Positive postportem of Election 2012

My friends, I know you came here to see something positive.  So here it is: I am positive this is the end of the America with which I grew up.  I am positive that I do not recognize a plurality/slight majority of my fellow Americans anymore.  I am positive that we have crossed the bridge into a nanny state European style socialist republic…and for those of you on the left, that is NOT a good thing.

Bill O’Reilly had a take on this last night, and he was right on the money.  He said that now, a majority of voters want the government to give them “stuff”.  They want the government to take money away from the producers to buy “stuff” for the non-producers.  Clearly, the Democrap Party is the looter party, and alas, a majority of Americans are now OK with that.

Folks, this is a point of no return.  How do you convince the moocher class that it is in their best interest to NOT be slaves to politicians and to government when they have abdicated all responsibility to provide for themselves?  You can’t expect the irresponsible and lazy to become responsible and energetic, not voluntarily.  And this has been a Democrap strategy for decades: get over half the electorate to pay no income taxes, and get as many people enslaved to government as possible.  You do those two things, and you’ve got an “electoral dynasty” for some time to come.  Ladies and gentlemen: that approach is working for the left, like a charm.

We can talk about media bias malpractice, and that’s certainly and unquestionably A factor…but not THE factor.  At the end of the day, if this country weren’t overrun with “take care of me, Uncle Sam, from cradle to grave” sheeple, then media bias wouldn’t be an issue.  But leftist media bias/malpractice has been around forever, yet Reagan and both Bushes still got elected in spite of it.  But that was a different America…and yes, even different than in 2004 when GWB was re-elected.  Today’s America is comprised of big government-adoring loyal subjects, indoctrinated in our government schools from an early age to believe that everything good comes from government, and not from God.

Liberalism always kills the goose that lays the golden egg, albeit slowly.  But eventually, the golden eggs run out, then there are more hands sticking out wanting “stuff” than there are golden eggs to pay for that “stuff”.  They don’t see that.  No, the left is a large bloc of economic illiterates who believe that a nation can tax itself into prosperity by simply confiscating the fruits of the labor of the producers to give to the non-producers.  Eventually, though, the producers stop producing.  Jobs dry up.  Tax revenues plummet.  But the “me, me, ME!” hands continue to stick out, looking for Uncle Sugar to take care of them yet another day.  And these leftist morons will continue to mindlessly, robotically vote for the candidate that is the bigger thief / plantation massah!

I’m sorry, my friends, but I genuinely feel like this country is gone.  We have a petulant race-baiting Marxist man-child who has never so much as run a hot dog stand destroy our economy, and in years past, that alone would have gotten an empty suit like this chump run out of town on a rail in an electoral landslide.  But in today’s America, the moocher class needs them some more Obama.

Michelle Obama famously said that for the first time in her life, she was proud of her country.  Well, I am actually ashamed of my country, a shame I did NOT feel when Bubba got elected in 1992.  The America I grew up in was the most wonderful, amazing country the planet has ever known.  I’ll hold onto those memories tightly, because the parasites who re-elected Chairman Zero have all but assured that those memories will never be seen again in my lifetime.

Election 2012 tomorrow

This is a crucial turning point in the future of this country.

We have two choices.  We can either continue with the leftist policies of the last four years which have led to a sputtering economy, hostility towards entrepreneurs and job creators, alarming growth of dependency on government to be the primary caretakers of able-bodied adults, and a feckless foreign policy that has made the country appear weak in the eyes of allies and enemies alike.  Or not.

The petulant think-skinned man-child who has been an unmitigated Carter-like disaster wants another four years to, in his words, “finish the job”.  That scares the hell out of me.  What job does he want to finish?  Offing America?  But even if I’m being charitable, he’s saying that he needs another term to continue doing what he did in the first term.  Are you freaking kidding me??

