… Cannot Stand
” We used to get along by leaving each other alone. The Founders established a limited government, neutral on religion, allowing states, localities, and voluntary associations to do much of society’s work. Even that didn’t always work: We had a Civil War.
An enlarged federal government didn’t divide mid-20th-century Americans, except on civil-rights issues. Otherwise, there was
general agreement about the values government should foster.
Now the two Americas disagree, sharply. Government decisions enthuse one and enrage the other. The election may be over,
but the two Americas are still not on speaking terms. “
” I compared the first presidential debate to
the Battle of Little Big Horn. This second
presidential debate seemed to me like one
of those Civil War battles—I’m not enough
of a Civil War buff to say which one—in
which both armies battered each other but
neither came out a clear victor and the war
went on. This strikes me as one of those
presidential debates, like most presidential
debates, in which most Democratic voters
believe the Democratic candidate won and
most Republican voters believe the
Republican candidate won. “
” I was struck by the difference between the generational and gender appeal of the two candidates. The dial groups showed that Ryan did better with women than with men—in vivid contrast with the usual partisan
patterns. Biden talked strongly about the need to keep Social Security and Medicare as “guaranteed” programs—the kind of thing that has tended over the years to older voters over the years (though they have tended to favor John McCain or Mitt Romney over Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012). But I think that Ryan’s argument that we need to reform these programs in order to make them available to people currently
under 55. Similarly, Biden’s frequent dismissals of Ryan’s and Romney’s positions as “malarkey” may resonate with people of
Biden’s generation—but who under age 40 uses the word “malarkey” any more? “
“Wednesday night’s presidential debate in which Mitt Romney shellacked Barack Obama attracted the biggest audience since the debate between Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan seven days before the 1980 election..
About 70 million Americans watched, a little more than half the 131 million voter turnout in 2008. That’s an estimate, because the ratings companies don’t count those watching on C-SPAN, PBS or the Internet.
Did the debates matter? The first state polls, conducted by Rasmussen and We Ask America on Thursday night, suggest the answer is yes.
Rasmussen reported that Romney was down 1 point in Ohio. We Ask America had him up 1 there.
Rasmussen had Romney up 1 in Virginia. We Ask America had him up 3. And in Florida, We Ask America had Romney up 3.
These states are important because the Obama campaign has spent millions on anti-Romney ads there, to build a fire wall blocking Romney from getting to a 270-vote majority in the Electoral College.
The arithmetic is fairly simple. The 28 states plus D.C. and one Nebraska congressional district that Obama carried in 2008 have 359 electoral votes this year. Subtract Indiana, which has fallen off the target list, and the Nebraska district, and he’s down to 347.”
“Did Mitt Romney win the first presidential debate between him and Barack Obama? Did Sitting Bull win at Little Big Horn?
You would have been surprised, if you had been the proverbial man (or woman) from Mars, to guess which candidate—the incumbent president of the United States or the former one-term governor of Massachusetts—had a better command of either the details of public policy. Obviously Mitt Romney did. And you would have gotten the sense that one of the two candidates had a sense of command and the other was hugely on the defensive. Romney was looking confident, with consistent smiles; Obama was constantly looking downward, on the defensive, irritated and—astonished.
Astonished, because during most of his public career Obama has been received by his audiences with undiluted adulation. He has been totally unused to being challenged on his talking points.”
” Thoughts on night three of the
” Barack Obama went into this convention essentially tied with Mitt Romney. Most voters want to think well of whoever is president but most voters dislike the current economy and disapprove of his economic policies. In these
circumstances I thought and think he needs a pivot, an indication of what new goals he would seek in a second term. We didn’t get that at this convention. Bill Clinton dramatically made the argument that no one–not even Bill Clinton–
could have done better. This will be credible to many voters, but probably not to some current
Barone on the “Dead” Tea Party
” But there’s a pattern here that the big liberal press has been reluctant to recognize: Candidates from the GOP establishment are
getting knocked off by challengers with less name recognition, far less money, and the support of the Tea Party movement. The Tea Party was supposed to be dead and gone, you know .”
Michael Barone on that hypocrisy
” Conservatives like Malkin and libertarians like megablogger Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit are not the only ones who are outraged by this; so are the liberal editorial writers of the Boston Globe . Their point is simple, and based on Supreme Court rulings: it’s wrong and
unconstitutional under the First Amendment for government to deny business licenses because
of an applicant’s speech and beliefs.
As the Globe rightly notes, “If the mayor of a conservative town tried to keep out gay-friendly Starbucks or Apple, it would be an outrage.”
As a conservative on most issues and a supporter of same-sex marriage, I find it fascinating that liberal politicians are so ready to
clamp down on others’ speech.”
