Election Politics of the Day

Loading...

Monday, December 5, 2011

Herman Cain Suspends Campaign, throws support to Gingrich

Lame Stream Media and Rumors Affect Cain Camp

On Saturday Herman Cain announced a suspension to his campaign citing the growing burden on his family from the allegations of his past infidelities.

So is that all it takes to topple a candidate?

Bill Clinton must be laughing up a storm.  (See Backstory Here on Gennifer Flowers)


With his wife Gloria standing by his side in a rare public appearance, Cain decried the sustained accusations as false and declared he is "at peace" with his wife and with himself. But he said the claims have "sidetracked and distracted" from his ability to present a new vision for the country, as well as impacted his ability to raise money. Related Video Herman Cain Suspends 2012 Presidential Campaign Cain moves in new direction "I am suspending my presidential campaign because of the continued distraction, the continued hurt caused on me and my family," Cain said, adding that he reached the decision "with a lot of prayer and soul-searching." - Fox News Story

After announcing the exit from the race for a nomination Hermain Cain decreed that  he will not be silenced when it comes to the solutions he proposed.  He pledged that his voice will be heard throughout the campaign in an effort to spur ideas such as tax reform.

Leaders of the Pack

With the clearing of the candidate field, so to speak, the rest of the pack should see a bump in poll numbers as Cain supporters begin to assess their choices in the field.

The clear leader today is Newt Gingrich with close to 30% of the polls and Mitt Romney in a close second place.  Interestingly enough, Newt has already claimed he is the nominee.  -- Daily Kos Story on Victory Proclaimation
 A bold move and prediction of the primary outcome.  He should remember, 30 days ago the clear choice was Cain.  Now Cain's done.

Who does Cain support going forward?

Well funny you should ask.  Rumors have surfaced that Herman Cain may be endorsing Newt Gingrich.  A spokesman for Herman Cain on Monday denied a report that an endorsement is imminent even as a source told MyFoxAtlanta that the former Republican presidential candidate will offer his backing to former House speaker and fellow Georgian Newt Gingrich. -- Fox News Story

A Cain endorsement would offer Gingrich a big boost after the former House speaker surged in significant polls over the weekend.
An NBC News-Marist College poll released Sunday found Gingrich had moved into second place in the key primary state of New Hampshire, with 23 percent support among likely Republican primary voters -- a significant jump from his 4 percent showing in a similar poll conducted in October.

Adding Cains  supporters would go a long way to solidifying Newts position as a front runner, but whether Herman Cains personal endorsement would hurt or help is difficult to predict.  After all, if the allegations of Cain's infidelity are true, then an endorsement would be the last thing Newt would want to have from Cain.  That would put a bit too much spotlight into his previous marriages.  But if Herman Cain is exonerated, then having that appeal in his court would certainly help.

Lesser of Two Evils

So with Herman Cain out, and the rest of the candidates trailing too far behind to make any dent in the pols, the race seems to be going in the direction of either Romney or Gingrich.  Neither of which has a perfect record to appeal to the base of the republican and conservative electorate.  Its going to be a hold your nose and vote kind of primary again.
Well at least McCain isn't running.




 Links

See Backstory Here on Gennifer Flowers and Clinton
Fox News Story on Cain Campain Suspension
Cain endorses Gingrich

Sunday, November 20, 2011

C-SPan Videos About Campaign Advertising

Below are three videos related to campaign advertising.

The first up is discussing the effective use of Advertising by Herman Cains campaign to spread the 9-9-9 message.  As a result, most everyone who hears it can remember the benefits.


The second is a video or Rep Rick Hill discussing a bill considering prohibiting negative advertising campaign materials and video along with the use of soft money for these negative ads.


The third video is a discussion about campaign advertising strategy in key battleground states and the role advertising in these states plays.

Mitt Romney picks up Key Endorsement

Moving on Up

On the same steps that JFK announced his presidential candidacy in 1960, Mitt Romney stood in front of Nashua City Hall and secured a key endorsement by first term New Hampshire Senator, Kelly Ayotte. - Fox News Article

Ayotte was one of Palin's "Mama Grizzlies" in 2010, and is a former state attorney general.

