So here were are, two days after Barack Hussein Obama, aka
Street Fighter, was reelected president of the Deteriorating States of America
and his opponent, Mitt "Mr. Nice" Romney is still writhing on the
ground in pain moaning "You cheated. You fight dirty."
Obama for his part,
although taking a drubbing and losing nearly 10 percent of the support he
enjoyed in 2008, is still dancing over Romney's prostrate form, doing the Ali
Shuffle, and laughing as he chants "But I won, I won, I won! And I won by
an Electoral landslide! Yeah!!"
And here I am again, saying one more time, "I told you
so."
I have a question for all the incredibly intelligent and
ever so knowledgeable pundits and commentators on the Republican side of the
political fence; how is it that Mitt Romney received fewer votes in 2012 than
John McCain did in 2008? Please, can someone tell me?
I understand to a point why McCain lost to Obama what with
the Messiah nonsense being put out by the Democrats' propaganda machine, also
known as the media, back in 2008. Also, Sen. McCain, although being referred to
as a Vietnam War Hero every time he shows up on FOX News, didn't have the full
support of the veteran community in 2008.
In fact, his partnership with Sen. John Kerry back in 1991
as co-chairs of the Senate Select Committee on POWs and MIAs, when they slammed
the door on the fate of hundreds of POWs who were left behind in Laos in 1973
with the full knowledge of the US government, resulted in a significant percent
of veterans opposing him in 2008.
So given that Romney was not carrying that baggage, why did he get fewer votes than John McCain?
Was it because he is a Mormon? Did Christian evangelists
shun him, fearing that a Mormon in the White House might advocate that we all
have more than one wife? I'm not kidding – and I don't support that concept.
But in truth, we've been down that road ever since the 1960 election when John
Kennedy's Catholicism was supposedly going to result in the Pope running
America. It was not a valid reason to oppose a candidate back then and it is
not a valid reason to oppose a candidate today.
I hope it wasn't religion but that still doesn't give us an
answer for why nearly 3 million Republicans didn't vote in this election.
How about the women's vote? Did McCain, as many have said,
pick up a huge amount of votes that otherwise would not have been in his column
because he had Sarah Palin on the ticket as his VP candidate? Paul Ryan was a
good vice-presidential candidate for Romney; nice, certainly smart and capable,
but he did NOT generate the enthusiasm that Sarah Palin did; was that it?
Now, I should note here that I backed Romney from day one
when he was campaigning against McCain for the 2008 nomination, and I
personally thought Paul Ryan was a very good choice … but maybe in the minds of
other voters he wasn't a GREAT choice.
Was Romney just too nice, or did he spread himself too thin
in a constant effort to reinvent himself? I don't know the answer, but I do
know this; with the significantly reduced voter turnout for Obama - 7 million fewer votes than 2008 - the GOP was handed the election on a silver platter and they blew it! The Grand Old Party didn't convince voters, despite hundreds of millions spent on ads, that the country is in dire straits and if they wanted it to get better Romney was the answer.
Granted, the GOP didn't get any help from the media; even from FOX News which spent so much time being "fair and balanced" that in the end you couldn't tell truth from fiction. I also believe this whole election was just a game to people inside the Beltway and on Manhattan Island, and they had a good idea how it was going to turn out long before anyone cast a vote.
Granted, the GOP didn't get any help from the media; even from FOX News which spent so much time being "fair and balanced" that in the end you couldn't tell truth from fiction. I also believe this whole election was just a game to people inside the Beltway and on Manhattan Island, and they had a good idea how it was going to turn out long before anyone cast a vote.
I could be wrong about this but frankly, outside of Karl
Rove who nailed FOX News for calling Ohio for Obama when his sources showed Romney coming on
like gang busters in precincts that usually vote for Republicans, I didn't see
any surprise or shock or anything similar regardless of who was talking when it
was clear that Obama was going to win.
Even though most commentators were in the tank for Obama
from Day One, and fed us a steady diet of bogus polls saying he was getting
tremendous support, the polls that used the 2008 turnout as the basis for
skewing the results in Obama's favor were dead wrong; regardless of what Neil
Cavuto says. He was wrong too.