““Barone: Obama believes success is a gift from government”
” Perhaps the rain made the teleprompter unreadable. That’s one thought I had on pondering Barack Obama’s comments to a rain-soaked rally in Roanoke, Va., last Friday. Perhaps he didn’t really mean what he said. Or perhaps — as is often the case with people when unanchored from a prepared text — he revealed what he really thinks. ”
It certainly is revealing every time this “smartest of all White House occupants” slips his leash from his Telebuddy minder and speaks extemporaneously .
Some hidden truth always seems to find its way to the surface .
” Consider this our latest entry in the Great Hunt for Silver Linings series, post-Mandate-mas. I’ll
gather three wise men to muse upon the impact of the Supreme Court ruling, two of whom
believe silver linings are easily found — and one of which believes the cloud to be even darker
than we realize. Let’s start with Glenn Reynolds, who moves from his Instapundit home today to
argue at the Washington Examiner that the entire ObamaCare arc didn’t delegitimize the Supreme Court, as critics warned — but it did
do real damage to the legitimacy other two branches of government: “
” What’s up with the white working class vote? For years the horny-handed blue collar worker was the star of the New Deal Democratic coalition. It was for him, and his wife and family, that Democrats taxed the rich, invented Social Security and supported militant labor unions.
Well, that was then and this is now. White working class voters — or white non-college voters, the exit poll group most closely approximating them — are now a mainstay of the Republican coalition.”
Tin Gold Ear …
Michael Barone is always worth listening to .
“Who does Barack Obama listen to?
Not Republican politicians. Evidently weeks go by between his conversations with Speaker John Boehner, who determines what legislation comes to the House floor.
Not Democratic politicians. We have it on good authority that he seldom talks to Democratic members of Congress. Lyndon Johnson used to be on the phone constantly, cajoling and inveigling but also on the alert for shifts in opinion. “
The ever astute political observer , Michael Barone :
“The picture Heilemann draws is of
campaign managers whose assumptions have been proved wrong and who seem to
be fooling themselves about what will work in the campaign.
One assumption that has been proved wrong is that the Obama campaign would.raise $1 billion and that, as in 2008, far more money would be spent for
Democrats than Republicans.”
All I can say is , keep assuming Mr’s Plouffle and Messina . I like what you are doing .
While I have posted about this phenomena before here and here , Michael Barone makes the point so much more eloquently than I could ever hope to do .
“It’s comfortable living in a cocoon — associating only with those who share your views, reading journalism and watching news that only reinforces them, avoiding those on the other side of the cultural divide.
Liberals have been doing this for a long time. In 1972, the movie critic Pauline Kael said it was odd that Richard Nixon was winning the election, because everyone she knew was for George McGovern.”
This from what I would judge to be one of the most astute readers of the American electorate today .
“But cocooning has an asymmetrical effect on liberals and conservatives. Even in a cocoon, conservatives cannot avoid liberal mainstream media, liberal Hollywood entertainment and, these days, the liberal Obama administration.”
I firmly believe his assertion that conservatives are better prepared to argue their case .
“Liberals can protect themselves better against assaults from outside their cocoon. They can stay out of megachurches and make sure their remote controls never click on Fox News. They can stay off the AM radio dial so they will never hear Rush Limbaugh.
The problem is that this leaves them unprepared to make the best case for their side in public debate. They are too often not aware of holes in arguments that sound plausible when bandied between confreres entirely disposed to agree.”
Michael Barone :
“It has been reported that the Obama campaign this year, as in 2008, has disabled or chosen not to use AVS in screening contributions made by credit card.
That doesn’t sound very important. But it’s evidence of a modus operandi that strikes me as thuggish.
AVS stands for Address Verification System. It’s the software that checks whether the name of the cardholder matches his or her address.
If a campaign doesn’t use AVS, it can wind up accepting contributions from phony names or accepting contributions from foreigners, both of which are illegal.
The 2008 Obama campaign pocketed money from “John Galt, 1957 Ayn Rand Lane, Galts Gulch CO 99999″ and $174,000 from a woman in Missouri who told reporters she had given nothing and had never been billed. Presumably she would have noticed an extra charge of $174,000.”
HT / Powerline
Following the record breaking haul of some $745,000,000 taken in for the 2008 campaign , and the fact that not only did the bootlickers in the media give him a pass regarding their unscrupulous methods and now can count on the FEC to watch his back , the Obama cartel has decided that they are free to repeat the process . How have the people of this country turned into such compliant , thoughtless , unquestioning sheep that the media can facilitate what is plainly the most dishonest administration ever ? It boggles the mind . The only explanation that springs quickly to mind is best exemplified by this Frank Zappa song .