When it comes to endorsements, Mitt Romney has a long list of supporters in the Republican establishment. Here’s one a wee bit outside that category: rock star Ted Nugent.
The Motor City Madman tweeted today that he’s “concluded this goodman will properly represent we the people,” BuzzFeed reports.
Nugent, a noted gun enthusiast and member of the National Rifle Association board, had been without a candidate in the GOP presidential race.
Archives for March 2, 2012
Many Democrats, of late, seem particularly bullish on the 2012 election. The Republicans seem fractured, their enthusiasm dampened by a brutal contest for the party’s presidential nomination.
Yesterday, David A. Graham offered a thoughtful piece contending that Reports of the Republican Nominee’s Doom Are Greatly Exaggerated. The whole thing is well worth your time. His points include two relating to the precarious state of the economy as well as one reminding us about the unpopularity of the president’s policies and another anticipating Republican unity in the presidential contest.
He also notes that the “Obama Administration is overdue for a major scandal (despite the best efforts of congressional Republicans, neither Fast and Furious nor Solyndra seems to have had a major impact on public opinion).” Well, they might have more impact if the legacy media paid them more heed.
All too many news outlets do seem to offer the president undue deference.
Despite that deference, a number of recent surveys from Gallup (perhaps the most reliable pollster) have shown that even as the president is not faring as well as the narrative suggests. Yesterday, Ed Morrissey linked “the latest Gallup survey show[ing] that enthusiasm has begun to rise among Republicans — and remains flat among Democrats:”
By 53% to 45%, Republicans, including independents who lean Republican, are slightly more likely than Democrats and Democratic leaners to say they are “more enthusiastic than usual about voting” this year. Republicans have consistently led Democrats in voting enthusiasm since last fall, but to varying degrees.
You have to wonder about people in politics who define themselves by their animosities. Some people seem to spend the better parts of their day obsessing about Sarah Palin and other right-wingers who figure prominently in their demonology. If you really hated this accomplished reformer, why would you want to subject yourself to seeing her picture every day on your wall calendar:
WTF stands for Winning the Future, right? We conservatives tend to put up Ronald Reagan Wall Calendars — not those mocking Jimmy Carter.
It’s not just the publishers of this wall calendar who obsess over the former Alaska Governor. As Byron York reported last month, “‘Game Change,’ the movie version of the 2008 campaign best-seller that premieres” next week on HBO, has a peculiarly Palin focus:
The book, by journalists Mark Halperin and John Heilemann, focused equally on the bitter contest between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination, and the troubled McCain-Palin ticket that went down to defeat in November ’08.
But the movie is about just one topic: Sarah Palin. Director Jay Roach jettisoned most of the book’s riveting political story so he could focus on the tumultuous period in which John McCain chose the then-governor of Alaska as his running mate. [Read more…]
Earlier today, Bruce alerted me to this piece of good news from the gay and lesbian auxiliary of the Democratic National Committee Human Rights Campaign: Joe Solmonese is stepping down as president.
That said, the new leader shares the same left-wing pedigree as his soon-to-be predecessor:
Chad H. Griffin was appointed today as the next president of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization, by the organization’s Board of Directors.
. . . .
The founding partner of strategic communications and campaign firm, Griffin|Schein, Griffin has taken on entrenched, well-financed interests like Big Tobacco, Big Oil and the far right, and shaped national policy debates around equal rights, clean energy, universal health care, stem cell research, and early childhood education. He has also led groundbreaking ballot initiative campaigns including the largest ballot initiative ever recorded, Proposition 87: California’s Clean Alternative Energy Initiative; the Proposition 10 campaign, which generates $600 million a year for early childhood education; and Proposition 71, which secured billions of dollars for stem cell research despite the Bush Administration ban.
An interesting choice, given the Republican House. Doesn’t look like he’ll be able to influence conservative legislators. Does seem that HRC is more interested in remaining part of the Obama coalition than in reaching out beyond its base.
Some of our readers seem to have misunderstood the point of my post earlier this morning, supposedly suggesting that Democrats needed to “differentiate themselves” from the hateful anti-Breitbart rhetoric some left-wingers have spewed in the past twenty-four hours.
