Here’s My Electoral Map Prediction

Yes, I’m feeling a wave toward Romney.

Bill Hennessy Electoral Map

My gut tells me this year is a lot like 1980.

1980 Was A Dead Heat

The final Gallup poll that year had a dead heat. Time Magazine’s November 3, 1980, called the race a dead heat. So did Newsweek.

The press was hoping John B. Anderson, a former Republican Congressman running for president as an independent, would siphon votes from Reagan. He did siphon votes from Reagan, but not nearly enough. America was fed up with Jimmy Carter.

What appears to be a dead heat to pollsters could, in fact, be a landslide for Romney. And I think that’s the only way Romney wins.

Romney Must Win Big To Win

In a close race, Democrats will cheat, steal, and defraud. They will fight it in the courts, discover ballots in trunks, and sue to let people vote until they get the numbers they need.

For Romney to win, the race must appear hopeless to Democrats before midnight Tuesday.

That’s exactly what I think will happen.

What do you think?

7 Warning Signs That Obama’s Imploding

Hurricane Isaac smiled on the Republicans in Tampa and delivered more misery to New Orleans and its surroundings.  That was just one of the ominous signs that 2012 is shaping up to be a forgettable year for Democrats, especially for Barack Obama. hurricane_isaac_florida1

Here’s seven more warning signs that Obama’s 6-year campaign is about to implode:

1.  Torrential Rains Wipe the Face of Mount Obamamore

Not that weather plays favorites, but you have wonder. First, there was Isaac. It missed Tampa and revealed Obama as a self-serving attention grabber. Obama who's going to New Orleans Monday only as a political necessity after Mitt Romney paid the drenched and ravaged city a visit on Friday.  But the real kicker was the torrential rains that ruined a gigantic Rushmore-like sand sculpture of Dear Leader Obama.

2.  Even Bill Maher Says Clint Eastwood “Killed” It at GOP Convention

In 2008, John McCain couldn’t buy a celebrity endorsement. In 2012, a Hollywood icon delivered one of the best and most bizarre performances in political convention history.  Clint Eastwood demonstrated the skills of a great storyteller by talking to an empty chair that represented the empty suit in the White House. When Bill Maher and Mark Levin agree, it must be true.

3.  Bill Clinton Poised to Upstage Obama (and remind all of us that things were better when Newt was Speaker of the House)

Did I call Obama an attention whore? Well, in that old profession Obama’s a cheap streetwalker compared the $10,000-an-hour “executive escort” named Bill Clinton. And there’s a lot of evidence that the two don’t like each other. That should make for quite a show as Bill Clinton brings his Little Rock carnival to North Carolina to show Obama how to turn political tricks like a master.

4.  Democrat Governor Admits We’re Not Better Off Than Four Years Ago

The greatest question ever asked in a presidential debate didn’t come from the moderator; it came from Ronald Reagan. In a debate with President Jimmy Carter, Reagan asked, “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?”  The answer then, as now, was “no.”  Even Democrats can’t deny that Obama made it worse.

5.  Democrats Campaign of Personal Attacks Tarnishes the Incumbent

Last June, the New York Times realized that Obama’s decision to take the low road in 2012 was a big gamble. That’s because of neuroscience. When I say something bad about someone, the listener thinks less of my subject, but he also thinks less of me.  (I should probably worry more about this fact, huh?)  By going negative hard and early, Obama is alienating voters left and right. He’s running against America’s current state—a state he produced by his work in the majority party in the Senate and as President.  That helps explain why even his own campaign staff can’t tell us things are better now than when Obama took office.

6.  Republican Identification Reaches Historical High

For years, Republican wins were tied to low turnout. That was because far more voters self-identified as Democrat than Republican.  But Republican identification is at an all time high following a positive and effective GOP convention.  For an incumbent relying on negativity, this Republican surge is a double-barrel shotgun aimed on Obama’s political future. He’s turning off young voters who should be idealistic, and catalyzing independents to choose the GOP.  According to Rasmussen, 37.6% of us identify as Republican, but only 33.3% as Democrat.  What’s worse for Obama (and better for America) are the trends.  Democrat identification is falling as Republican ID rises.  In other words, Democrats are becoming Independents and Independents are becoming Republicans.

