Archive for the ‘Barack Hussein Obama’ Category
- Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
- SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
- Solyndra ($535 million)*
- Beacon Power ($43 million)*
- Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
- SunPower ($1.2 billion)
- First Solar ($1.46 billion)
- Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
- EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
- Amonix ($5.9 million)
- Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
- Abound Solar ($400 million)*
- A123 Systems ($279 million)*
- Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($6 million)*
- Johnson Controls ($299 million)
- Schneider Electric ($86 million)
- Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
- ECOtality ($126.2 million)
- Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
- Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
- Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
- Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
- Range Fuels ($80 million)*
- Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
- Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
- Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
- GreenVolts ($500,000)
- Vestas ($50 million)
- LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
- Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
- Navistar ($39 million)
- Satcon ($3 million)*
- Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
- Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)
*Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy.
SOURCE: Heritage Foundation >>>
Their argument is that Obama was feistier and more energetic than he was in his first debate.
Mitt was also plenty energetic. Both the CNN and CBS insta polls of debate watchers both gave Obama a narrow overall win.
CNN had it Obama 46 to Romney 39, with the rest seeing the debate as a draw.
The CBS poll had it Obama 37 to Romney 33, with 37 percent seeing the debate as a draw.
But both these polls also gave Romney an overwhelming victory on the issue that matters to voters: Who will fix this disastrous Obama economy?
In the CBS poll, 65 percent said Mitt Romney won on the issue of the economy compared to 34 percent who said Obama won.
In the CNN poll, Romney beat Obama by 18 point on who has better answers for the economy.
This is devastating for Obama. This means even some Democrats who watched the debate came away thinking Romney has a better plan than Obama for the economy.
The economy is the issue that matters to voters. And that’s the issue that will decide this election.
Moreover . . .
In both MSNBC’s and the FOX News/Frank Luntz focus groups of undecided voters, Romney won overwhelmingly. Here’s what Frank Luntz’s focus group had to say:
And here is what MSNBC’s focus group had to say:
Mainstream media pundits were going to award the debate to Obama no matter what.
Obama was certainly better in terms of energy this debate than what we saw from him in Denver. But his arguments were the same.
And his answer on Libya (supposedly Romney’s weakest moment last night) will come back to bite Obama because what he said there was flatly false.
Debate moderator Candy Crowley was the big loser last night when she intervened to supposedly correct Romney on Libya.
Turns out Romney was right, Crowley was wrong. Her intervention into the exchange between Obama and Romney with her false statement threw Romney off stride a bit for a moment.
Obama told us he had called the Benghazi attack terrorism on day one, when in fact, he had not.
Obama’s lie on Libya hurt Obama because every minute America is thinking about Libya is another minute Obama is losing voters.
A U.S. Ambassador and three other Americans were killed in an inexplicably unprotected U.S. consulate in one of the most dangerous regions of the world by an al Qaeda attack on September 11 — the anniversary of, well, September 11.
This was the third attack on this U.S. consulate in a country dominated by radical, militant Islamists. But Ambassador Stevens’ requests for more security were rejected . . . even though the British and Red Cross had exited Libya because it’s so dangerous and had become overrun by al Qaeda and other Islamic radicals.
Now the Ambassador and three other Americans are dead. Reports are that he was repeatedly sodomized and tortured before he was murdered. Also inexplicably, we (and the families of the slain) still have no autopsy reports from the Obama Administration.
The well-planned al Qaeda attack featured rocket-propelled grenades, mortars, heavy artillery, and commandos.
Obama blamed the attack on a YouTube video that had 19 views before the Obama Administration started talking about it.
Now he’s compounding his lies by lying about his lies . . . because he wants to promote the myth that he’s defeated al Qaeda. Apparently not. Apparently, al Qaeda is as strong, or stronger, than ever.
All this will hurt Obama badly as we speed toward the foreign policy debate on Monday.
The need for leadership and truthfulness should be Romney’s theme in Monday’s debate.
Overall, Romney put in another strong debate performance last night.
Perhaps it was a draw, or Obama a little ahead, on style. But Romney won overwhelmingly on substance and on what matters to voters — and that’s having actual solutions to America’s economic crisis.
Here’s why . . .
1) Romney hammered Obama relentlessly on his economic record, on the deficit, and on gas prices. Obama had no answers. That’s what voters will remember.
2) Romney explained his tax plan better in this debate than he did in the first debate.
3) Romney went into great detail on how he would dramatically increase oil and coal production to bring energy prices down and make America energy independent.
4) Romney hammered on the theme that he would make America the most attractive country in the world for business — so businesses will build plants and invest here rather than in China and overseas. He pointed out that even left-leaning Canada dropped its corporate tax rate to 15 percent, compared to a 35 percent top corporate tax rate in the U.S. – which is why Canada’s economy is now doing so much better than ours.
5) Romney was terrific on how he would crack down on China’s cheating on trade.
6) Romney reminded voters repeatedly about how ObamaCare is killing business, killing the economy, and killing jobs.
7) CNN’s poll of debate watchers had Romney beating Obama 49-46 on who would better handle health care. ObamaCare is Obama’s #1 legislative achievement, but voters don’t like it.