"Mitt Romney has proven through his experience as a successful businessman, effective governor, and by his excellent presidential debate performances that he is best prepared to lead our country and ensure Barack Obama is a one-term president," Ayotte said. - Fox News Article

Evidently all that time spent in New Hampshire is paying off.  Political analysts have been wondering whether Romney's lack of presence in Iowa and his concentration on New Hampshire would hurt him.  However Iowa has been rather fickle during republican primary season.  Iowa, a conservative Christian leaning state typically favors solidly Christian Conservatives.  Romney has been painted by some in the Christian Conservative movement as a "bandwagon" Christian.  His Mormon faith has also been called into question.  So why not cut your loses and take your campaign out of Iowa and go someplace where religion is not at the first and foremost political talking point.  Makes sense to me.  Besides, with Florida immediately after Iowa, I believe that will be the new game changer in election cycles.  Florida is one of only a few states that can claim they represent the United States as a small "snapshot" of all the demographics.  If Romney can take New Hampshire and Florida, its pretty much locked up from there.  Add Newt to the ticket and you have your conservative "Street Credit" amongst republican voters.

Perpetual Runner Up

Romney has been a perpetual runner-up this election cycle, taking a second place showing virtually every week to a new candidate of the day.  It feels like polled republicans are looking for anyone but Romney.
What is everyone afraid of?  Oh yeah, Romneycare and the whole Massachusetts governor thing.

So far Ayotte is the first of the Republican member of the congressional delegation in New Hampshire to back a candidate.  Is this the start of Romney's turn at first place?

Recently, Romney has taken a back seat to surging Newt Gingrich.  Polls show Gingrich as the front runner of the field with 23 percent and Romney with 22 percent.  Could we see a Gingrich/Romney ticket?  Or a Romney/Gingrich ticket?

What about Herman Cain?


HasBeen.  Ok thats a bit premature and harsh, but with all the controversy around Herman Cain's past history related to the sexual misconduct allegations, he appears to be a lame duck.  Don't get me wrong, any normal politician could easily spin the allegations and make it out to be nothing much and still win the nomination.  Just look at Bill Clinton and the Jennifer Flowers scandal during the 1992 election cycle.  However Herman Cain is no politician.  He was the golden boy media darling for a little bit, but now he just looks like a creepy business executive.  Not a creepy politician which could be forgiven by the electorate, evidently.

Well that might explain why Newt's previous marriage and all the controversy around that is being overlooked.  He's a politician.

Romney's Next Move


Taking a page out of Newt's playbook, Romney has started to attack Obama more and more and not other Republicans.  During his appearance with Ayotte on his visit to New Hampshire, he also took the opportunity to step up his criticism of President Obama, and what Romney characterizes as the President's "failed leadership" in trying to get the Super Committee to come to a consensus. - Fox News Article

"He has not taken personal responsibility to get the Super Committee to find ways to balance our budget and cut spending," he said.

Instead, Romney says, President Obama "set a trap" with $454 billion in cuts to military spending at stake should the Super Committee fail. "We cannot put the United States security in jeopardy by the failure of this committee and the failure of his leadership." Fox News Article

 Trigger, Trap, same thing.  On Wednesday the super committee needs to find 1.2 Trillion dollars to cut from the federal budget otherwise a trigger mechanism kicks in and and automatically starts to cut things like military budgets.  Oh who thought that was a good idea when crafting such a measure?  Oh yeah, the Liberal Progressives in Washington along with spineless republicans not willing to do what is right thing.

Oh well, time to hang my Gadsden Flag back up and rally the folks.  What do you think of a new slogan for the tea Party ... How about #Occupy_The_White_House?







Links
Fox News article on Endorsment
Romney Scores Endorsement
Supercommittee stalled on Wednesday Vote

Here come the attacks

Out Front


Over the past couple of weeks Newt Gingrich is surging in the polls and has become the front runner of the republican race.
As the front runner in a Republican primary you become the punching bag of the day for the all liberal media attacks. Its like feeding raw meat to lions.
Newt is an obviously accomplished politician.  With his experience in the house as Speaker, and his academic pedigree as well as well versed knowledge of world politics, its a wonder why it took this long to become front runner.  He has gone toe-to-toe with the best debaters as well as moderators and usually comes out on top.

What about controversies?