7.  Even Huffington Post Realizes Obama Failed to Reform Politics as Promised

Sam Stein at HuffPo writes about an Obama flaw we on the right recognized four years ago: Obama’s no reformer. He promised to change politics, to change America, to heal the world and lower the seas. He didn’t.  By contrast, Mitt Romney’s determination to help you and your family looks far more promising.

While the Electoral Map is still concerning for Republicans, Obama seems to be steering the Democrats into the teeth of a political hurricane.

Wait, what year is this?

Dig this opening paragraph –>

As the marathon for the presidency, 1980, begins to quicken, the American electorate is in a singularly sour and pessimistic mood. Not only is the public naturally worried about the economy, energy and inflation, but it doubts things will improve much. The country is anxious to find strong leaders —the evidence is overwhelming—and the public has little faith that Jimmy Carter has the ability, let alone the programs, to solve the nation's problems. Clearly, the search has begun for a candidate who is seen to have the sort of leadership qualities that Carter is thought to lack.
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,920594,00.html#ixzz1XEIEFbL6

September 10, 1979.  I remember that year, that month.  I owned St. Louis Cardinal Football season tickets, bought with money I earned cutting grass and shoveling snow. Ottis Anderson debuted with 190+ yard game against the Dallas Cowboys.  I was playing football, too, at St. Mary’s High School. My Epiphany baseball team had just lost the 1979 Junior Boys City-County Championship in the final game. (We won the following season.) And the Iranian hostage crisis was still two  months away.

Substitute unemployment for inflation, Obama for Carter, and 2012 for 1980, and this Time story could run tomorrow.

carter_obama_smile1001281 (1)

I blogged about the remarkable similarities between America’s worst president, and the man aspiring to succeed him, with Change Is All You Need, January 7, 2008

Carter was all about change. He offered an “outsider’s perspective” of Washington, a popular image two years after Nixon resigned. Carter spoke of reaching out to our enemies, a popular position one year after Saigon fell. Carter spoke of renewing American values, a popular sentiment as violent crime and drub abuse rates soared.

On Labor Day, Matt Stoller told Salon.com readers What Democrats Can Do About Obama. 

From the debt ceiling fiasco to the recent rescheduling of a jobs speech at the behest of Speaker Boehner, it has not been a good summer for President Obama. Like Chinese water torture, Gallup's daily tracking poll has shown a steady and unrelenting drip of bad news. He has been in and out of the high 30s for his approval, and in the low to mid-50s for his disapproval.

Later, Stoller declared that “Obama has ruined the Democratic Party.”  He went to predict a possible future for Democrats under Obama:

If the economy worsens going into the fall, and the president continues as he has to attempt to cut Social Security, Democrats might be facing a Carter-Reagan scenario. Reagan, at first considered a lightweight candidate, ended up winning a landslide victory that devastated the Democratic Party in 1980. Carter wasn't the only loss; many significant liberal senators, such as George McGovern, John Culver and Birch Bayh, fell that year.

Republicans, though, should avoid overconfidence.  In 1979, the GOP field sported a candidate unlike any other in generations.  Reagan already led Carter in opinion polls as of the September 10, 1979, Time edition. A new Reagan has yet to emerge from the apck of 2012 Republican candidates.  Plus, the GOP of 1980 had a stronger bench that its 2012 edition.  (By the same token, the Democrat Party of 1980 was still pro-American. I would not say the same for its current version.)

Still, this recent New York Times story seems to echo the 1979 story on Carter:

Americans are more pessimistic about the nation’s economic outlook and overall direction than they have been at any time since President Obama’s first two months in office, when the country was still officially ensnared in the Great Recession, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

Amid rising gas prices, stubborn unemployment and a cacophonous debate in Washington over the federal government’s ability to meet its future obligations, the poll presents stark evidence that the slow, if unsteady, gains in public confidence earlier this year that a recovery was under way are now all but gone.

