If the election were held today, who would win?

By George Dienhart

I found great little utility over at 270towin.com. As you may have guessed, it’s a tool to predict possible paths to victory in the electoral vote this number. There is polling data and historical data for each state. Nifty tools on the web don’t normally make the cut on what I want to write about. The news is in the results. It’s a McCain victory:

As you can see, there is a whole lot of red on that map. The totals are 305 McCain to 233 Obama. That’s a pretty good cushion for McCain. And this is before the 527’s get a hold of Obama and his myriad of personal problems.

There is no trickery here- the McCain states are the states in which he is ahead, and which traditionally go Republican. My analysis is NOT the same as just clicking the websites “McCain vs. Obama” link. That link leaves states such as Texas in a “tossup” category. Texas is clearly McCain territory according to polling and past history. In my simulation McCain states went to McCain and Obama States went to Obama. With McCain’s path to victory clear, why is big media still acting as though the election is a done deal, anointing Obama as president? Can anyone say liberal bias?

DNC self-flagellation to continue

by George Dienhart

Why, oh why, do Democrats do this to themselves? It was supposed to be their year. As a staunch Republican, I still have to overcome laughter every time I turn my attention to the race for the Democratic Party Presidential nomination. Certainly there are more important stories, as the nomination is all but wrapped up, but there are none more entertaining. Today’s story in the today’s New York Post claims that 64% of all Democrats want Hillary Clinton to stay in the race. To me this is mind-boggling.

In recent history, Democrats win when the economy is an issue. True the recent history I speak of is Bill Clinton, but the DNC has convinced Big Media that there is a recession, and many people have fallen for the marketing blitz. This would normally mean that the opposition party (as far as the White House is concerned) is poised to run away with the election. This is clearly not the case with McCain running statistically (within the margin of error) even or ahead of Obama in almost every case. In most of these same polls Clinton leads McCain. As an angry, bald, white guy once said, It’s the economy, stupid (even if it’s not). Why don’t voters trust Obama with the economy?

Most likely, it is a combination of things. For starters, he has no experience, whatsoever, in running a large organization. Budget work is hard work and requires energy and ideas, not catchphrases and positive “buzz”.

Secondly- Taxes. I know it is hard for Democrats to realize, but we already pay too much. Tax cuts stimulate the economy. Lower taxes under President bust have lead to record revenues. Obama’s tax hike would be historic- not just due to its massive size, but also because of the massive damage that would be done to the economy. The tax increase, in conjunction with an increase in spending so large that it defies logical explanation, will almost certainly throw us into a four year recession.

There is also an issue of trust. Repeatedly, Obama shows us that he has poor judgment. This is not the time for the United States to select a leader with judgment problems..

When you roll this all up- it spells out why most Democrats want Hillary to keep fighting the good fight. As a Republican, I can only sit back and enjoy the ride.

McCain Snappy answers to stupid questions

by George Dienhart

Two email releases from Team McCain yesterday:

"Obama Is The High Tax Candidate, Having Proposed More New Tax Increases"

"Obama Voted Against The FY 2007 Iraq Emergency Spending Bill That Provided Nearly $1.8 Billion For Veterans Medical Care."

Two important points, indeed…

 

 

Does the RNC finally get it?

by George Dienhart

The Washington Times has obtained a memo outlining what may be the Republican campaign strategy this fall. In part, the memo states:

"It starts with this: Washington is broken, the American people want it fixed, and Democrats in Washington have proven unable or unwilling to get the job done. Republicans will,"

This is addressing that “change” thing all the kids are so crazy about these days. It is also putting the lack of change over the last two years squarely where it belongs- right at speaker Pelosi’s dainty little feet. This is the first salvo of a policy that is designed to stem the massive hemorrhaging that is slowly killing the GOP.

It is all part of what the RNC calls "American Families Agenda"- which is scheduled to kick off on Wednesday. The Agenda is designed to address challenges confronting families and will seek to replace outdated laws to help women with children who work outside the home and families in which both parents work. These groups normally skew to the left, and are a growing part of the population. The first item on the agenda addresses rising fuel costs- this is good timing because prices will drop after the summer travel season ends. This will keep the agenda on people’s minds as the prices drop. Mmm mmm- that’s good politics.