8) Obama never talked about the future or what America will look like after another four years of Obama policies.
In the CNN poll, 49 percent thought Obama spent more time attacking his opponent to 35 percent who thought Romney was the main attacker — which is probably why more debate watchers awarded Obama a few more debating points.
But what voters will remember is that Obama never talked about his plans for a second term. How will his second term be any different from his first term?
Elections are always about the future. People want to know the President’s plan for making America a better place. How will life be different four years from now?
Obama did not say.
He just attacked Romney. That’s what liberals liked about Obama last night.
But that won’t help Obama win over undecided voters, which is what he has to do to win the election.
In the CNN poll, 49 percent of debate watchers saw Romney as the stronger leader compared to 46 percent who saw Obama as the stronger leader.
If you’re the sitting President of the United States and more people see your opponent as the stronger leader, you’re in a heap of political trouble.
People want a real leader as President, not someone who boasts about “leading from behind.”
This is a race for President, not for debate winner. People want to know: Who has the best plan to take America to a better place? Who has the best plan for the future? . . .because what we’ve been doing for the last four years has so obviously failed.
Romney answered these questions. Obama didn’t.
That’s why Romney this morning is in even a stronger position to win this election than he was before last night’s debate.
By the way, what was Obama’s long discourse on contraception all about?
Does he really think this is the big issue on the minds of voters?
How can I say this?
REASON #1: All you have to do is look at President Obama’s reelect number.
Today, in the Real Clear Politics average of polls, Obama’s reelect number stands at 46.0 percent in his head-to-head race with Romney.
Romney is now at 47.3 percent — one full point ahead of Obama.
But what’s important right now is Obama’s reelect number.
Anytime a sitting President’s reelect number drops under 50 percent, he’s in trouble.
When it falls below 48 percent, it becomes very difficult (nearly impossible) for an incumbent President to claw his way back to 50 percent.
Because the President is the known quantity. And right now only 46.3 percent of likely voters think he deserves another term.
After four years in office, how on earth will he persuade 3.7 percent of the electorate to change their mind and vote for his reelection?
Obama’s reelect number has been at 46-48 percent all year. Hasn’t budged much.
What’s changing is Romney’s rising elect number, as voters get to know him better.
Obama’s only hope was to demonize Romney.
But that can’t succeed anymore.
Team Obama spent $300 million doing just that, with an avalanche of negative ads.
Both Romney and Ryan were able to undo all these negative ads with their debate performances — watched by a combined 125 million Americans.
With their debate performances, they were able to answer the #1 question in the minds of undecided voters: Are these two men plausible alternatives to Obama and Biden?
Both Romney and Ryan showed themselves to be far more than plausible alternatives.
By all accounts, Romney wiped the floor with Obama in the first debate, while Biden exhibited signs of mental instability with his incessant laughing, snickering, eye-rolling, and guffawing during Paul Ryan’s cogent presentation and answers to questions.
Biden demonstrated with his bizarre, mentally unstable debate performance that he’s completely unfit to be one heartbeat away from the Presidency.
So Romney just needs to perform acceptably in the next two debates. He will.
REASON #2: Obama only won Ohio with 51.2 percent of the vote in 2008
And this was when Obama could do no wrong, and nothing was going well for McCain.
We had just suffered a massive financial collapse under the watch of George W. Bush, who also was unable to find any WMDs in Iraq. Bush ended his Presidency as among the most unpopular Presidents in history.
Yet, Obama was still only able to win 51.2 percent of the vote in Ohio in 2008.
Does anyone seriously believe Obama will get anywhere near the 51.2 percent of the vote in got in 2008 — when he was at the very peak of his popularity?
The five big battleground states to watch are Florida, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Colorado.
The respected Suffolk University Polling Research Center of Massachusetts has already pulled its polling research team out of Florida, Virginia, and North Carolina (to focus elsewhere) because they feel those states have already been won by Romney (this, even before Romney’s debate trouncing of Obama).
Romney now has also established a lead in Colorado.
Real Clear Politics has now moved Colorado into the Romney column.
Most polls still give Obama a narrow lead in Ohio of one or two points. But most of these polls are old.
Obama’s only hope at this point is to somehow pull out a win in Ohio. He then would have a chance to win an Electoral College vote victory even while losing the popular vote across the country.
By the way, Romney can still win an Electoral College victory without Ohio. But that math becomes more complicated. He would have to win Wisconsin — which is entirely doable with Paul Ryan (from Wisconsin) on the ticket. Polls show Romney-Ryan just two points behind in the usually blue badger state.
But if Romney wins Ohio, this election is over.
Now let’s look again at why it will be so tough for Obama to win Ohio when Romney is leading Obama in national polls.
In 2008, McCain performed three points better in Ohio than he performed across the rest of the country — losing to Obama by 4 percent in Ohio while losing by 7 nationwide.
In 2000, we saw a similar gap between the Ohio vote and the national vote. George W. Bush won Ohio over Al Gore by a 3.3 percent margin, while Al Gore actually won the popular vote nationally by half a percent.