The similarities between Carter and Obama grow stronger every day, as our nation weakens. It’s up to us to muddle through to the next election.  If we can, that shining city on a hill is still within our grasp. 

I think the Gipper would want us to try.

Waning US Influence

Pro-Western governments in these countries have fallen to anti-American forces or diminished their support for the US since Barack Obama became president.

  • Lebanon
  • Jordan
  • Yemen
  • Qatar
  • Egypt
  • Turkey

Obama’s campaign promise to restore respect for America around the world is a joke.  A cruel and dangerous joke.  Our enemies see Obama’s weakness as American weakness. As they did during Jimmy Carter’s failed presidency, those enemies are advancing.

The next president will have more than a financial catastrophe to fix.

It’s 1978 All Over Again **UPDATE: Thaddeus McCotter Agrees With Me**

The news might seem unimportant to us in the USA:

Day after day they marched, tens of thousands strong, defiant chanting demonstrators surging through the streets of Cairo, a capital unaccustomed to the shouts and echoes of dissent. The subject of their protest was the policies of Egypt’s supreme ruler, Hosni Mubarak. Some carried signs demanding his ouster. Others called for a return of long denied civil and political liberties and the enforcement of Islamic laws.

Except I changed a few words.  I replaced “Tehran” with “Cairo”, “Iran” with “Egypt”, and “Mohammed Reza Pahlavi” with “Hosni Mubarak.”  The paragraph above is from Time Magazine’s cover story on turmoil in Tehran from September, 1978. Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,916373,00.html#ixzz1CN3AbsVh

The Obama White House response to anti-government turmoil in Egypt today parallels Jimmy Carter’s vacillating and indecisive response to Iran 33 years ago. Carter, who praised the Shah in 1977, seem lost for a response to turmoil in 1978, and joined the world in criticizing the Shah after the fall.

That’s courage.

Here’s how events unfolded as the Shah—a bulwark against both Soviet domination and radical Islam in Southwest Asia—faced exile or death:

Even by late 1978 few people in the Carter administration, including the American embassy staff in Teheran,20 seemed to know much about the leaders or directions of the revolution. Khomeini’s violent ideas and extraordinarily anti-American, anti-Zionist views apparently had not yet registered. U.S. policy appears to have straddled both sides. For example:

—Shortly after the Shah declared martial law, President Carter called him to voice support.

—Yet in October, after weeks of daily reports sent back to Washington on events in Iran, Ambassador William H. Sullivan "could detect neither high-level concern nor any comprehensive attitude toward the events that were in progress."

—On 4 November 1978, as rioters spread fires across Teheran, destroying banks, theatres, and the British embassy, security advisor Brzezinski called the Shah from the Iranian embassy in Washington to express his assurance that the United States would "back him to the hilt."

—Concurrently, certain high-level State Department officials evidently had concluded that the Shah was the major problem in Iran and that he had to go regardless of who replaced him.

—Energy Secretary James Schlesinger (a previous Defense Secretary in the Ford administration) argued that the Shah had to be saved, and proposed a U.S. show of force in the Indian Ocean.

—Late in December President Carter seems to have agreed, dispatching the aircraft carrier Constellation to the Indian Ocean. Then, possibly out of concern over risk to the carrier, the President countermanded his own order.21

Thus, as time ran out for the Shah and for Washington, the Carter administration split between supporting the monarch, dumping him, or riding out the storm. Events, not policy, now determined American responses in Southwest Asia.

Last week, White House spokesman Gibbs refused to support Mubarak publically.

Today, a world long caught up in economic turmoil turned its attention to turmoil in Cairo. We should be scared, because the Obama Administration has no plan. The White House, we learned, has not contacted Mubarak since the crisis began.

It’s as if Obama had no idea there was an Egypt.

If Egypt falls to radicals, the Suez Canal will close.  Israel will face extinction. Oil and gasoline prices will soar, possibly to $200 a bbl and $8.00 a gallon, respectively.  The nascent and weak recovery would quickly turn to economic depression.

