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.

Last polls for today's primaries

by George Dienhart

I like the averages over at Real Clear Politics. Their final poll averages are Clinton up by 5 in Indiana, and Obama up by 7 in North Carolina.

Primaries in NC and IN

by George Dienhart

Today, two states go to the polls. As you doubtlessly know, these races are ever important for the Democrats. If you are reading from either state, the polls close at 7 p.m. in Indiana, and at  7:30 p.m. in North Carolina- now go vote!

Of tax reliefs and obliteration

By George Dienhart

Funny watching two Democrats argue over tax breaks. Obama is against the tax holiday on gasoline while Clinton is for it. I guess we should enjoy this while we can, I mean Clinton normally would not advocate any kind of tax break. She is desperately trying to distinguish herself from Obama. She chose to make her stand over a tax holiday that was first proposed by…John McCain?

There is usually some cross-pollination of ideas in an election. Different candidates can claim the good ideas of the primary opponents. Unpopular ideas are often cast off and forgotten. This is a little different, though. Sen. Clinton has chosen to make her stand on an idea advanced by the presumptive Republican nominee. Stealing Ideas in a primary is old news. Stealing ideas from the opposition party is a bold new direction, even for Clinton.

This is not the only difference that the two candidates have. Clinton is apparently Pro-obliteration, while Obama is anti-obliteration. I am speaking in regards to Iran, of course. I am usually against obliteration, but in this case, I might make some exceptions. For example:

• Enemies of America that wish to obliterate us
• Osama bin Laden
• Anyone harboring bin Laden
• That guy that keeps calling me to try to sell me a time-share. I mean it, I am REALLY not interested.

I agree with the Clintons on almost nothing. The one thing I can say about Hillary is she probably will not surrender to the terrorists. I cannot say that about Obama. I hope that Clinton would apply the same standards on obliteration to all of our enemies- and that telemarketer.

 

Obama supporter William Ayers desecrates U.S. flag

Little Green Footballs has a piece on an Obama supporter- complete with a picture of him standing on the United States flag.

Slate unabashedly pro- Obama

By George Dienhart

From Slate “Magazine”:

“Can we please stop pretending she has a plausible chance to win the nomination? Here's a rule I would like every political reporter, campaign official, TV talking head, and politician in the United States to follow. Go ahead and say, if you like, that Hillary Clinton retains a serious chance of winning the Democratic nomination. If you say this, however, you must describe a set of circumstances whereby this could happen. Try not to make it sound like a fairy tale."- Timothy Noah

Seems these projections have been all over the place- Here, Here, Here and Here. Now I’m for McCain, but as I have said, this sure is fun to watch…

Is Obama sucking the DNC dry?

By George Dienhart

Amidst all the hubbub about Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton breaking fundraising records, the mainstream media seems to be overlooking the incoming receipts of the Democratic National Committee. The DNC has been lagging behind not only its presidential candidates, but also behind the Republican National Committee.  In fact, the RNC has risen over twice what the DNC has- 36.5 million for the GOP, while the DNC has raised only $17.7 million.

With all the attention focused on the presidential race, people have not paid attention to these all-important figures. The parties largely fund congressional races, and also run ads for their presidential candidates. This is big important news, which also shows that the Democrats may be in more trouble than they think. Earlier in the election cycle, Republicans spoke of retaking the house- then they were besot with a wave of retirements that stunned both leadership and the rank and file voter. I actually heard a stunned talk show host, Michael Medved, moved to silence when one of his callers informed him of how many house members actually planned to retire. To my knowledge, he has not brought up retaking the house on his show since.

The numbers are daunting, but people are asking for change, and in change, there is often opportunity.  At last count, 22 Republicans were retiring. Some of these races will be in safe districts, some in competitive districts. The key point is, this could be good news in that it may usher in a new wave of younger, more energetic Republicans.  Raw state will begin profiling and analyzing the situation in each of these congressional districts today.

First up, Wyoming Congresswoman Barbara Cubin’s at large seat.

Cubin is a somewhat controversial 7-term congresswoman from Wyoming. Wyoming is sparsely populated, and as such has one at large district. Cubin won re-election in 2006 by the slim margin of 48.3% to 47.8%. Wyoming is normally a solidly Republican seat. The last election was close, but not because of a disaffection for the Republican Party, because of Rep, Cubin’s bizarre behavior and missed votes.  Cubin’s antics have included distributing obscenely shaped cookies and threatening to slap a man in a wheel chair. With a good Republican in the race, this should be an easy win. The Republican front runner appears to be businessman/rancher Mark Gordon.  Gordon has jumped on the “change” train. His website quotes him as saying "People all over the state and the nation are calling for new blood, fresh ideas, and leaders willing to listen and able to think outside government, outside the beltway, who have the kind of proven business and ranching experience needed to bring about sensible change.”

 

Next:  Tom Davis (R-Va 11^th district.),

Chickens coming home to roost for the Democrats

by George Dienhart

I imagine things may be a little tense in the Obama campaign headquarters right about now. He is now tantalizingly close to a nomination that is his to lose. Problem is, he just may lose it yet. The delegate count stands at Obama 1714, Clinton 1589. First one to 2025 wins. There are about 727 delegates still up for grab- enough to put either over the top, or neither. There are 380 delegates yet to be chosen via the primary process. The remaining 347 are super delegates who are not bound to any vote. Here is a little breakdown of what I see happening:

I allocated the remaining delegates by analyzing existing trends in polling, the states election history and where I think the momentum will be. I also took into account fundraising, though I did not weigh it as heavily as I would have in the past. I chose to de-emphasize funding (to a degree) due to the McCain and Clinton comebacks.

As you can see, this is a nightmare scenario for the Democrats- no clear winner has emerged after the last primary. The Super Delegates- will choose the Democratic standard-bearer and that is super bad news for Democrats. If they vote for Clinton, they set their party back 20 years and McCain wins. If they vote for Obama, they vote against the last 16 years of Clinton rule, and McCain wins. As you can see, believe the damage is already done.

A Clinton candidacy delivers more of the same Clinton act- and it is an act that has left the voters both cold and tired. This is a scenario that consists of more Bill shenanigans, more Hillary temper-tantrums, and more losses in a war on terror that will be fought by the police, not our military. The public wants no part of this. While the general public has had enough, Clinton does have enough hangers on to continue to fund her in a guerilla campaign that cut Obama top the bone.

Nominating Obama means hearing more of Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers. More damnation and terrorism. More Freudian slips over what the liberal elitist Obama really thinks about the majority of the country. In short, an Obama Nomination sets back the Democratic Party for the same 10 years. On the funding front, Obama has enough cash to wield a club that will hammer away at Clinton- bringing up numerous scandals and flips.

No matter which Democrat is elected, Republicans win. The 10 years that this will cost the Democrats will cost them dearly- three presidential elections, and nominations for most of the non-newly appointed Supreme Court seats. We have heard of previous “conservative revolutions”- this one will make the others pale by comparison. We will not win back congress this time, but we will in the next two cycles. Either Democratic candidate will disaffect a huge swath of their base.


While as a Republican, I feel this is good for the country, it would have been hard to imagine only a few months ago. Obama was doing well- and Hillary was the Democratic Party’s past. Four months ago- a Hillary nomination was going a foregone conclusion. Even though this election will most likely result in another white, male president, it has been historic. Historically, no political party has ever damaged itself so badly, in what should have been an easy election. With the left-wing manufactured recession and an unpopular president, conventional wisdom tells us we should have a Democrat elected this cycle. History books will tell us otherwise- leaving Democrats to cling bitterly to memories of what might have been.