Through the title and the inclusion of the post in the category “Liberal Hypocrisy,” I intended to make clear I was mocking Democrats like Barney Frank and liberal commentators like the editors of the New York Times for holding Republicans accountable for the mean-spirited rhetoric of a handful of right-wing extremists, yet so unwilling to apply the same standard to Democrats and holding them accountable for hateful rhetoric coming from their side of the aisle.
No, Democrats don’t need to differentiate themselves from this bile. But, at the same time, they shouldn’t be demanding that Republicans differentiate themselves from hateful rhetoric spewed by their supporters [Read more…]
Just shy of two years ago, the then-Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, insisted that his Republican colleagues needed “to do more to ‘differentiate themselves’ from the hateful speech spewed in the healthcare debate’s final hours.”
Nearly a year later, even after learning that the man who shot Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords had ties neither to the Tea Party nor the GOP, the editors of the New York Times told us that it was
. . . legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge. Many on the right have exploited the arguments of division, reaping political power by demonizing immigrants, or welfare recipients, or bureaucrats.
When some on the left learned of the death of Andrew Breitbart, they reacted in the manner the Old Gray Lady attributed to virulent Republican supporters with a gale of anger and expressions of hatred, demonizing a man who dared challenge their most cherished shibboleths.
Michelle Malkin reported that one leftie had tweeted, “It is very hard to have sympathy for an evil person like Andrew Breitbart!” The Tatler collected more Tweets, including this particularly telling one, “Andrew Breitbart died? Is it wrong that I’m happier about that than when they got bin Laden and Saddam?” At the Washington Examiner, Charlie Spiering reports that one liberal call Breitbart, “a vile excuse for a human being” and yet another alleged he “was a racist, sexist, homophobe.”
Always the same litany, lefties? Guess they just assume that if someone is conservative, he must fit their narrow view of what a right-winger must be, someone who hates people who differ from the white male norm. [Read more…]
Yesterday, Rasmussen released a “national telephone survey of Likely Republican Primary Voters” showing Mitt Romney
. . . with 40% support to 24% for the former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania. This is Romney’s biggest lead to date and the highest level of support any GOP candidate has earned in regular surveying of the race. Two weeks ago, it was Santorum 39%, Romney 27%.
. . . .
In a one-on-one matchup, Romney now beats Santorum 50% to 38%. In the previous survey, Santorum was ahead of Romney 55% to 34%, the only time any challenger has led Romney nationally in a head-to-head match-up.
How quickly things change. I have some sense that we might see similar volatility in the matchup of the eventual Republican nominee against the failed Democratic incumbent, with the president’s internal polls showing his strong support considerably softer than he would like.
In five surveys of registered voters from December 2010 to September 2011, Marist found the percentage of voters planning to definitely vote for President Obama stayed in a relatively narrow range (36-40) whereas those intending to definitely vote against him never fell below 40 and once reached as high as 49.
Rasmussen finds that Obama’s strong approval rating has not exceeded 28% since December 2010 while his strong disapproval, only occasionally falling below 35%, that is, he has a smaller base of dedicated supporters than he has of dedicated opponents.
Perhaps, that’s why he seems to be running scared — and particularly eager to demonize the opposition.
House Democrats, reports the Huffington Post, “have raised more than $1.1 million in the past week from their “War on Women” campaign“:
The DCCC launched its campaign on Feb. 23. Since then, Democrats have been using it to raise money, collect signatures on petitions and generally fire up their base ahead of elections. The campaign comes in response to the debate raging on Capitol Hill over women’s access to birth control that escalated with House Republicans hosting an almost entirely male hearing on the issue in mid-February.
Emphasis added. No, the debate is not about women’s access to birth control, but about the federal government mandating what benefits private organizations can offer their employees. At least we know what the Democrats’ rhetorical crusade is really about: raising money and firing up their base.
John Hinderaker gets at the real problem with the mandate:
why on Earth is the government in the business of telling any employers, not just religious institutions, what benefits they must offer their employees? [Read more…]