So Ohio tends to vote more conservative than America as a whole — which is why Ohio is always the key state for Republicans to win in Presidential election years.
If the Republican candidate can’t win Ohio, he can’t expect to win the election . . . because Ohio is slightly more conservative than America is as a whole.
It’s a bellwether state — but it’s a bellwether state that tips slightly in favor of Republicans.
There’s no reason to believe Ohio will behave any differently this year. If Romney wins nationally, he’ll win Ohio by a slightly wider margin than his national total.
REASON #3: The giant enthusiasm gap between the Republicans and Democrats.
This is always a key number predicting election outcomes.
Scott Rasmussen puts the enthusiasm gap at +11 to +14 in favor of the GOP. Other polls show about the same number.
This is critical for gauging likely voter turnout.
Does anyone believe black and young voters (the core of Obama’s base in 2008) will turn out for Obama in the same numbers they did four years ago?
Young (under age 30) voters still favor Obama over Romney, but by a deminishing margin. And there is zero enthusiasm this time among young pro-Obama voters. Look for many of them to stay home on Election Day. And the unemployment rate among black voters is now 15%. They will still vote for Obama. But how many will show up?
REASON #4: The Independent vote is breaking heavily against Obama.
Romney leads by 12 points among Independents in most polls, by 20 points in some polls.
It’s almost impossible for Obama to swim against this tide.
If you assume a roughly equal turnout of Republicans and Democrats (which is what most pollsters assume), Romney wins by winning the Independents. Even if you give Democrats a +3 percent turnout advantage over Republicans (unlikely), Romney’s big lead among Independents gives him the election.
The bottom line . . .
Debates don’t change the fundamentals of Presidential elections. Never have.
Debates perhaps can turn a few votes in super-close elections (Kennedy-Nixon in 1960 — with Nixon visibly sweating; Bush-Gore in 2000 — with Gore sighing excessively).
But this election is not that close.
The media polls have skewed in Obama’s favor in part because of the pro-Obama bias of most media polls — also because pollsters tend to deliver the results those paying them are looking for.
So it looked like Obama was winning.
But now that the election is only three weeks away, these pollsters have their reputations to protect. So you are seeing more accuracy today in the polls than we saw two weeks ago.
In addition, the Gallup poll has shifted its metric from measuring registered voters to “likely voters.”
Republicans always score 3-4 points better among likely voters than registered voters — and better still among actual voters.
The closer you get to measuring actual voters, the better Republicans do.
In addition, Romney was unknown to many low-information voters before the debate.
The more voters see Romney, the more they become comfortable with the idea of Romney as President.
So the upcoming debates will be fun to watch. The debates will provide good fodder for the pundits.
Pundits have to make a living, too, so need to talk about something every day.
But the debates won’t matter much — except possibly to add to Romney’s margin of victory by giving the undecideds even more confidence that the country will be in good hands with Romney.
Of course, if Obama lays another egg on the stage, we’re looking at a blowout election.
So put this in the bank.
A Romney-Ryan victory is now baked in stone (barring something completely unexpected). The only question now is the margin of Romney’s victory.
My expectation is that this election won’t be close.
Romney will win by 7 to 10 points as the undecided voters break heavily against the incumbent President in the final few days before the Election, as they always do.
Until this, Mitt Romney’s ads have been absolutely dreadful — no bite
Rasmussen today has Romney now leading Obama 49-47 — with a 16 point lead among Independents. This represents a four point bounce so far from the debate. But Rasmussen’s daily tracking poll is a three-day rolling average. So one day of polling is still from before the debate.
Look for Romney to increase his lead in tomorrow’s Rasmussen daily tracking poll.
Obama’s new ad on debate even more pathetic than his debate performance: Accuses Romney of bullying poor Obama . . .
RNC puts out great ad on the Obama “Smirk” . . .
It was a bloodbath last night for Barack Obama in the debate. He was General Custer at Little Big Horn. He was Duane Bobick vs Ken Norton.
This was the most one-sided debate in Presidential debate history.
To know this is true, just listen to how Obama’s friends reacted to his performance.
JAMES CARVILLE: “Romney came with a chainsaw.“
CHRIS MATTHEWS: “What was he doing!?”
ANDREW SULLIVAN: “This was a disaster!“
MICHAEL MOORE: “This is what happens when you pick John Kerry as your debate coach.“
VAN JONES: “Was able to out-Obama Obama.“
AL GORE blamed the altitude for Obama’s dismal showing.
Obama’s deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter blamed moderator Jim Lehrer.
THE NEW YORK TIMES called him “President Xzanax.”
CNN POLL: Romney Annihilates — 67-25
In the final 15 minutes of the debate, I almost started feeling sorry for Obama.
He looked pathetic — like a whipped puppy.
The expression on Obama’s face told us he knew he had lost, knew he had no answers. Couldn’t wait to get off the stage.
Obama actually looked afraid of Mitt Romney.
Every feeble punch Obama tried to deliver was parried by Romney and then countered with an avalanche of devastating blows. When Obama asked Jim Lehrer, in a debate on economics, if they could move onto a different subject, this was like Roberto Duran saying “NO MAS” in second fight with Sugar Ray Leonard.
