Gay Patriot Header Image

Americans seem favorably disposed to reelecting a GOP House

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 6:41 pm - July 19, 2012.
Filed under: 2012 Congressional Elections

In a detailed analysis of the race for the 113th House of Representatives, Stuart Rothenberg offers some sobering news for Democrats:

Democratic strategists need a dramatic shift in the House playing field if they are going to have any chance of netting the 25 seats they need to regain a majority in the House of Representatives. And that outcome looks increasingly remote.

Right now, the outlook for the House is anywhere from a small GOP gain to a modest Democratic gain in the single digits — not close to what Democrats hoped for as the cycle began.

(Via HotAir headlines.)  Given the likelihood that Republicans will retain their majority in the House and, at minimum increase their representation in the Senate, you’d expect journalists to ask the president how he, should he win a second term, he plans to govern with a Republican House ill-disposed to his big-government initiatives.

If the Democrat does succeed in beating Mitt Romney this will, he will not do so on the strength of his ideas or support for his policies, but on his ability to define and demonize his Republican rival.  He will, in short, have no mandate.

But, then, maybe the state of play in the House races suggests a different outcome in the race for the White House.

Oversampling Dems, CBS/NYT poll shows Romney slightly ahead

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 6:36 pm - July 19, 2012.
Filed under: 2012 Presidential Election

Of the major polls, the CBS News/New York Times survey tends to oversample Democrats most often.  In the latest such survey released last night, Ed Morrissey finds that the pollsters gave Democrats a six-point advantage over Republicans.  Despite this advantage, Romney leads:

Forty-seven percent of registered voters nationwide who lean towards a candidate back Romney, while 46 percent support the president. Four percent are undecided. The 1 percentage point difference is within the survey’s three-point margin of error.

And this after outspending Mr. Romney on campaign ads.  We are, Morrissey observes, “seeing no trending changes while they bury Romney with” such ads:

Not only have they failed to build any momentum, what harbingers there are to find in this poll show stirrings for Romney.  Enthusiasm is up among Republicans and down among Democrats, as I noted yesterday, and Obama’s approval ratings on issues are all under water now. . . .

One wonders what the Obama team is seeing in their internal polling.

UPDATE:  Jim Geraghty has more on this poll.

If Obama didn’t mean to say that entrepreneurs didn’t build their own businesses, why doesn’t he retract* the remark

Serendipitous that Nick would post on the president’s ad accusing Romney of ‘Launching a False Attack’ for Quoting Obama exactly at the same time I was planning a followup to my piece on the president “Hollywood Mentality”.  The president is trying to spin his remarks as something other than they were.

As the Weekly Standard‘s Daniel Halper (who alerted both Nick and me to the ad (in my case, via Instapundit)) put it, “The Obama campaign is purposefully trying to make it sound like Romney is misquoting the president, when the official White House transcript backs up Romney’s quotation.”

Nor has president retracted the statement; neither the campaign nor the White House said the president misspoke when he said, “If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”  (Here’s my google search for “obama ‘didn’t build that’ misspoke” (no quotation marks in search).)

Now, if the president had rephrased the remark, adding five words after the first “that”:  “enterprise entirely on your own” and replacing “Somebody else made that happen” with “Other people helped you along the way”, we would all grant that he had a point.  Most of us would agree with him.

The president may be trying to spin his remarks as being other than they are, but it’s very clear what he said.  Mitt Romney quoted him accurately.  As have countless conservative bloggers and pundits.

If the Democrat didn’t mean what he said, why then doesn’t he simply acknowledge that he misspoke and retract — or amend — his remarks?

* (more…)

Your President Thinks You’re an Idiot

Posted by ColoradoPatriot at 5:47 pm - July 19, 2012.
Filed under: 2012 Presidential Election

Sometimes it’s simply obvious. I mean slap-in-the-face, palm-to-the-forehead simple as that. Try to follow this without retching:

The Obama campaign has now put out an ad:

It accuses Mitt Romney of “saying anything to get elected” by, well…quoting the president’s own words.

The ad shows the governor reading from a piece of paper the infamous “you didn’t build that” line from last week, followed by a slide that says (get this): “The only problem? That’s not what he said.”

Um… but that is precisely what he said.

Here’s the point in a post like this that I’d usually link to and/or imbed a video of the president actually saying that. Only I don’t have to, because if you keep watching the president’s own ad, at forty seconds in, you see…the president saying that.

Does your leader, the Commander in Chief, the most powerful man in the world think that you, the average voter is not only so stupid that you don’t see though his pitiful attempt to distract you that he put his own quote in the ad? You know, the one that Mitt Romney apparently made up or something?

Cayman Island and Swiss bank accounts…”outsourcing”…vulture capital…1%er…call Mitt Romney anything you want, but at least he respects you, the American voter enough not to think you’re so stupid that you wouldn’t notice in his own ad that he is lying…

ht, TWS

-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from HHQ)

More media interest in Mitt Romney’s tax returns
than in Obama’s dispersion of federal funds?

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 5:30 pm - July 19, 2012.
Filed under: Big Government Follies,Media Bias

Caught this image on a formerly* left-leaning lesbian’s Facebook page:

It called to mind a question she had asked previously, wondering just how many “green” energy companies receiving federal stimulus dollars had gone belly up. Not long thereafter she linked this blog post which alerts us to the 22 “clean energy companies supported by President Obama’s stimulus that are now failing or have filed for bankruptcy.

Don’t you think what the president has done with federal taxpayer dollars is at least as newsworthy as what Mitt Romney did with his own?

* (more…)

What’s the matter with California? (High-Speed Rail Edition)

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 12:45 pm - July 19, 2012.
Filed under: Big Government Follies,California politics

Drive through some streets in Hollywood and you’ll wonder when was the last time they repaired the potholes.  Some of our freeways need resurfacing.  And the governor just signed an “$8 billion bill to kick off high-speed rail construction“:

The centerpiece of SB 1029, however, is $6 billion to start building the first tracks in the Central Valley early next year. The remaining $2 billion will beef up transit while laying the groundwork for high-speed rail in the Bay Area and Southern California, including electrification of the existing Caltrain line between San Francisco and San Jose.

. . . .

Despite the governor’s enthusiasm, high-speed rail has become increasingly unpopular around the state, and polls show a majority of voters now oppose the plan largely because of its record costs and uncertain prospects for completion. Brown, who was silent publicly when the Legislature debated his bullet train plan two weeks ago, now needs Californians back on board but said Wednesday he wasn’t concerned by the polls.

Doesn’t seem he’s concerned about the cost either.  “Bay Area Democrats,” we read further in the article, “unions and business leaders applauded Brown for improving a wobbling high-speed rail plan in the last year, helping to reduce the most recent cost estimates by $30 billion . . . ”  Reduced cost estimates by $30 billion?  Sounds like a huge chunk of change, but that lowers the “projected cost” to just $68 billion.  And the state’s budget is $16 billion in the red.

And let’s not forget cost overruns endemic to big-government projects.  Particularly in California.

FROM THE COMMENTS:  EssEm reminds us that there are also “the maintenance and repair costs over the years…”