Ignore the polls.  Right now, polls are showing a tie.  A president whose economic record has, according to these same polls, been perceived as abysmal by the electorate; who loses independents by double digits (anywhere from 15-22%); who saw a swing of -15% in the gender gap he enjoyed in 2008; whose party lags in enthusiasm by 15% to the GOP; who isn’t packing the house at campaign stops (even with Stevie Wonder headlining) while his opponent is welcomed by standing-room-only crowds (including outdoor amphitheaters in chilly Colorado cities and 30,000+ in PA)…THAT guy is TIED or slightly AHEAD, in polls with absurd Democrat oversamplings (in today’s CNN poll, and oversampling of D+11?)?  Seriously?

I doubt it.  Ignore the polls.  Everything feels like it’s on the side of the good guys (for those of you on the left, that would NOT be the Obamatons).  But it doesn’t matter what it FEELS like.  It only matters what IS.

The left and the MSM (pardon the redundancy) have been doing their part to convince you that their boy is gonna win.  The numbers TODAY aren’t bearing that out.  Don’t listen to them.  You do YOUR part: vote, and get your proper-thinking friends to get to the polls and vote, too.

In the end, the only poll that matters is the final poll after all the legitimate votes are legally and properly counted.  Maybe then, this country’s long national nightmare will finally be over and Obamunism will have been sent to the trash bin of history…where it belongs.  We’ll see.

Are national polls AND Ohio polls both right?

No way, says Josh Jordan.  Excellent read, so please check it out.  Excerpt:

In Ohio, Republicans tend to outperform their share of the national vote: In the last six presidential elections, only in 2004 has the Republican candidate performed worse in Ohio than he did nationally, and even that was a difference of only 0.3 percentage points. In the other five elections, the GOP candidate outperformed his margin of the national vote by an average of 3.1 percentage points. While it’s clearly possible for Republicans to perform worse in Ohio than nationally, it is very difficult to imagine a scenario where there is more than a point difference between them based on past elections. History would suggest Romney could not be up 2 points nationally while being down 2.1 in Ohio, which would mean that Republicans would be under-performing in Ohio by more than 4 points.
…
Both of these points suggest that it is more likely that either the national polls or the Ohio polls are wrong, rather than the possibility that both can be right. There is a big reason for this discrepancy: the partisan makeup of the Ohio polls.

As mentioned above, in current Ohio polls, Democrats have a party-ID sample advantage of 6.3 points. In 2008, Democrats had a 5-point turnout advantage in Ohio. That means that while national polls have the turnout advantage down 2.6 points, in Ohio it has actually increased 1.3 points. It is almost impossible to conclude that while the nationwide party-ID advantage of Democrats has dropped since the wave election of 2008, Ohio has actually increased over the last four years.

If that’s not enough, the Ohio polls have actually become more Democratic since the post-DNC polls that gave Obama the significant bounce that led many pundits to declare Romney’s chances in Ohio DOA. Of all Ohio polls from September 7 to September 19, Obama held an average lead of 4.2 points, with a Democratic party-ID advantage of 5.7 points. Today Obama leads by 2.1 points, with a party-ID advantage of 6.3 points. In the last month, while Romney has had surges in polls all over the country, the polling in Ohio has actually found more Democrats even while Obama’s lead was cut in half. …

Um…unlikely, to say the least.  Case in point: a new PPP (the Daily Kooks’) poll shows Oba-Mao with a +4 lead over Romney in OH…with a D+8 sample, even bigger than the big blue wave of 2008 (and +9 bigger than the R+1 that turned out during the red wave of 2010…so a 9% swing ONLY TWO SHORT YEARS AFTER the nation rebuked Obama? Really?).  So with an unrealistic +8 sample advantage over Republicans, the best B.O. can do is to only get HALF of those?

B.O. can’t win without Ohio.  Romney CAN, though it’s hard to imagine that he’d lose Ohio but pick off other “firewall” states needed to offset the difference (WI and either IA, NH, or NV, assuming CO continues its pro-Romney trend).

In the end, the only poll that matters is the one AFTER the votes are in.  But regardless of who wins, it will be a fun exercise to go back and look to see which pollsters were right and wrong, and see if they explain themselves.

Liberal Iowa fishwrap endorses Romney, first GOP endorsement since 1972

The Des Moines Register hasn’t endorsed a Republican for president since Nixon defeated George “One State” McGovern in 1972.  It’s taken 40 years, but even this fishwrap recognizes that stupid is as stupid does and a vote for B.O. is stupid.  Excerpt:

The former governor and business executive has a strong record of achievement in both the private and the public sectors. He was an accomplished governor in a liberal state. He founded and ran a successful business that turned around failing companies. He successfully managed the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City.