I was watching Cavuto last night and he was laughing it up
with a pollster, paying off an election bet in quarts of ice cream, and lauding
the polls as being accurate. I do not agree with his position on
polling. Obama won the electoral vote in a landslide and the popular vote by some 3.5 million; hardly close in either case.
How can you have the incumbent president of the
Deteriorating States of America lose 10 percent of his support, with most
polling outlets using the 2008 turnout as
a basis for oversampling Democrats by double digits just to give him the
appearance of a tie, and say the polls were accurate?
They were wrong. They were dead wrong. And they were also
wrong when they said there was far more enthusiasm on the Republican side
because if they were right on that count, with such a precipitous drop in
support for Obama, Romney would have won in a landslide instead of Obama.
Oh, and I heard Rush Limbaugh saying yesterday that even
though lots of people were bringing up their concerns about voting machines
that were registering votes for Obama even though they voted for Romney, he
wasn't going to get into that subject.
OK, maybe Limbaugh won't go there, but I will. I was
watching the returns Tuesday night and it occurred to me that you don't need to
tinker with all the machines in a multi-state conspiracy to give your candidate
the edge. You only need to do it in a few states, and frankly, in a few
districts in those states.
The media was calling the election's outcome in state after
state literally as soon as the polling places closed their doors, before even a
single vote was counted. The election came down to a half-dozen states and in
those states the vote was so close that the returns from a few cities or
counties made the difference – and virtually all of this is predictable based
on past voting patterns.
I wrote a few weeks back that if you could swing just 3
percent of the vote with scanners or automatic voting machines that have been
sabotaged you would have the election. What was the final outcome? A tad less than three percent? Certainly worth
thinking about and discussing wouldn't you say?
Frankly, I think Romney lost because he didn't come out swinging with brass knuckles on one fist and a baseball bat in the other. Especially toward the end he was way too conciliatory.
There was no good reason to vote for Barack Obama unless you believe in communism or at least hardcore socialism. His national policies are a disaster, his foreign policies are a disaster, his support dropped like a rock because even his supporters have lost faith in him, and the country's economy is in a tank and going right down the drain.
But Republicans didn't come out to vote either nationally or in my little state of Connecticut so they obviously didn't believe in their candidate to a large enough degree to change things. Do you know what Republicans have become in Connecticut? Placeholders. People who don't seem to really want the office but agree to have their names put in contention to hold the spot open until someone who does want the office comes along.
Know how many national offices the GOP won in Connecticut this election? Zero. That my friends is leadership - or not.
Frankly, I think Romney lost because he didn't come out swinging with brass knuckles on one fist and a baseball bat in the other. Especially toward the end he was way too conciliatory.
There was no good reason to vote for Barack Obama unless you believe in communism or at least hardcore socialism. His national policies are a disaster, his foreign policies are a disaster, his support dropped like a rock because even his supporters have lost faith in him, and the country's economy is in a tank and going right down the drain.
But Republicans didn't come out to vote either nationally or in my little state of Connecticut so they obviously didn't believe in their candidate to a large enough degree to change things. Do you know what Republicans have become in Connecticut? Placeholders. People who don't seem to really want the office but agree to have their names put in contention to hold the spot open until someone who does want the office comes along.
Know how many national offices the GOP won in Connecticut this election? Zero. That my friends is leadership - or not.
Well, that's enough navel gazing. Someone has to be honest and take the blame for this mess, so I'll be up front with you; I am a jinx and I will never again publicly offer my opinion on
who should win a presidential election. Four years ago I said John McCain would beat Barack Obama
and I was wrong; this year I said Mitt Romney would defeat Obama and I was
wrong again.
Obviously, I jinxed Romney – McCain lost all by himself so
I'm not taking the blame for that one. But by writing with such certainty that
Romney would win, it is clear that I jinxed him and that is why he lost the
election.
And if you believe that I have a few other fairy tales to
tell you.
0 comments:
Post a Comment