But it wasn’t just Obama’s poor performance.
Romney put in a great performance. Romney was substanative. Romney was funny. Romney’s body language was commanding.
It was clear he is just better informed than Obama on the issues. Romney had fact after fact. Obama had the same stale talking points we had heard from him a thousand times before.
But what I loved best about Romney’s performance is he went ideological.
He talked about the Constitution. He even referenced the Tenth Amendment. He quoted America’s Declaration of Independence.
He said he would eliminate every program that did not pass this test: “Is it worth borrowing money from China to continue this program?” If not, he’ll cancel it.
He promised to repeal ObamaCare.
He said education is almost entirely the job of local government — that perhaps there was a federal role in grading the schools. But that’s about it.
He did not back off his plan to offer a voucher option on Medicare for those age 54 and younger (the Paul Ryan plan). He even told Jim Lehrer he will stop federal funds for PBS, even though he likes Big Bird.
One of the great moments in the debate was when Romney said he doesn’t think government should take on the role of “picking winners and losers” in business.
Then Romney really stuck the knife in, saying: Obama has the uncanny ability of picking almost all losers — referring to Solyndra and all those green energy companies Obama threw billions of dollars at that then went bankrupt.
Romney’s performance last night was even better than Ronald Reagan’s performance against Jimmy Carter in 1980. And that’s saying something.
If you watch Reagan’s 1980 debate performance with Carter, you’ll see that Reagan did stumble a bit a couple of times. Romney did not stumble once — not even over a single word.
Reagan really was not a heavy fact guy. He could not rattle off a litany of facts and policy specifics, the way Romney did last night. Reagan was great at talking in big themes and broad principles.
Bill Clinton was a good debater. He was great with policy specifics and facts — but could not talk in big themes the way Reagan could.
Romney was able to do both — talk in big themes (like Reagan) and rattle off reams of facts and policy specifics (like Clinton, but even more so).
Anyone who watched last night’s debate can see why Mitt Romney was such an effective CEO — why he was so successful at building Bain Capital, why he was able to turn the Olympics around, and why he was able to win the governorship in solidly blue Massachusetts.
Mitt Romney just exudes competence.
My bet is he will win over not just Independents with his performance last night. He’ll win over many rank-and-file Democrats — just as Reagan did.
He’ll win them over even though they’ll disagree with him on some issues. He’ll win over some Democrats who just want a strong leader for America — just like Reagan did.
In my article a few days ago, I predicted a four point Romney victory on November 6th.
But that was before this debate. That was a prediction based on the weak, content-free ads Team Romney has been running.
After last night’s debate performance, look now for a 10+ point blowout in the Election for Romney.
I never expected such a strong debate performance from Romney.
Romney was bold. Romney was confident. Romney was not the least bit defensive. Romney advanced conservative principles every step of the way. Romney skinned Obama alive.
Some will say there were no real memorable lines in this debate. No gotcha moments when the debate turned.
That’s because this debate victory for Romney was so overwhelming.
It was like a tank running over an ant.
I have watched this debate now three times all the way through.
The first time I watched, I was nervous.
The second time I watched, it was with a big grin on my face from start to finish. I just wanted to enjoy it for the full 90 minutes — every word of it — with a bag of popcorn.
The third time, I studied it — and was even more impressed with the thoroughness of Romney’s total destruction of Obama. This was true debate mastery by Romney — every word, every line was a torpedo into the side of the USS Obama.
This debate performance will be studied in high school and college debate and American history classes for the next 100 years as an example of “How It’s Done.”
Frankly, Romney should fire his entire campaign team — especially the creators of his weak, content-free ads. I never thought I’d say: “Just let Romney be Romney.”
That seems to be what we saw last night. We saw a candidate who spoke with passion and conviction about conservative principles — about the Constitution, about America’s founding principles. Even the great Ronald Reagan did not talk all that often about the Constitution.
Before this debate, I was looking at the Romney campaign with dismay — thinking he’ll probably muddle his way to victory despite his campaign.
Today, I am truly excited about Romney. My vote is no longer just an anti-Obama vote. I am now strongly pro-Romney.
Obama’s new ad on debate even more pathetic than his debate performance: Accuses Romney of bullying poor Obama . . .
RNC puts out great ad on the Obama “Smirk” . . .
Mitt Romney is running an utterly inept campaign. His ads are just dreadful. And he really has no message the voters can discern. The Romney campaign so far has been pathetic — worse than McCain’s in 2008.
In the Real Clear Politics list of polls, every poll now has Mitt Romney running behind.
Ignore all this. Mitt Romney will win this election. And it won’t be that close.
Here are nine reasons reasons why.
REASON #1: Just 42 percent say they are “certain” to vote for Obama.
This is in the most recent tracking poll by Scott Rasmussen, which shows Obama leading Romney by 2 among “likely voters.”
The lack of enthusiasm among Obama’s supporters will get swamped by the rabid enthusiasm of the anti-Obama vote.
REASON #2: Scott Walker’s 7 point margin of victory in June in heavily Blue Wisconsin.