Well with the front runner status comes spotlight scrutiny.
This is the media's chance to dig up some dirt, to muckrack the past, and cast shadow on a poltical heavyweight.

In an effort to tackle and squelch the inevitable dirt that will be found in his past, his campaign has created a website called "Answering the Attacks".  In the website he discusses everything from his multiple marriages, to the comment about "right-wing social engineering" and even that corny PSA ad with Nancy Pelosi.  I have to say, that ad makes me cringe.  Newt what where you thinking?

Newt's new favorite target

If there is one really differentiating factor about Newt from the rest of the field it is his continued determination to not fight or throw barbs at the other republicans, but to insist that everyone concentrate on the bad policies of the Obama administration and Liberal progressives.  As a result Occupy Wall Street is the new favorite target.  Also known to you hipsters as "occupy" or to you nerds as #Occupy, or to the cool liberal media as OWS.  Funny, I grew up in the late 60's and early 70's and hipsters where not this violent.  At most they broke stuff when they stumbled into it from being too high. 

Newt lobbed harsh words at the movement Saturday in Iowa, describing them as representative of an entitlement culture.

"Now, that is a pretty good symptom of how much the left has collapsed as a moral system in this country and why you need to reassert something as simple as saying to them, go get a job right after you take a bath," Gingrich said.



Up in the polls

A recent Fox News poll showed Gingrich leading the GOP field by a hair. The poll showed him with 23 percent, and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney right behind him with 22 percent. - Fox News article

The poll showed businessman Herman Cain, who for weeks was competitive with Romney, dropping back to third place with 15 percent. - Fox News article.

A new poll out of New Hampshire also showed Gingrich closing in on Romney, who is banking on a win in the Granite State primary. The Magellan Strategies poll showed Romney leading with 29 percent and Gingrich with 27 percent, inside the 3.6 percentage-point margin of error. - Fox News Article


Links
Newt out Front - Fox News
Newt in front of Romney in NH
Can Newt withstand the spotlight?
Newts answers to the Attacks

Sunday, November 13, 2011

C-Span Videos regarding Presidential Debates

The first c-span video discussed the complaints about corporate donations and sponsorships of presidential debates.


The second discusses a lack of independent candidates within the debates, given the scope of independent voters ...


The third is a Presidential debate with just Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich dubbed a Lincoln-Douglas style debate
Note just how much information is gleemed from this style debate in a relatively small amount of time versus the larger format CBS CNN style debates that appear as all show and no substance

Media Shaping Politics causes Bachman to claim bias.

Media shaping your facts

Its no secret that in part, the media shapes and forms the political dialogue of the modern politics.  They have the ability to sway public opinion by putting story after story in from of millions of readers who eagerly digest the words as pure fact, and accept them as gospel.

Case in point, the recent attacks on Herman Cain for the alleged harassment from 20 years ago.  The media has ran no less than 87 stories in the first week.  That is more than all the stories combined over the past three years and during the campaign 208 discussing Barack Obama's ties with 60's terrorist Bill Ayers and other radical socialists.  (Yes Barry, I really don't believe you when you say he's just some guy next door who let me borrow his house to start your political career, wink wink.)   The Herman Cain story has been shoved down our throats so much lately that the media is suffering a backlash.

See video of Maria Bartoromo being boo'ed by the audience for asking about the allegations.  You know, she was nicknamed the "Money Honey" on CNBC.  I wonder if she'll sue someone for harassment?

What about Michelle Backman

I digress ... Back to Michelle Backman.  Today her campaign actively and openly complained that CBS conspired to not ask her many questions, and not any on substance.  Her camp has obtained email threads from CBS staffers that show that they discussed how Michelle was no longer real candidate with any chance and so should not get any questions during today's debate.
CBS News’s political director, John Dickerson, made the mistake of saying basically that in an e-mail and accidentally sending it to the campaign of Representative Michele Bachmann.  Mr. Dickerson e-mailed his colleagues that he would prefer to “get someone else” other than the Minnesota congresswoman for an online show after the CBS News/National Journal debate on Saturday night

Really? Last I checked, she didn't resign from running?  Who are you CBS to attempt to influence the outcome of the debate by skewing questions!

This is exactly why more and more people are turning to other outlets for their news.  Integrity is lacking in the main stream.

