNC. Also there was not a little initial confusion on the ruling from the news media.  (To be kind, it is a strange ruling as the Bluegrass Pundit pointed out above.)

Christopher Johnson is on a rampage. ;)

Over at RedState, Erick Erickson is also looking on the bright side, in part “because John Roberts concluded it was a tax, the Democrats cannot filibuster its repeal because of the same reconciliation procedure the Democrats used to pass it.”

Ezra Klein’s take on John Roberts and his opinion is interesting.  I seriously doubt Roberts is a “political genius.”  But Klein’s piece is worth considering.

I’m listening to Mark Levin now.  He is not so sanguine about John Roberts or the ruling, and that is an understatement.  And I put a lot of weight on Levin’s judgement.

MORE: Levin calls John Roberts’ opinion with its tax contortions “Mickey Mouse.” And I agree.

Mainline libchurchers are in the Amen Corner for this ruling, of course.  I don’t trust myself to comment further in polite words at the moment.

Speaking of which, the Bible says not to let the sun go down on your anger.  Good thing there’s still over two hours of daylight left here.

(And yes, the formatting is a bit off.  Sorry about that.  The Blogger interface can be annoying that way.)

The Invisible Romney (union) Vote?

One Jazz Shaw has written a perceptive post positing, along with Clark Judge, that some Romney supporters in unions are not showing up in opinion polls. 

For said supporters remain quiet because they do not wish to become a target of union leaders and/or their goons.  They see life as easier if they confine their support to the ballot box and otherwise keep their views to themselves.  And given the thuggish history of many unions, that is very understandable.

I recommend those who are skeptical about this thesis to look not only at the Wisconsin recall results, in which Walker greatly outdid the exit polls, but also some of the comments at the above post, such as this one:

I used to be a member of a trade union and I was a union officer for several years. The whole time I was in the union I had to lie about supporting the Democrats if I wanted to work, and in some cases, to avoid being beaten to a pulp. I was surprised to learn how many other members did the same thing. It’s a lot.


There are a lot of union members who believe that the Democrats are the be all and end all of politics and the saviors of society, and that anyone who doesn’t support them is evil. The true believers are fanatical, utterly intolerant of the slightest dissent, and vicious to those they perceive as heretics. Independents are despised almost as much as Republicans.
There are a lot of union members who will loudly proclaim their love of Obama and fealty to the Democrats and then vote a straight Republican ticket. It’s a simple matter of survival.

Now I do not think this invisible union vote thesis applies to red states in which unions don’t have enough power to be much of a threat.  But I do think some union workers are keeping their opinions to themselves in swing or bluish states where there is a history of union intimidation and violence against those who don’t toe the line.

By the way, I think there are other anti-Obama voters under pollsters’ radar.  There are others who do not wish to become the target of vindictive Lefties (Remember the attacks on Prop 8 supporters?) or who simply do not wish to be seen as RACIST BIGOTS.  They would rather just cast their secret ballots and leave it at that.

And in this toxic environment, I can hardly blame them.