The polls in the Real Clear Politics average of polls understated Scott Walker’s strength in the Wisconsin recall election in June by a bit more than four percent.
If there is a similar four-point polling error now (which is likely), Romney is now running tied with or slightly ahead of Obama.
But the GOP voter base is far more energized to defeat Obama than it was to defeat Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett in the Wisconsin recall election in June. The energy in Wisconsin was on the Democrat side — aimed at defeating Walker.
The Dems and the Big Labor Unions spent about $40 MILLION to defeat Walker in a heavily blue state, but lost.
We’re likely to see that the polls now are greatly underestimating the seething anger out there bubbling under the surface over what Obama is doing to America.
Reason # 3: Obama’s job approval numbers are exactly what they were in early October of 2010 – just prior to the sweeping GOP election victories in the 2010 mid-term elections.
On October 4, 20120, Obama’s job approval rating stood at 48 percent, with 51 percent disapproving his job performance — identical to Obama’s job approval numbers now.
The 2010 mid-term elections four weeks later produced the biggest landslide in favor of the GOP in a century.
We’re likely to see something very similar in November 6th.
The polls were overstating Obama’s strength then, and are now.
Furthermore, Team Romney, if they have any competence at all, should be able to bring Obama’s job approval rating down to 45 or 43 percent with some decent ads cataloguing Obama’s disastrous record and pathological lying.
But even if Team Romney is incapable of creating any decent ads, there will come a point when even low-information undecided voters will begin to take stock of their own personal situation.
Look for Obama’s job approval numbers to start dropping precipitously over the next few weeks as the electorate (especially those less-engaged undecided voters) start to focus on what Obama has done to America.
REASON #4: The undecided vote tends to break 80 percent against the incumbent in the final week before Election Day.
If Scott Rasmussen’s poll is correct that just 42 percent of likely voters are “certain” to vote for Obama (while 43 percent of likely voters are “certain” to vote for Romney) this leaves 15 percent of likely voters who are persuadable — in other words, not sold on Obama.
Many of these soft Obama “leaners” won’t vote.
Obama’s given his soft “leaners” no reason to make the effort to vote.
REASON #5: Throw out the media polls.
The Gallup poll that shows Obama up by six is of registered voters, not likely voters. So this poll is useless as any kind of gauge on what’s likely to happen in the election.
For the media polls to be right (that purport to be of “likely voters”), we would need to see Democrats turn out equal of greater than what we saw in the 2008 election.
In 2008, the Democrats had a +7 percent turnout advantage over the GOP.
If that happens, Obama will win. But that won’t happen.
In 2004, the two parties were dead even on turnout. That’s where it’s likely to be this year — at best for Democrats.
But the media polls are assuming an 8-9 percent turnout advantage for Democrats. The actual turnout on Election Day will be about equal between Republicans and Democrats. Every survey (including the skewed media surveys) shows Romney leading Obama among Independents.
The Real Clear Politics average of polls also shows a slight edge for the GOP on the generic ballot.
So with a deflated Democrat voter base and a super-charged GOP voter base, projecting and even turnout between Democrats and Republicans is being generous to the Democrats.
But the media projects an +8 to +9 turnout advantage in favor of the Dems — greater than the +7 percent Dem turnout advantage in 2008.
You decide if that sounds plausible.
It’s virtually impossible for either candidate to win without carrying the Independent vote.
So, to know where the election really stands, track what all these polls are saying about what the Independents are thinking. Romney’s holding an average 10 percent advantage among Independents even in the skewed media-sponsored polls.
There are other indicators that the media-sponsored polls are wrong.
Both Romney and Obama are spending a lot of time and money campaigning hard in Pennsylvania. But this should be a blowout state for Obama if the media polling is right.
Polls show Romney up by 11 percent in Indiana — a state Obama won. Other polls show it much tighter than expected in states like New Mexico and Nevada, which have heavy Hispanic populations (who presumably heavily favor Obama).
Arizona, once thought to be a tight battleground state (also with a heavy Hispanic population), is looking like a blowout for Romney, with Romney now at +10 over Obama.
All these are indicators that the national media-sponsored polls are way off — vastly overestimating Obama’s strength.
By the way, I’m not as convinced that Hispanics will vote as overwhelmingly for Obama as the polls now suggest.
The Hispanic cable channel Univision has produced an explosive documentary on the real story behind Obama’s “Fast & Furious” gun-running scandal that has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of innocent Mexicans that isn’t sitting well with Mexico or with many Hispanic Americans.
And most Hispanics are not in sync with Obama’s extremely liberal social issue positions – i.e. gay marriage, gays in the military, taxpayer-funded-abortion-on-demand, Obama’s assault on the Catholic Church, etc.
So look for Romney to perform significantly better among Hispanics when all the votes are cast than polls are showing right now.
REASON #6: Obama’s dismal economic record
- Barack Obama has added $6 TRILLION to the national debt. What has all this deficit spending bought us? Zero net-new jobs.
- The economy is now growing at an anemic 1.3% annual rate. The economic growth rate has dropped each of the last three quarters. The economy is now teetering on the brink of another recession.