What about Newt?  Two weeks ago he was considered a long shot/last place candidate.  Now there are talks about a resurgence to the number two spot after Herman Cain.  (Poor Romney)  If CBS took these steps to sideline Newt we may not have even heard about his climb in the polls.

What to do for the general voter ...

The first thing everyone should do is educate themselves about the policies and positions of every candidate.  Use every available outlet to gather enough information to make you comfortable with a few candidates and follow them in the media, all media.  Then come election day, make an educated vote count.

What about the person who doesn't educate themselves about all the issues?  That's an interesting question.  What if one candidate has one stance on an issue that is dear to your heart?  Say abortion.  Do you vote for that person just for the one issue?  Well, no you shouldn't, and that's the game politicians and the media play with the electorate.  They focus on hot button topics and brush aside others that just don't fit their agenda and before you know it, your hope and change turns into "You hope the change in your pocket can buy you some food." "Ignore the man behind the curtain, raising taxes on everyone, but calling it a tax on the wealthy, ignore economics 101."  Learn the truth.  Then go act on it.

What if you don't like anyone.  Don't vote.  By not voting you send a clear message that they all suck as choices.  They better get it right next time.  Sure you might get stuck with someone you don't like, but lets face it, if you didn't like them enough to vote for them before, then whats the difference.

Links

NY Times on Email from CBS

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Obama catches Foot in Mouth disease from Biden

And loosing the Jewish vote (and donor money)

Or another ally that hates us?  Fresh in the wake of insulting France's Prime Minister Sarkozy's looks (see my blog here ... Blog Post) ... an open mic during last week's G-20 summit caught President Obama and French President Nicolas Sarkozy complaining about Israel's Prime Minister, according to a report by Reuters.
"I cannot bear Netanyahu. He's a liar" said Sarkozy. Obama, according to a French interpreter who was translating his remarks, replied: "You're fed up with him, but I have to deal with him even more often than you."

Even Joe Biden is saying "Whats up with that?"

Possible Cover Up

This happened at the G20 summit, but was reported on Nov 9th after the French Press decided the cattiness was already out of the bag, so they ran the story along with the Reuters reporter who was in the room.  But speculation was that the reporters in the room had an agreement to not publicly disclose these comments.

So much for trusting the press to give you unbiased news.  Hey I bet they fit the story right between Cain sex scandal stories.

Ramifications for Re-Election

Well, kiss the Jewish vote goodby Barry, just like in the election of NY 9 (See my blog about Weiner here). Below is a convenient list of the top 10 Obama Administration humiliations of Israel, tweaked to fit the blog and read easier, but credit goes to the British News Outlet The Telegraph
After reading below and seeing the timeline in one list, you can understand the frustration of our Israeli Allies with how we have treated them recently and why they feel so alone.
While the Jewish vote does not encompass a large percentage of the electorate, if it votes as one body for Obama's opponent that feels like twice the vote (1 less for Obama and 1 more for Republicans).  Plus many of the largest campaign donors are Jewish.  Will this change their mind and shut their wallets?  Or even worse for Obama, will they open their wallets for the Republicans?

My opinion, this is one of many groups that Democrats cannot solidly count on to be counted in thier corner, along with businessmen, the middle class, and the youth.  (The youth are protesting elections OWS style)

Link to Story ...
Link to Story on Foxnews
Obama loosing Jewish Vote

Top 10 Insults (Link)
 1. Obama’s humiliation of Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House - The Telegraph
In March, the Israeli Prime Minister was humiliated by Barack Obama when he visited Washington. As The Telegraph reported, “Benjamin Netanyahu was left to stew in a White House meeting room for over an hour after President Barack Obama abruptly walked out of tense talks to have supper with his family”, after being presented with a list of 13 demands.

2. Engaging Iran when Tehran threatens a nuclear Holocaust against Israel
In contrast to its very public humiliation of close ally Israel, the Obama administration has gone out of its way to establish a better relationship with the genocidal regime of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which continues to threaten Israel's very existence. It has taken almost every opportunity to appease Tehran since it came to office, and has been extremely slow to respond to massive human rights violations by the Iranian regime, including the beating, rape and murder of pro-democracy protesters.

