If We Don’t Flip Some Toss-Up States, Romney, Ryan, and the USA Are Screwed

  Choosing Paul Ryan as his running mate was a great Romney move. Looking ahead, Romney sees movement conservatives working hard right up to the election—even if he or his advisors continues to say stupid things.  That was necessary.

SCROLL DOWN FOR TWO IMPORTANT EVENTS THIS WEEK

But it wasn’t enough to win the election and unseat America’s first anti-American president.  To do that, we must find a way to win over the selfish middle. (I know, writing things like “selfish middle” doesn’t help, but I hate lying to them.)

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Obama vs. Romney Create Your Own Electoral Map

Here’s the reality: the Electoral College, which once favored Republicans, is now the exclusive property of the DNC.  That’s because “moderates,” who vote for candidates promising to give them stuff, have moved into formerly conservative states.  In the map above, Obama needs only 33 electoral votes to win.

Now, take out all the toss-ups by giving the gray states to the candidate currently with the lead in polls in that state:

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - No Toss-Ups

If the election were held today, America would be screwed.

It’s possible, perhaps likely, that Romney could win a sizable popular majority and STILL lose an Electoral landslide.

Here’s what we need to do if we don’t want to be the generation that lost America:

  1. Shore up Romney’s lead in the red states like Missouri
  2. Sweep statewide races in red states like Missouri
  3. Ensure a Republican Congress (both houses)
  4. Adopt a toss-up state to work

Here are the toss-up states (electoral votes):

  • Colorado (9)
  • Florida (29)
  • Iowa (6)
  • Nevada (6)
  • New Hampshire (4)
  • North Carolina (15)
  • Ohio (18)
  • Virginia (13)
  • Wisconsin (10)

By “adopting,” here's what I mean:

  • Choose only ONE state to adopt so you can focus your energy
  • Lobby friends and relatives who live in the state
  • Donate to state candidates in your adopted states hoping they have coattails
  • Comment on newspapers and blogs that focus on your adopted state, even if not directly political
  • Call radio talk shows in your adopted state, using their internet broadcast to listen in
  • Pray

Quite honestly, the Electoral College is stacked heavily against Romney. That means it’s stacked against America’s future, as well.  A landslide for Romney in Missouri won’t help Romney in Florida or Virginia.

Yet we still need to elect Ed Martin, Todd Akin, Shane Scholler, Cole McNary, Peter Kinder and the other Missouri candidates.  We need to elect a solid House delegation. And we need to prevail on statewide and regional referenda.

That’s a lot to do.  And only about 90 days to do it.

TWO IMPORTANT EVENTS THIS WEEK

You can get involved beginning this Wednesday, August 4, at 4:00 p.m. in Valley Park at the Victory Bus Tour Rally.   All statewide and local candidates will be at the Victory Fieldhouse.  They will making a stop on the Victory Bus Tour and with this being the statewide HQ, it needs to be full!  Please forward this on to everyone you can.

Victory Bus Tour Rally – ALL Statewide and Local Candidates

Wednesday August 15th – 3:45 – 5 pm Victory Fieldhouse 932A Meramec Station Rd Fenton, MO 63088

If you’d like to discuss this further, come out to Sky Music Lounge this Thursday, August 16, at 7:00 pm, for the next St. Louis Tea Party After Party. The scheduled topic is Voter Fraud, but we’ll be talking a lot of election strategy, too.

Finally, I need say this:  in 2012, yelling at people, telling them they’re wrong, won’t work.  Sitting the election out because your favorite candidate didn’t win would be like surrendering to the Soviets.  Your children and grandchildren deserve to live as free men and women.  If we lose freedom now, it won’t come back in their lifetimes.  Winning this election might not keep you from the chains of slavery to government, but losing will weld the shackles shut.

 

New Hampshire Exposes GOP’s Diverse Base

Okay, Santorum and Gingrich didn’t get a bump out of their debates over the weekend.  More like the bump got them.

And Ron Paul did way better than I expected. Congratulations to Dr. Paul and Mitt. mitt-romney-fgr

I still think my Saturday night post accurately reflected the national impressions, though.  That’s backed up by this CBS News poll that shows Republicans believe Santorum most closely shares their values, but—and this is a J Lo but—they believe Romney is more electable.

Romney and Santorum bring different perceived strengths to the race as well. Romney is viewed as most electable (and most likely to be the eventual nominee), while Santorum is seen as the candidate who best represents these voters' values - up 17 points since November. Romney is right behind him on this measure.

I have to disagree with their judgment on Romney. Here’s why.