Other parts of the agenda will address health care, the economy and national security. The Democrats have seized the health care issue as a tent pole in their own strategy. The economy and national security are normally GOP territory. This year the economy may be in play- but economic concerns are already ebbing as the dollar gains strength and employment numbers keep coming in better than expected. The economy grew last quarter, meaning there is no chance that the current slowdown can be rightfully called a recession- it takes negative growth in consecutive quarters for that. The economy will probably grow again this quarter anyway, albeit more slowly than I would like to see. Voters are not stupid and truth normally wins out at the end of the day. Barring any kind of catastrophe, the economy is likely to be a non-factor in this election.

As always, the devil is in the details. Politicians make promises all the time. The Democrats made their 6 in ’06 promises two years ago and dropped the ball on every one of the six promises. We all want cheaper fuel, but how are we going to get it? The first step is to enact a strong dollar policy- a stronger dollar will buy more oil per dollar than a weak dollar. We also need to drill, drill, drill, and drill. In short, we need to stop printing money as if it was the Sunday paper, and start developing our own oil fields. The strong dollar part of the equation could be done immediately by the fed buying back gobs of greenbacks. Europe would most likely agree to a similar buying spree as it is in their best interests as well. Developing our untapped fields in the ocean and in Alaska will take longer, but have long-term benefits.

As far as healthcare goes, I feel we are falling into a trap to outspend the Democrats on this. Even if we win elections, we may lose if the GOP jumps on any kind of healthcare plan that infringes on what is currently the best healthcare system in the world. We can drive down rates by allowing insurance companies to pool the members across the nation, as opposed to having separate plans for each state. The potential savings of truly national insurance are massive would open up the markets to millions of new consumers.

As far as national defense goes, we really need to differentiate ourselves from the Democrats here, and it comes down to one thing- do you want to surrender or win?, America will chose to win, by an overwhelming margin when the stakes are spelled out. This is an easy victory for us.

I will cover this more Wednesday after the news embargo on this is lifted. We will see how close I am.

 

Someone else that doesn't know when to call it quits

by George Dienhart

I’m talking to you Bob Barr. Apparently, he’s a Libertarian now. A Libertarian with WAYYYY to much time on his hands. What’s Bob’s solution to the federal government spending too much? Why he’s planning on trying to siphon off votes from the candidate that best represents restraint in spending. Great plan Bob, really.

Double standard prevails

by George Dienhart

Camp Obama refuses to address corruption issues- ties to Toby Rezko. The Rezko issue was active just 3 years ago when Rezko helped Obama buy his McMansion. Why is this relevant? It is relevant because the Obama Camp has decided to bring up the “Keating 5” scandal from McCain’s past. Past as in 1989. Interesting double standard. A fascinating historical footnote is that 4 members of the Keating 5 were Democrats. Why is that relevant? According to a wikipedia article, “Robert S. Bennett, whom McCain had hired to represent him in this matter, defended McCain's character and was one of many people who criticized the piece. Bennett, who was the special investigator during the Keating Five scandal that The Times revisited in the article, said that he fully investigated McCain back then and suggested to the Senate Ethics Committee to not pursue charges against McCain because of "no evidence against him." Bennett was coincidentally on Hannity and Colmes the night the story broke to talk about his autobiography. On the show, he said that he felt the Committee pursued charges against McCain because, without him, the case would have been entirely against Democrats.” I guess that is what passes as fair to the Democrats.

The Scorecard

by George Dienhart

List courtesy of the New York Times:

Republicans and Democrats agree that the following states are in play:

Colorado

Florida

Iowa

Michigan

Minnesota

New Hampshire

New Mexico

Nevada

Ohio

Oregon

Pennsylvania

Virginia

Washington

Wisconsin.
Republicans believe that they can add:

New Jersey

California

Democrats believe that they can be competitive in

Georgia

North Carolina

South Carolina

One things for sure- the maps going to look a whole lot different on election night.

 

The mighty middle?

by George Dienhart

Gerald F. Seib and John Harwood of The Wall Street Journal speculates that moderates may pave the way to a less confrontational legislature:

'The long, fascinating spectacle of the presidential primaries has all but obscured their potential impact on American politics: Campaign 2008 may break Washington's gridlock by reviving the long-dormant political center. ...
They go on to write, 'In the wake of Tuesday's primary elections in North Carolina and Indiana, it appears more likely than ever that the two presidential candidates this fall will be Sen. Barack Obama for the Democrats and Sen. John McCain for the Republicans. They happen to be the two most surprisingly successful candidates of the year, and both got ahead largely by arguing they have unique abilities to bring people together in Washington.'

This is probably true of a McCain presidency. An Obama presidency will be more successful in passing legislation that the Bush administration, largely due the Democrats majority in both houses. I doubt that there would be a lot of reaching across the isle, though. There’s not enough common ground between conservatives and the nation’s most liberal Senator (by ACU rating).