**UPDATATE** US Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (one of my favorites) issued a statement tonight to that begins brilliantly:

The Egyptian demonstrations are not the equivalent of Iran's 2009 Green Revolution.  The Egyptian demonstrations are the reprise of Iran's 1979 radical revolution.  Thus, America must stand with her ally Egypt to preserve an imperfect government capable of reform; and prevent a tyrannical government capable of harm.

Yeah, yeah, you bleeding hearts will criticize Mubarak.  But if Mubarak falls, you will see horrors that have been hitherto unimaginable.

And still this idiot in the White House is incapable of formulating a policy.  As was said of Carter's dealings with Iran in 1978, events, not policy, will determine American response to what happens in Egypt.

Don't say I didn't warn you.

***UPDATE II*** Michelle Malkin has another angle: the people must be heard. True, but these protests seem eerily like Tehran 1978.  Don't assume this will end well--for the oppresses liberals in Egypt or for the world.

Have you noticed few people call Barack Obama “The One” anymore? “The Golfer” or “The Vacationer” is more like it. Something less than One, by any measure.

obama-wipesbrow499

Still, with each passing day and each new, permanent crisis, it seems like BO just ain’t up to the job of President.  Nothing new.  When Jimmy Carter’s incompetence became obvious, the lefty press developed a theory that the job had simply grown too complex for one man. Don’t be surprised to hear it again shortly. They carried that meme right into the GOP convention of 1980 when Walter Cronkite decided that Ronald Reagan needed to appoint Gerald Ford his co-nominee rather than veep

Of course, Reagan became President and proved, in short order, that  not only could one person handle the job, the right person could do it in 6 hour days with a nap to boot.  The trick, of course, is finding the right person. And America apparently failed at that challenge in 2008. 

I don’t have a bunch of stats and numbers for this, but I do have an awfully strong hunch.  Bill Clinton was dealt bad news from time to time, but he always seemed to land on his feet.  Barack Obama has good news every now than, and he somehow manages to screw that up, too.  Let’s look at headlines of the past week:

Did I say past week?  That was TODAY! 

Here’s the thing: today wasn’t a aberration. Every day of the Barack Obama presidency is like this.  Or worse. In fact, a few weeks ago, former Obama fawner, Peggy Noonan, declared Obama a “snake-bit President.”  And that ain’t good.

But Mr. Obama is starting to look unlucky, and–file this under Mysteries of Leadership–that is dangerous for him because Americans get nervous when they have a snakebit president. They want presidents on whom the sun shines.

Indeed. In 1981, the masters at Bishop DuBourg High School had us all watch Reagan’s Inauguration on TV.  We saw it happen live, on CBS, if I remember correctly.  Here’s the story from Defense.gov:

In stepped Reagan. After taking the oath of office, Reagan strode to the dais. As the new president began his inaugural address, the sun broke through the clouds. A woman in the crowd said that even Hollywood couldn't have written a better script.

Reagan’s whole presidency was like that. Not scripted, but lucky.  When Dutch (Reagan’s nickname from back in Dixon, Illinois) screwed up, something happened. He’d come out smelling like a rose.

Noonan was right, of course. We want lucky leaders.  As goes a song from the musical Pippin, “It’s smarter to be lucky than it’s lucky to be smart.”

I would argue that intelligence, education, and experience, alone, are not enough to be president. Yet Obama appears to lack all of those, in addition to luck and instinct.  We know he went to Harvard. But so did George W. Bush. And Hank Paulson.  And the CEOs of most of the banks that collapsed in 2008.

So we have a lot of evidence that we hired the wrong dude to lead America.  The question becomes “what do we do now?”

There’s only so much we can do, and some of you have been doing it for a while.

  1. We can keep pressure on Congress to STOP enacting this snake-bit, incompetent President’s agenda.
  2. We can support candidates who will stop Obama’s agenda in the next Congress.
  3. We can recruit and train candidates for 2012 who will reverse the damaging growth of government.
  4. We can pray that our country survives this present crisis of government.
    Until we have a Congress and President who understand the Constitution and voluntarily abide by its limitations on government powers, it’s up to us to remain vigilant against further government growth. And it’s also incumbent upon on us to understand what a colossal mistake we made by electing this snake-bit, failure of a man to our country’s highest office.