Romney has made rebuilding the economy his No. 1 campaign priority — and rightly so.
…
The president’s best efforts to resuscitate the stumbling economy have fallen short. Nothing indicates it would change with a second term in the White House. …

Funny, though, that one of B.O.’s campaign spokesboobs doesn’t think it’s “reality-based“:

Obama deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter on Sunday dismissed the Des Moines Register endorsement of GOP candidate Mitt Romney, saying it was not “based at all in reality.”

“They endorsed Mitt Romney in the primary, so this was not much of a surprise,” said Cutter on ABC’s “This Week” of the influential swing-state paper’s backing for President Obama’s challenger.

“It was a little surprising to read that editorial, because it didn’t seem to be based at all in reality, not just in the president’s record, but in Mitt Romney’s record,” Cutter added. “It says that he’d reach across the aisle, which he’d do the exact opposite. It’s the exact opposite of what he did in Massachusetts.”

Um…sure, Snookums.

I guess they were more “reality-based” when the fishwrap endorsed her boss in 2008, huh?  Funny, that.  Anywho, looks like every major newspaper in that swing state has endorsed Romney.  And while I don’t put much stock in a newspaper endorsement’s ability to persuade would-be voters, I do find it extraordinarily telling that more fishwraps than I ever suspected would jump off the Obama Titanic.

President talking about the big issues of the day: Big Bird, binders, bayonets

This is how you win an election?

Romney hits Obama on “Apology Tour”

About. Friggin’. Time.

Quote of the day, “Romney’s acceptability” edition

Nice summary by Ace of how the debates have altered the race:

Obama had successfully used ads and media allies to paint Romney has a heartless vampire, a soulless robot, a bloodthirsty warmonger.

The story of the debates has been Romney using completely free media to undo all that Narrative, and all that money spent.

I think that Obama was only up because he had gone negative on Romney so hard, as part of the “Kill Romney” strategy they announced 8, 9 months ago.

People do not like the way things are. They do not like the economy and are sick of Obama’s excuses.

So Obama poured hundreds of millions of dollars into ads to paint Romney as unnacceptable.

Well, in four debates (including Ryan), the Romney-Ryan team as painted themselves as perfectly acceptable, even appealing.

That means that the election returns to… the economy people don’t like, and the endless excuses people are sick to death of hearing.

Indeed.

Gore: Obama sucked in first debate because of Denver’s high altitude, or something

The Internet’s inventor has a theory as to what cost his boy the first debate (video at link):

AL GORE: I’m going to say something controversial here. Uh, Obama arrived in Denver at 2 p.m. today, just a few hours before the debate started. Romney did his debate prep, in Denver. When you go to 5,000 feet, and you only have a few hours to adjust, uh — I don’t know, maybe…

Um, no, it’s not controversial…just supremely stupid. Moron.

Exit question: Anyone other than me surprised that the Goreacle didn’t blame it on global “warming”?

First Romney-Obama debate postmortem

I bet you think I’m gonna declare Romney the winner of the first debate, being the ideological hack that I am.  Well…you’d be right, of course. 😆

But it’s not just ME who thinks this.  In addition to CNN’s poll showing 67% of respondents thought Romney was the clear winner, and CBS’ poll showing more than twice as many people though Romney won as Obama, this page will give you a great illustration as to how the left saw it.  Even James Carville can’t help but call it straight, for once.  Dude, when you’ve got Bill Maher, Queen Andrew Sullivan, Mark Halperin, Peter Beinart, Juan Williams, and even Tingles Matthews and other MSDNC talking heads (speaking to both of their viewers) all in despair…well, it’s a good night for the good guys!  🙂

Exit question: Will “objective, neutral journalist” George Snuffalupagus (or whatever the h3ll his name is) continue his trend of ignoring reality and call this one for B.O., too?