To win, the Republican nominee must do two things: 1) generate more energy within his base than Obama, and 2) he must attract the people who don’t trust unlimited government, but don’t necessarily care for the conservative base, either

Ronald Reagan did that.  Reagan won the support of many center-right factions:

  • Defense hawks (Cold Warriors)
  • Religious right (Moral Majority)
  • Fiscal conservatives (Supply Siders)
  • Strict constructionists (Constitutionalists)
  • Blue collar families (Reagan Democrats)
  • Independents (independents)

But Romney isn’t Reagan.  Romney is much more like John McCain, Bob Dole, George H.W. Bush, and Gerald Ford—the last four Republicans to lose a presidential election.

The reason those four lost wasn’t because they were bad men.  They were good men.  And it wasn’t really because their policies were out of step with most voters.  In fact, their policies were more reflective of America than those of their opponents.

The reason McCain, Dole, Bush, and Ford lost to Obama, Clinton, Clinton, and Carter was because they failed to pull together that broad conservative coalition. But the biggest reason they lost was that they failed to convince the last two—so-called Reagan Democrats and independents—that they offered a choice. And they failed to inspire the base to spend their vacation pounding the pavement or making calls.

A WSJ story today reveals some crucial facts:

Today's Republican Party has become steadily more blue-collar, more populist and more influenced by voters who act as much like independents as Republicans. All that makes the idea of attacks on capitalist behavior arising from the traditional party of capitalists a little less bizarre.

• Three-quarters of those who voted in the New Hampshire Republican primary had family incomes below $100,000, early exit polls indicated. Almost half had no college degree.

• In a stunning sign of how loose party affiliations have become, almost half of those who turned out to vote in the Republican primary actually identified themselves as independent voters. Big chunks of them went for Texas Rep. Ron Paul and former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., the least-conventional of the GOP candidates.

• Nationally, when the thousands of interviews conducted in last year's Wall Street Journal/NBC News polls are combined, Americans who call themselves blue-collar workers actually were slightly more likely to identify themselves as Republicans than as Democrats.

• And when the Journal/NBC News poll asked Americans in November who was responsible for the country's current economic problems, Republicans were precisely as likely as Democrats to blame "Wall Street bankers."

When blue collar families and independents see establishment Republicans, they figure they might as well vote the Democrat who will at least throw them some largesse

There a many Americans who want government fixed. They want the Fed managed at least, if not dissolved. They are willing to go through the pain of winding down entitlement programs and realigning powers of the states to Constitutional intent. 

But they won’t go for half measures that create a bunch of pain and confusion but resolve nothing,eliminate no unconstitutional program, shut down no counter-productive cabinet department, and create new layers of bureaucracy through which we all must wade.

Maybe the blue collar voters and independents are wrong about establishment Republicans. Maybe I am, too.  And maybe so many people find Obama dangerous (I do) and anti-American (I do) that they will vote for anyone the GOP nominates. Our desire to avoid bad things is very powerful.

Then again, our desire to move toward good things is important.  If the only choice we on the right offer non-aligned voters is the lesser of two evils, Obama will be win re-election. 

There is no Reagan on the horizon, no Shane character to ride into town and save the day.  We have a choice between Romney, Paul, Santorum, and Gingrich.  Among those last three, I see none with a distinct advantage in gaining the nomination. Unless two quit. Soon.

But the larger problem is with the party itself.  Its establishment seems to have no idea how to inspire, and its insurgents have no idea how to team up.

Who Won the New Hampshire Republican Debate?

 

It depends on how you score. Rick-Santorum

I see three scoring scenarios:

  1. Best conservative performance
  2. Best electability performance
  3. Best positional performance

Conservative performance is pretty clear: whose answers appeal to conservatives?  (Does not mean conservatives believed the candidate meant what he said.) This is not Tea Party scoring, either. I’m not limiting my evaluation to the 3 core Tea Party principles of Constitutionally limited government, free markets, and fiscal responsibility.  This is broader conservatism.

Electability performance means the candidate appealed to general election voters. This doesn’t meant centrist—it means not scaring the crap out of people who aren’t politics wonks. (That’s most voters, by the way.)

Positional performance means the candidate did what what he had to do based one his current standings in he nomination process.

On conservative performance, I have to go with:

  1. Santorum
  2. Perry
  3. Gingrich / Romney

Electability

  1. Santorum
  2. Gingrich
  3. Romney

Positional

  1. Romney
  2. Santorum
  3. Gingrich

If we give 3 points for first place, 2 for second, and 1 for third, we get this composite ranking:

  1. Santorum: 8 points
  2. Gingrich:  6 points
  3. Romney:  5 points

What does it all mean? 

Santorum should move up a bit in the polls before the New Hampshire primary, but not enough to win.  He needed Romney to finish out of the top 3 in this debate. 

Gingrich needed to pull Romney out of the top 3 and get closer to Santorum than he did.  This hurt Newt.

Romney improved his chances, but he didn’t close the deal.  The longer he lets Santorum and Gingrich stay in the game, the more vulnerable his lead becomes.