3. Drawing a parallel between Jewish suffering in the Holocaust with the current plight of the Palestinians - Speech in Cairo
In his Cairo speech to the Muslim world, President Obama condemned Holocaust denial in the Middle East, but compared the murder of six million Jews during World War Two to the “occupation” of the Palestinian territories, in a disturbing example of moral equivalence:
“On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people – Muslims and Christians – have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations – large and small – that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own.”

4. Obama’s attack on Israeli “occupation” in his speech to the United Nations - Speech to UN,
In his appalling speech to the UN General Assembly last September, President Obama dedicated five paragraphs to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, without once referring directly to Palestinian terrorism by name, but declaring to loud applause “America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.” He also lambasted the Israeli “occupation”, and drew a connection between rocket attacks on Israeli civilians with living conditions in Gaza. The speech served as a ghastly PR exercise aimed at appeasing anti-Israel sentiment in the Middle East, while bashing the Israelis over the head.

5. Obama’s accusation that Israel is the cause of instability in the Middle East - WSJ Article
As The Wall Street Journal noted, “the Obama Administration seems increasingly of the view that Israel is the primary cause of instability in the Middle East”, citing a recent press conference where he stated:
"It is a vital national security interest of the United States to reduce these conflicts because whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower, and when conflicts break out, one way or another we get pulled into them. And that ends up costing us significantly in terms of both blood and treasure."

6. The Obama administration’s establishment of diplomatic relations with Syria
While actively appeasing Iran, the Obama administration has also sought to develop closer ties with the other main state sponsor of terrorism in the Middle East, Syria, establishing diplomatic relations with Damascus in February. Syria remains a major backer of Hamas and Hizbollah, both responsible for a large number of terrorist attacks against Israel.

7. Hillary Clinton’s 43-minute phone call berating Netanyahu
As The Telegraph reported, Hillary Clinton sought to dictate terms to Israel in the wake of Vice President Joe Biden’s visit to Jerusalem:
"In a telephone call, Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, ordered Mr. Netanyahu to reverse a decision to build 1,600 homes for Israeli settlers in occupied East Jerusalem that sparked the diplomatic row. She also instructed him to issue a formal pledge that peace talks would focus on core issues such as the future of Jerusalem and the borders of a Palestinian state. In addition, the Israeli prime minister was urged to make a substantial confidence-building gesture to the Palestinians. Mrs. Clinton suggested this could take the form of prisoner releases, an easing of the blockade of Gaza and the transfer of greater territory in the West Bank to Palestinian control."
Last time I checked, Israel was still an independent country, and not a colonial dependency of the Obama White House. Yet that still hasn’t stopped the Secretary of State from acting like an imperial Viceroy.

8. David Axelrod’s attack on Israeli settlements on "Meet the Press"
It is extremely unusual for a White House official to launch an attack on a close US ally on live television, but this is exactly what the President’s Senior Adviser David Axelrod did in an interview in March with NBC’s Meet the Press, designed to cause maximum humiliation to Israel, where he stated in reference to new settlement construction in East Jerusalem:
"This was an affront, it was an insult but most importantly it undermined this very fragile effort to bring peace to that region. For this announcement to come at that time was very destructive."

9. Hillary Clinton’s call on Israel to show "respect"

As The Telegraph revealed, the Secretary of State lectured the Israelis at a dinner attended by the Israeli ambassador and the ambassadors of several Arab states in mid-April, urging Israel to “refrain from unilateral statements” that could “undermine trust or risk prejudicing the outcome of talks”. In Clinton’s words:
"Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu has embraced the vision of the two-state solution. But easing up on access and movement in the West Bank, in response to credible Palestinian security performance, is not sufficient to prove to the Palestinians that this embrace is sincere. We encourage Israel to continue building momentum toward a comprehensive peace by demonstrating respect for the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinians, stopping settlement activity and addressing the humanitarian needs in Gaza."

10. Robert Gibbs’ disparaging remarks about Israel - Interview on Foxnews
Not one to shy away from criticizing America’s friends when the opportunity arises, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs entered the fray in an interview on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace in March where he attacked the Israeli government for weakening “the trust that’s needed for both sides to come together and have honest discussions about peace in the Middle East.” In condescending terms he stated that Benjamin Netanyahu should start “coming to the table with constructive ideas for constructive and trustful dialogue about moving the peace process forward.”