Quote of the day, “An assessment of Obama’s first debate performance” edition

Gotta love Dennis Miller!  ROFL!  😆

President Obama had better hope that a kicked ass is covered under ObamaCare — as comedian Dennis Miller wryly observed.

Biden makes the case for electing Romney

Heh.

Advice to Romney: Go big, or go home!

Krauthammer has a great column about this.  Excerpts:

It makes you think how far ahead Romney would be if he were actually running a campaign. His unwillingness to go big, to go for the larger argument, is simply astonishing.

For six months, he’s been matching Obama small ball for small ball. A hit-and-run critique here, a slogan-of-the-week there. His only momentum came when he chose Paul Ryan and seemed ready to engage on the big stuff: Medicare, entitlements, tax reform, national solvency, a restructured welfare state. Yet he has since retreated to the small and safe.

…

Romney has accumulated tons of cash for 30-second ads. But unless they’re placed on the scaffolding of serious speeches making the larger argument, they will be treated as nothing more than tit for tat.

Make the case. Go large. About a foreign policy in ruins. About an archaic, 20th-century welfare state model that guarantees 21st-century insolvency. And about an alternate vision of an unapologetically assertive America abroad unafraid of fundamental structural change at home.

It might just work. And it’s not too late.

I sure as heck hope not.

Obama hearts “redistribution”

Notice in the video clip the Alinsky-like laugh of ridicule when confronted with the assertion that he’s a socialist.  But hey, who are you gonna believe: The One, or your lying eyes & ears?

Socialism fails.  Every time.  Without exception.

Quote of the day, “MSM and Lewinsky not that dissimilar” edition

Heh. Video at link.

At Thursday’s Mitt Romney rally in Fairfax, Virginia, one Romney supporter lambasted the media in its coverage of the election.

“I think you guys are suck-ups,” the woman said. “I think you guys got your embroidered kneepads from the White House, buddy. That’s what I think.”

“War on women” irony lost on Democrats at their convention

A tribute to the late Senator Ted Kennedy, who killed a woman with his car and let her die in a slow, torturous watery tomb as his pickled #ss wandered up and down the road, pondering his political future.  Mary Jo Kopechne was unavailable for comment.  Then again, so was Kennedrunk.  Anywho, Teddy K also sexually accosted a waitress with Chris Dodd (Google “waitress sandwich Dodd Kennedy” if you don’t know).

Bill Clinton, a womanizing lout who raped Juanita Broaddrick.

Yet it’s Mitt Romney and the Republicans who have declared a “war on women”?  Got it.  Thanks for the clarification.

Irony: it’s not just for breakfast anymore.

Romney picks Paul Ryan as his running mate

Good?  Bad?  Pros?  Cons?

What say you?

Despicable Obama ad blaming Romney for killing a worker’s wife is so bad that…wait…even MSNBC slams him?

Dude, you know you have jumped the shark when the mouthbreathing fellatrix lineup at MSDNC thinks you’ve gone too far.

Obama on the economy: Our plan “worked”

If, by “worked”, he means that he meant to destroy the American economy, then I’d have to agree with him.

Romney responds to Obama’s attack on entrepreneurs

Well done, sir.

Romney ad: Obama is a liar

It’s about friggin’ time.

Washington comPost poll shows tie with Romney and Obama…with a D+9 sample

For those of you on the left, that means the poll sampled 9% more Democrats than Republicans.  Which is fascinating, considering that the Big Blue Wave of 2008 showed Democrats outnumbering Republicans at the polls by 7%.  In other words, this new poll from the comPost samples an electorate that is MORE Democratic than the biggest Democratic wave EVER…and the best Obama can do with a 9% advantage in poll sampling is a TIE.

I normally don’t get too caught up in polls this far out.  After all, McCain was doing well against Obama at this time in 2008, and Carter was leading Reagan at this point in 1980, according to the polls.  We all know how both of those turned out.  But I do find polls like this one interesting, where they sample in such a way as to get the results that they seek.  Although I’m sure the comPost was hoping that a D+9 poll would have yielded better results for their boy.

As for the comPost: Nope, no liberal media bias!

Did Roberts’ ruling on ObamaCare actually HELP conservatism and help Romney?