- The real unemployment rate is 11.2 percent if you use the size of the labor force as it stood on Obama’s first day as President.
- If the labor participation rate was sitting at the 30 year average of 65.8 percent, the unemployment rate now would actually be 11.7 percent.
- Since the Obama Administration declared the end of the recession in June of 2009, 58 percent of the jobs created have been low income jobs. (Source: National Employment Law Center)
- The percentage of working age Americans with a job has been below 59 percent for 35 months in a row.
- Since Obama became president, the number of Americans living in poverty has risen by 6.4 million.
- The cost of a gallon of regular gasoline cost $1.86 on average in America on Obama’s first days as President. Right now, that same gallon of gas costs $3.75 on average.
- The number of Americans on food stamps has grown from 31.9 million when Barack Obama entered the White House to 46.7 million today.
- Since January of 2009, the median household has lost $4,019 in income per year. Median household income has fallen every year of the Obama Administration.
- America now ranks #18 in the world on the Wold Index of Economic Freedom. Countries that are the most free economically are the world’s most prosperous countries. The U.S. now ranks behind most the industrialized world in terms of economic freedom. We have thus relinquished the big advantage America had over the rest of the world that made the United States the most prosperous nation in human history.
- Under Obama, America has fallen from the #1 ranked country for economic competitiveness to #7, according to the World Economic Forum. This is why our standard of living is falling like a lead balloon.
All Team Romney has to do is catalogue these facts.
The fact that Romney has not done so yet is mystifying.
James Carville helped focus Bill Clinton’s winning 1992 campaign against George H. W. Bush by telling Clinton: “It’s the economy, stupid!”
Carville was trying to get an undisciplined candidate to focus on the most important issue to voters.
It’s still “The economy, stupid” — only more so.
The economy is a whole lot worse today than it was in 1992.
Actually, the economy then was wonderful compared to now.
REASON #7: ObamaCare is as unpopular is ever.
Polls tracking support vs opposition to ObamaCare have remained consistent over the last two-and-a-half years — 53 percent favoring repeal, 42 percent opposing repeal.
If anything, opposition to ObamaCare has hardened since the law’s passage. Though it sure would help if Romney would sometimes talk about the coming catatsrophe that is ObamaCare.
For some reason, Romney inexplicably is ignoring the topic.
We now learn that ObamaCare . . .
- contains 21 new taxes and tax increases that will cost the average American family $4,791 in additional taxes and penalties per year.
- requires the hiring of 16,000 new IRS agents to enforce ObamaCare.
- is now in the process of building 159 brand new government agencies to administer ObamaCare.
REASON #8: Obama’s foreign policy record is starting to look even worse than Jimmy Carter’s.
The Middle East is now on fire.
The U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, and three others were brutally murdered by al Qaeda. Ambassador Stevens was sodomized repeatedly and brutally tortured before he was savagely executed and dragged through the streets.
For some reason, the U.S. Embassy in Libya had absolutely no security — zero.
Now even the mainstream media is having a tough time completely ignoring Obama’s lies about the al Qaeda attack on the U.S. Embassy.
We now learn that the Obama White House knew from the beginning that the attack on the U.S. Embassy on September 11th was executed by al Qaeda, had been planned long in advance, and had nothing to do with that silly anti-Islam YouTube video.
But the Obama Administration continued to insist that the attack was provoked by the video anyway — and continues to blame the video, even now.
Total incompetence plus pathological lying exposed for all to see is a toxic political mix for any President.
Obama calls the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Libya and execution of Ambassador Chris Stevens as a ”bump in the road.”
Bump in the road to what?
You can just imagine what Chris Stevens’ family thinks of that assessment.
As if that’s not enough . . .
Egypt, once a strong U.S. ally, is now under the control of the rabidly anti-American Muslim Brotherhood — thanks to Obama’s decision to back the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak.
Obama is doing absolutely nothing about Iran’s march toward getting a nuclear bomb.
Meanwhile, Obama has gone out of his way to alienate America’s two closest allies — Great Britain and Israel.
Reason #9: Romney will perform well enough in the debates.
Romney showed himself to be an able debater during the primaries. He destroyed Newt in the debate just before the Florida GOP primary.
He also destroyed the Rick Perry, ending Perry’s hapless campaign.
So look for Romney to show well in the debates.
He doesn’t even have to win the debate. Obama, no doubt, will perform well also. Romney just needs to show he’s capable.
Ronald Reagan in 1980 pulled away from Jimmy Carter after the debate because Reagan showed he wasn’t the Mad Bomber Carter was trying to portray Reagan as. Reagan showed in his debate with Carter he was capable of leading the country.
He did not have to win the debate. Carter’s record was so bad, all Reagan had to do was show he wasn’t some kind of extremist and that he belonged on the stage with Carter.
And that’s about all Romney has to do . . . because Obama’s record is such an obvious disaster on every front.
Once Romney succeeds at that (not throwing up on himself, and looking presentable) all of Obama’s attack ads will fall flat because Obama’s ads will not resemble the Romney voters saw in the debates.