From the unintentionally funny file:

by George Dienhart

According to Ron Allen on 'the Chris Matthews Show, Sen. Obama has quite a sense of humor. Or maybe he’s just a vindictive jerk:  'May 20th: Oregon, Kentucky - the day that Obama thinks he's going to get a majority of the pledged delegates. He's probably going to have a big speech, not in Louisville or Portland, but probably in a swing state - Michigan or Florida - and really make a pitch to get this thing moving to the general election.'

So, he’ll declare victory in one of the states that he has worked so hard to disenfranchise. Funny Guy, that Obama…

Smart move from the McCain camp.

by George Dienhart

When Hillary surged late in the primary season, Obama started ducking debates. Apparently someone at McCain HQ noticed. Via the Politico:

'The McCain camp is also examining a suggestion by Mark McKinnon, a media strategist for the Republicans, who has suggested that his boss and Mr Obama agree to campaign together in some states, attending joint town hall meetings and debating each other without a moderator. ... [A] refusal from Mr. Obama could be used against him.  'The town hall meeting is John's best format,' the aide said. 'He's a natural campaigner up close with the public. That would test Obama's claims that he wants a clean fight on the issues. John is also strong on finance reform. If Obama reneges on public funding it will look bad.'

Balls in your court, Sen. Obama.

Someone owes Real Clear Politics...

by George Dienhart

Look at what I circled- this was a real ad served up by google. Just the thought of this made me go temporarily blind…

Click to enlarge, and no I didn't click on the link...

Quote of th day- Jay Leno

"President Bush blasted Congress for not allowing oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Democrats said it wouldn't do any good, because it wouldn't produce oil for 10 years. You know, the same thing they said 10 years ago."

Seems like he has his bearings

by George Dienhart

Sen. McCain’s remarks from the TIME 100 'most influential people in the world' Gala.

'I'm informed that it is the custom to toast someone who has influenced our lives. In that case, please raise your glass to the discernment and probity of the people of New Hampshire. Running for President of the United States is an unusual experience: invigorating, fatiguing, flattering and humbling in equal measure. This long and surprising campaign seems to have exhausted reporters as well as your expense accounts. Imagine the effect it has had on the candidates: the strain of constant travel; the stress of never knowing what one of your supporters might say that at least temporarily puts your campaign on defense - or in my campaign, what I might say- and the terror of knowing that only one of us will be invited to this dinner next year.  

'It's a tough business. And though we are rivals, we should respect each other's willingness to hazard it. Senator Obama is a man of unusual eloquence, who has performed the very worthy service of summoning to the political arena Americans who once wrongly thought it of little benefit to them. Senator Clinton has demonstrated great tenacity and courage; two qualities I have always esteemed. I count myself among their many admirers. Please join me, then, in a toast to my opponents and compatriots, Senators Clinton and Obama, and to the noisy, contentious, striving, beautiful country we hope to lead.'

First Obama attack on Mccain

by George Dienhart

For such a skilled orator, this had all the subtlety of a sledgehammer upside the head. From the WSJ:

'A preview erupted yesterday when, in an interview on cable news, Sen. Obama suggested Sen. McCain was 'losing his bearings.'

So-the first attack is based on age. How predictable. Maybe Sen. Obama would like to talk of experience.

GOP "Can We ask?" website goes live.

by George Dienhart

Here is your chance to ask Obama the questions that the MSM will not. The GOP has made it easy, you can ask via text or video. My submission- “Did you ever get to finish your waffles?”

The difference between McCain and Obama

by George Dienhart

John McCain has said repeatedly that he wants a clean fight. That might make one wonder how Se. Obama feels on the subject. From the Wall Street Journal:

'Soon, [Obama] is likely to unleash attack ads aimed at defining Sen. McCain. With vastly more money, Sen. Obama will be able to flood the airwaves as voters are forming impressions.'

As you can see, regardless of whom the Democrats nominate, it’s the same old song and dance.

Mothers Day Message from John McCain and his mother.

by George Dienhart

You can watch it here.

Of Obamicans and Macacrats

By George Dienhart

IndyStar.com is reporting massive cross over voting in the Indiana primary. Is this a sign of success for Rush Limbaugh’s Operation Chaos, a massive desertion of Republican Hoosiers to Obama, or something else? My money is on something else.