Interesting analyses, from many different sources.  Excerpts here, and you really should check them out.

Essentially, conservative pundits are wondering that while the ObamaCare ruling was a short-term win for Chairman Zero, maybe Roberts’ rejection of the Commerce Clause being used to regulate economic inactivity (which lower courts ruled was valid) will prevent future Congresses from trying to use that clause to expand the power of the federal government and thus advance the cause of limited government.  Perhaps that cause, plus the outrage from the ruling which will galvanize the conservative base to rally around Romney (which they may not have otherwise done), will put Romney and Republicans in charge…or so the thinking goes.  And if Romney and Republicans take control, they will definitely repeal ObamaCare…which means that ObamaCare got repealed PLUS the Court will have prevented similar abuse of the Commerce Clause in future sessions.

Anywho, that’s the school of thought…or spin, depending on how you look at it.  What do YOU think?

Paging Mitt Romney re: ObamaCare

Now that the Court has ruled that the federal government can make you buy anything if they just call it a “tax”, I hope Mitt Romney and the Republicans are smart enough (yeah, I know, that’s laughable) to ride this abortion of a ruling into November.

I’m watching my country die.

New Romney ad smacks Obama for his stupid “the private sector is doing fine” assertion

Team Romney is hitting this economic ‘tard pretty good these days, huh?  Does President Jack@ss really think that the reason the economy hasn’t recovered is due to not enough government spending?  Seriously?

New Romney ad takes Obama to task for crony capitalism, economic ignorance

Well played, Gov. Romney.

Quote of the day, “Obama’s hypocrisy on broken promises” edition

So Team B.O. wants to run on Romney’s supposed broken  promises, huh?  OK, fair enough.  But Jim Geraghty has an observation:

Ah, charges of unfulfilled promises from President Barack “If I don’t have this done in three years, then this is going to be a one-term proposition” Obama, the man who pledged who cut the deficit in half in his first term, the man who criticized Hillary Clinton’s proposal for a mandate requiring Americans to purchase health insurance, is going to hit his opponent on broken promises.

Four years ago this week, Obama said — with profound humility, he assured us — that future generations would look back and say, “this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick, and jobs for the jobless, this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow, and the earth began to heal . . .” and now he tells us to beware of politicians bearing grandiose promises.

Obama 2012: Stick with the broken promises you know.

Heh.

Romney to reporter: Can we talk about economic issues, you know, the stuff that matters this year?

Video clip here (can’t embed it).  The magic comes around the 2:15 mark, when an exasperated Romney asks the reporter (who is droning on about gay marriage, in-state tuition for kids of criminal aliens, medical marijuana) if there are any “issues of significance” she’d like to discuss.

See, though, she’s just telegraphing the left’s and the MSM’s (pardon the redundancy) intention: get the ADHD public focused on shiny objects to distract them from the colossal failure of Oba-Mao’s government-controlled central planning economic policies.  Sure, jobs have hemorrhaged since he took over, more people have abandoned looking for work, gas prices have more than doubled, foreclosures have spiked, and…oooo, look, gay marriage/medical dope/dog on a car roof!

Obama ate dogs

By now, many of you know that the Romneys are catching hell over the way they transported the family Irish setter nearly 30 years ago on family vacations, namely on the roof of the car.  Ann Romney says the dog enjoyed it, and considering my dog darned near steps all over my passengers to stick his head out the window, I can see that.  Would I put my dog on the roof?  No, probably not.  But if the dog didn’t die, didn’t suffer, and it happened three decades ago, then I don’t give a wet fart on a dry January Monday how they transported their dog.

But the MSM cares.  They do not want any talk about the sky high unemployment, the exploding deficit, our crippling debt, hemorrhaging of jobs, skyrocketed fuel prices, unconstitutional power grabs…but instead, Mitt Romney’s dog from the 1980’s.

OK, you hacks.  You wanna go there?  You really wanna go on the “who loves dogs?” track.  Fine.  Let’s go there.  I’ll stipulate that Obama loves dogs more…especially with some fava beans and a nice Chianti.  Slurp-slurp-slurp-slurp-slurp-slurp-slurp!  From the Daily Caller:

Hey, if we’re going to talk about how presidential candidates treated dogs decades ago, let’s talk about how presidential candidates treated dogs decades ago.