Remember, only 42 percent say they are “certain” to vote for Obama. So that’s 58 percent who, frankly, would prefer someone else, if that someone else looks plausible.
Romney’s mission for the debates: Look plausible.
Presidential races rarely turn on debate performance anyway. This race will be won by Romney and lost by Obama based on the underlying fundamentals.
How is America doing under Obama’s stewardship?
The Bottom Line . . .
Obama’s economic and foreign policy records are both complete disasters.
Other than allowing Navy SEALs Team Six to kill Osama bin Laden after Obama dithered for two months (some reports say 16 months) over whether to give the green light to the SEALs, nothing Obama has done has worked. Nothing. Zip, zero, nada.
Even this so-called economic recovery (if you can call it that) started in June of 2009, before a single Obama policy had kicked in.
So really, this was the Bush recovery (such as it was).
But the economic recovery stopped dead in its tracks in April of 2010, two weeks after Obama signed ObamaCare into law on March 24, 2010.
Businesses stopped investing and expanding because they have no idea how much ObamaCare is going to cost. The more businesses find out what’s in ObamaCare, the more nervous business gets.
Now it looks like we are headed into another recession — this one quite likely a whole lot worse than the Recession of 2008.
The federal government is now borrowing 44 cents out of every dollar it spends.
What will this current $16 TRILLION national debt turn into if we have another recession?
At that point, the entire economic system implodes. We become far worse than Greece.
Nothing much happens when Greece implodes because the Greek economy is so small.
Other countries can bail Greece out.
But when the U.S. debt situation becomes proportionally like Greece, the world economy collapses. The rest of the world is not big enough to bail us out.
When the U.S. catches a cold, the rest of the world catches pneumonia.
But when the U.S. catches pnueumnia (or worse), a worldwide economic implosion ensues.
Then we become like what we saw in Cormac McCarthy’s great book (and movie) — THE ROAD.
This is the picture of the future under Obama that Team Romney needs to present to voters.
The question Team Romney should ask voters is not so much “Are you better off today than you were four years ago?”
The real question is: Think things are bad now? How much worse off will you be in 2016, after another four years of Obama?
How much worse off will you be when the national debt jumps from $16 TRILLION to $20 TRILLION (what Obama says the debt will be if he gets another four years) . . . or a more realistic $30 TRILLION?
How can America even survive this level of debt?
There comes a point when the entire federal budget can pay for nothing more than the interest on the debt — no defense, no roads, no law enforcement, no safety net programs, nothing but interest on the debt.
How much worse off will you be when the 21 tax increases in ObamaCare kick in next year?
How much worse off will you be when Taxmageddon kicks in on January 1, 2013?
What will all these tax increases, deficit spending, and mounting multi-trillion-dollar debt do to the U.S. and world economy?
What will all this do to you personally?
It would be nice if Team Romney would start connecting these dots. for voters.
If Team Romney had any brains at all, it would use video clips like this to show the dramatic difference between the direction he wants to take the country and where Obama wants to take the country:
If Romney used this clip in ads, he’d win by 15 points, not four.
What a great illustration of Obama’s America.
Here’s another one Team Romney could use:
Even most people on Welfare don’t want America to collapse into this sinkhole.
More of this, and we’re a banana republic.
Might as well move to Mexico or some Third World country where it’s cheap to live.
Or perhaps just learn to live off the land.
Once undecided voters really start to focus the bleak future that awaits all of us if we have another four years of Obama, you’ll see the undecideds break heavily against Obama. But that’s not likely to happen until the final week.
The end result will be Romney winning by at least 4 percent, almost no matter what he does. And he will carry all the major battleground states.
But Romney could win by 15 if he just copies what Reagan did in 1980 against Jimmy Carter — and that’s go on offense, go ideological, and go big.
That is, if he just explains Constitutional Conservatism to the country. . . and how the future under Constitutional Conservatism is bright and prosperous (as it has been in the past), while the future under Obama’s bureaucratic socialist central-planning scheme is bleak (like Europe, or worse).
No need to reinvent the wheel. Just copy Reagan. Shuffle Reagan’s words around a bit so you are not accused of plagiarism. Reagan showed us the roadmap for sweeping, overwhelming, crushing victory . . . TWICE.
And he had no conservative talk radio, no FOX News, no conservative blogasphere, no conservative media to help him.
Reagan was able to do it on his own. He did it with his message.
If Romney starts making his campaign about big themes ala Reagan . . . or like Thomas Jefferson when he wrote our Declaration of Independence, Romney will win big — by 15 points or more.
You inspire people with big ideas and big themes.
As Proverbs says: “Where there is no vision, the people perish.” (Proverbs 29:18)
By the way, you should re-read the Declaration of Independence.
That was one of the greatest negative ads of all time — a long catalogue of abuses and assaults on liberty by King George III and the British government. That’s what an effective political document reads and sounds like.
And that’s what Romney needs to launch against Obama — a 21st Century edition of a Declaration of Independence for the American people — featuring a long catalogue of abuses, lawlessness, and pathological lying by the Obama regime.
That’s how Romney turns a four point victory into a 15 point victory.