One thing that struck me about the IndyStar piece was a quote from Meghan Ward-Bopp. She said, "I'm a hardcore Republican," she said, "but it's about who I wanted in second place in case McCain doesn't make it. ... I don’t like the way this country's been run in the last 20 years. I'm sick of the dynasty (of two families) that's been running things." This taps into how voting is a personal experience, and as such cannot always be summed up by the pundits. The piece also quoted other voters as crossing over to prolong the Democrats misery. Again, a deeply personal, if not slightly twisted reason.

It is here that I must ask, what about the Obamicans and Macacrats? It is really the same pool of voters- what we are so used to calling Reagan Democrats. It is this demographic that will swing the election to the eventual winner. Obama’s supporters are constantly publicizing the Obamican- Republicans that are planning to vote for Obama. In reality, these voters were mostly independents, not Republicans. Obama is too far to the left for the vast majority of Republicans. Thus, Obamican is a misnomer. They are the same group of left leaning Democrats that the Democratic candidates traditionally court.

McDemocrats are a little different story. McCain has always done well with independents. Macacrats are security first voters and moderates. Like or not the McCain nomination has moved the party to the left. It was not a seismic shift. It was subtle- but true moderates noticed it. McCain is someone that a voter who traditionally leans slightly to the left can support- they’ll trade off issues that are not important to them for someone that will not just protect them, but also for someone who not tax them to death. McCain comes closest to this description.

This is something that McCain knows and is prepared to use. He is actually in the process of moving his campaign to the right after securing the nomination. This unprecedented move to shore up the base was made because McCain is so popular with moderates and independents. It is not something that President Bush could have done, and it is not something that Obama or Clinton can currently do. This has left the voter with three candidates- two of which are sprinting to the right, with the third floundering in past mistakes.

Candidate Obama’s past mistakes are grave. These mistakes would have sent him back to the Senate to finish his term months ago, had they happened earlier. His actions in avoiding accountability have alienated him from the right and the center- and remember, it is the center that most be one in every election. He continues to do the opposite of McCain and Clinton- he is still moving to the left. Democrats moving to the left in primary season are the traditional strategy- but this is not a traditional year. Candidate Obama has so damaged his campaign by pandering to leftist extremists that he has jeopardized what was once a sure thing nomination. He may have even destroyed any chance he has of being president.

Candidate Clinton has also embraced the moderates, by moving to the right. Her bombastic statements on Iran are only part of a strategy to shift her stance to be closer to her those of her husband. She is trying to make up for being far more liberal on social issues by pretending to be a hawk on security. This has left her with a gaping hole in her left flank. Obama has marched straight through this hole and has almost sewn up the nomination due to Clinton’s miscalculation. It was this decision that leaves the Democrats where they are today. Clinton thought she had the nomination wrapped up last summer, so she started moving to the right. The hard-core liberals in the cities and suburbs deserted here, turning in droves to Obama. This left the Democrats fragmented, and with little chance of uniting in the upcoming general election.

That last point was important. Polls show that over a third of Hillary supporters will not vote for Obama in a general election. Polls show that the same is true for Obama supporters, in that they will not vote for Clinton. These voters are the true phenomenon here. They are the true Macacrats- voters that will actually cross party lines to vote. McCain has to ensure that he does not run so far to the right as to push these voters back to which ever Democrat eventually wins.

Hey, McCains still running too...

Here’s a sneak peak from the speech Sen. McCain will give at Wake Forrest today:

"For both Senator Obama and Senator Clinton, it turned out that not even John Roberts was quite good enough for them. Senator Obama in particular likes to talk up his background as a lecturer on law, and also as someone who can work across the aisle to get things done. But when Judge Roberts was nominated, it seemed to bring out more the lecturer in Senator Obama than it did the guy who can get things done. He went right along with the partisan crowd, and was among the 22 senators to vote against this highly qualified nominee. ... Apparently, nobody quite fits the bill except for an elite group of activist judges, lawyers, and law professors who think they know wisdom when they see it - and they see it only in each other."

That’s what we call “insight”. If we were playing baseball , we would call it a homerun…

McCain VEEP Sweepstakes

By George Dienhart

A friend asked me not to long ago who I thought McCain would pick for VP. I said that I though Bobby Jindal would be a good candidate, but I had doubts that Sen. McCain would pick him. Turns out I may have been wrong on that. Several prominent pundits (Gerald Seib , Robert D. Novakand William Kristol) have mentioned Jindal as a possible running mate for McCain. Jindal seems to be the real deal, and fits nicely with what the electorate seems to be calling for. He’s young, successful and runs as a reformer. Not being one who is overly PC, I’ll also say that it puts to rest that the GOP is the party of old white guys.