Can you name the author of this quote?

“With Lolo, I learned how to eat small green chill peppers raw with dinner (plenty of rice), and, away from the dinner table, I was introduced to dog meat (tough), snake meat (tougher), and roasted grasshopper (crunchy). Like many Indonesians, Lolo followed a brand of Islam that could make room for the remnants of more ancient animist and Hindu faiths. He explained that a man took on the powers of whatever he ate: One day soon, he promised, he would bring home a piece of tiger meat for us to share.”

Yep, that’s Barack Obama, writing about his childhood with his stepfather Lolo Soetoro in Indonesia, from Chapter Two of his bestseller Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance.

“So what? It was a long time ago,” you say. “He was a lot younger. Customs are different there. He was just doing what his stepfather told him. And hey, you can’t even prove that the dogs were ever left on top of a car, you racist.”

Hey, whatever you have to tell yourself, libs. Say what you want about Romney, but at least he only put a dog on the roof of his car, not the roof of his mouth. And whenever you bring up the one, we’re going to bring up the other.

It’s no fun when we push back, is it? That’s why it’s so much fun.

You must read the updates and the comments, which are friggin’ hilarious!  One to whet the appetite:

Q: What does Obama do when his dog gets stuck?
A: Grabs a toothpick.

Game on, beyotch.

CNN poll a product of “utter fantasy”

This is a great takedown of that CNN poll from yesterday that is wildly different from other recent polls.  In the CNN poll, Obama leads Romney 52%-43%.  In polls from two and three days before, Romney leads Obama in both, albeit within the margin of error.

Why am I talking about polls at this stage of the game?  Simple: media malpractice.  Excerpt of the takedown:

…That might not be the biggest problem with the poll, though. Its biggest problem is … math. Reader Raymond O did some math and asked a rather interesting set of questions in an e-mail last night about how CNN did theirs. First, let’s start with the topline results, as reported by CNN: Obama 52%, Romney 43% among registered voters, 53/41 among all respondents. If that’s the case, then the number of respondents in the latter case voting for Obama should be 538, and the number supporting Romney 416.

However, when reading the questions on page 3 of the poll report, that’s not at all what we see:

BASED ON 484 RESPONDENTS WHO PLAN TO VOTE FOR OBAMA — SAMPLING ERROR: +/- 4.5 PERCENTAGE PTS.
3. (Asked of Obama voters) Is that more a vote FOR Barack Obama or more a vote AGAINST Mitt
Romney? …

BASED ON 476 RESPONDENTS WHO PLAN TO VOTE FOR ROMNEY — SAMPLING ERROR: +/- 4.5 PERCENTAGE PTS.
4. (Asked of Romney voters) Is that more a vote FOR Mitt Romney or more a vote AGAINST Barack
Obama?

Since the combined total of the two exceeds their count of registered voters in the survey (910), we have to assume this refers to the general-population response. That’s wildly different than the 53/41 split that CNN reports from the poll. In fact, it’s only a 48/47 split for Obama. And given that the poll shows a slightly better result for Romney among registered voters, it’s not difficult to conclude that Romney probably led in that category before CNN’s pollster shifted the results around to this extent.

Read the whole thing…it is fascinating to what lengths CNN is going in order to get their boy re-elected.  They refuse to offer the breakdown of respondents the way every other poll does, with number of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents polled.  The comPost and other fishwraps almost always oversample Democrats by double digits over Republicans for their polls, but at least they show their weighted unrealistic numbers.  CNN isn’t going to bother with that.  Plus…they’re even ignoring basic rules of math now!

Nope…no liberal media bias!

Axelrod makes the case for voting AGAINST Obama and FOR Romney

Romney’s team is already all over this.  Check out this 0:29 video clip:

Wait…what?  OMGosh!  😆

Tweeted Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul: “@davidaxelrod’s right: choice IS btwn growing economy vs continuing down down [sic] road we’re on.”

Dude…I agree with Axelrod on something.  I need a shower.