If Romney continues to play “small ball” (what he’s doing now — complaining about China cheating, talking about his standing in polls, and the like), he’ll win by four points — about what Clint Eastwood’s empty chair would win by.
Actually, an empty chair would win by more than four.
The question is not whether Romney will win. He will. The question is his margin of his victory.
That will depend on what Romney does in these final five weeks.
It’s come to this. Obama buys votes with free cell phones . . .
#1: Since January of 2009, the median household has lost $4,019 in income per year.
#2: Median household income has fallen every year of the Obama Administration.
#3: Our national debt recently soared past $16 TRILLION. Obama has added nearly $6 TRILLION to the national debt.
#4: Barack Obama has added more than $1 TRILLION to the national debt every year of his Presidency.
#5: The federal government is borrowing 44 cents of every dollar it spends.
#6: A gallon of regular gas cost $1.86 on average across America on President Obama’s first day in office. Today, a gallon costs $3.86 on average in America.
#7: The official unemployment rate today is 8.1% compared with 5% four years ago and 7.8% on Obama’s first day in office. The unemployment rate has been over 8% for 43 straight months.
#8: The true unemployment rate now is 11.2% if you use the size of the labor force as in stood in January 2009.
#9: If the labor participation rate was sitting at the 30 year average of 65.8 percent, the unemployment rate would actually be 11.7 percent. But people are leaving the labor market because they are too discouraged to look for work in this terrible economy, so this makes the official unemployment rate artificially low.
#10: The labor participation rate for men has fallen to 69.9 percent. This is the lowest level since the government started tracking this number in 1948.
#11: But how are we doing compared to two years ago? The percentage of working age Americans that are employed is smaller now than it was two years ago. In August 2010, 58.5 percent of working age Americans had jobs. In August 2012, 58.3 percent of working age Americans had jobs.
#12: Since Barack Obama entered the White House, the number of long-term unemployed Americans has risen from 2.7 million to 5.2 million.
#13: Today, more than half of all Americans are now at least partially financially dependent on the government.
#14: The U6 unemployment rate now stands at 14.7% when you count part-time workers who would like full-time work and when you count those who have not looked for work in four weeks or more but who want work. Many economists say this is the true unemployment rate.
#15: The percentage of working age Americans with a job has been below 59 percent for 35 months in a row.
#17: Since the Obama Administration declared the end of the recession in June of 2009, 58 percent of the jobs created have been low income jobs. (Source: National Employment Law Center)
#17: Today more than 104 million Americans are enrolled in at least one welfare program run by the federal government. We have 88 means-tested federal welfare programs.
#18: The number of Americans on food stamps has grown from 31.9 million when Barack Obama entered the White House to 46.7 million today.
#19: One quarter of all U.S. children are enrolled in the food stamp program today.
#20: Since Obama became president, the number of Americans living in poverty has risen by 6.4 million.
#21: While Obama has been president, U.S. home values have fallen by another 11 percent.
#22: More than 10 million homeowners are underwater on their mortgages.
#23: Electricity bills in the United States have risen faster than the overall rate of inflation for four years in a row. (Source: USA Today)
#24: While Obama has been President the velocity of money (one of the best measures of the economy’s overall health) has plunged to a post-World War II low.
#25: More than three times as many new homes were sold in the United States in 2005 as will be sold in 2012.
#26: The United States was once ranked #1 in the world in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita. Today we have slipped to #11 — behind countries like Brunei and Norway, according to the World Fact Book published by the CIA.
#27: The United States was ranked #1 in terms of economic competitiveness when Barack Obama became President. Today, the U.S. economy has fallen to 7th place, according to a report by the World Economic Forum — behind countries like Sweden, the Netherlands, and Finland.
#28: More than 10 million U.S. households today do not have a bank account. That number has increased by one million since 2009.
#29: In 1999, 64.1 percent of all Americans were covered by employment-based health insurance. Today, only 55.1 percent are covered by employment-based health insurance.
#30: Health insurance costs have spiked up by $3,065 for the average American family since Obama took office — a 23 percent increase (Source: Kaiser Family Foundation)
#31: Health insurance costs have been spiking up even faster since ObamaCare was passed into law on March 24, 2010.
The Bottom Line . . .
The truth is Barack Obama’s so-called “recovery” is far worse than the recession that started under George W. Bush in the 3rd quarter of 2008 and that was proclaimed over by Obama in June of 2009 — before a single Obama policy had kicked in.
The “recovery” stopped in April of 2010 — two weeks after ObamaCare passed into law. See chart here >>>
Romney’s theme should NOT be “Are you better off than you were four years ago?”
That was Reagan’s line, and really doesn’t communicate the gravity of today’s economic crisis.
We’re in the midst of a full-blown economic collapse — as illustrated by Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke’s pledge today to print as much new money as needed to keep the economy afloat through Election Day.
Mitt’s theme should be: “Think things are bad now? Just imagine what America will look like if Obama is reelected and has another four years to complete his promise to ‘fundamentally transform’ America.”
Obama certainly is “fundamentally transforming” America — into Third World banana republic . . . and amazingly quickly.