Mitt Romney is the runaway Republican nominee for 2012, and the remaining primaries will not contribute much light to the nature of the contest with the White House. The Obama re-elect is readying to attack Romney as a plutocratic pirate who schemed and plundered worthy American companies in order to make himself a 1%er. The charge will work for all the loyal Democrats and about half of the Independents. Dave Brady, Hoover, tells me that the 2008 polling of the Independents (at 40%, outnumbering the partisans of either party) showed that Obama won Indies by 8% over McCain. For 2012, if Obama splits the Indies, he will win again. Romney must win the Indies outright in order to win he White House. What do Indies care most about? The economy, and after that, they are sympathetic to Democratic issues of healthcare and education. This means that the Indies are not concerned with class warfare, or with the envy card that the Obama re-elect aims to play. How will Romney outlast the charge of plutocrat? Romney immediately starts talking about opportunity for the middle class, and that may work. Advantage Obama when the topic is healthcare and schools. Advantage Romney when the topic is jobs and investment. The Indies will exhaust themselves swiveling back and forth right up to Election Day.
"Mitt Romney is the runaway Republican nominee for 2012 . . ." I think you are jumping the gun on this one JB . . .
(1) More independents in NH than Democrats or Republicans (I think)
(2) Exit polls this Tuesday showed only 4% named healthcare as the most important issue
(3) JB says above that Indies are sympathetic to issues of healthcare and education after the economy.
Hmmm, something doesn't add up here.
Also, another thing that doesn't add up: Rasmussen's continued polling of 55%+ supporting the repeal of ObamaCare. Are Indies concerned about healthcare? Maybe somewhat. Are they supportive of ObamaCare? I don't think the evidence supports that.
We have to be careful about references to healthcare here. In 2008-2009, healthcare MEANT ObamaCare and vice versa. Now, in 2012, people have seen that healthcare costs continue to spike upwards and Medicare continues on its unsustainable course. So healthcare does not equal ObamaCare any longer. In fact, they may become negatively corrollated in the near future if they're not already.
My dear friend Mr. Avlon continues to try to portray independents as fiscally conservative. Well, if that's the case, and any of them have read the 2011 Medicare Trustees report, they will see that the actuary, Rick Foster, as well as the Trustees themselves, disclaim the assumptions under which the fund projections are done (the assumption that the Medicare provider reimbursement reductions will actually take place, specifically.) In other words, no true fiscal conservative could read that report, or a simple precis thereof, and come away with any conclusion other than that Medicare is doomed. Ergo, any indepedent who votes for Obama in 2012 isn't even close to being a fiscal conservative, and the converse is true as well (also the Adidas and the Nikes).
Just listened to your interview re "The Independents . . ." that was some knee pad radio brother . . .
:)
What means this, knee pad radio?
"50 greatest guitar solos, @NMEmagazine http://t.co/236RsUiz"
Must find where I put my sense of humor when I wonder what this is doing on JBS . . .
Corlyss,
K P Radio . . .
You're too innocent to be exposed to such things . . .
heck, I am too innocent to be exposed to such things.
No more vulgar than today's politics I suppose.
vsk
http://www.hoover.org/news/daily-report/104471
Will Independents Vote GOP In 2012?
by David Brady (Deputy Director; Davies Family Senior Fellow; and cochair, Virtues of a Free Society Task Force) and Douglas Rivers (Senior Fellow)
More Americans now call themselves independents than Democrats or Republicans, and New Hampshire, the site of Tuesday's GOP primary, is no different. About 40% of Granite State voters are not registered in either major political party, and our best estimate is that the share of independents nationally has grown to 42% from 35% over the past three years. That 7% of the electorate is big enough to have changed the outcome of any of the last five presidential elections—and this is not necessarily good news for the GOP.
Barack Obama carried independents by an eight-point margin in the 2008 exit poll—and Republicans carried them by a 19-point margin in the 2010 midterms. Thus GOP candidates may be tempted to believe the independents' disaffection with the president that cost Democrats control of the House will lead inexorably to a Republican presidential victory this year.
Not so fast. In the first place, Republicans benefited from a low Democratic midterm turnout. According to exit polls, there were about equal numbers of Democratic and Republican voters in the midterm, unlike 2008 when Democratic voters outnumbered Republicans by seven percentage points (39% to 32%). Republicans can't count on a low Democratic turnout in 2012 and there are still more registered Democrats than Republicans. To win in 2012, it's good enough for Democrats to split the independent vote. Republicans need to carry a clear majority. And there are significant policy disagreements between independents and the Republican base.
Take, for example, a YouGov survey conducted on Dec. 22. After the economy (which all voters said was their No. 1 concern), the next most important issues for Democrats are Social Security, Medicare and the environment. For each, their preference is for the federal government to do more. For Republicans, the next most important issues are the budget deficit, taxes and immigration and, for the first two, they want the federal government to do less.
Independents, on the other hand, say that health care and education are more important. They tend to worry about what the federal government does in each area, but unlike the Republican base they are not opposed in principle to federal action.
On ObamaCare, for example, independents oppose repeal 40%-33% while Republicans favor 62%-23% and Democrats oppose 46%-27%, according to a Nov. 12 YouGov survey. And in an Oct. 29 YouGov survey, independents opposed cutting federal education spending 56%-20% while Republicans favored reductions 39%-29%. Democrats opposed cutting spending 67%-8%.
Independents are usually closer to Republicans than Democrats on the general issue of the size of government and government spending. In a Nov. 22 YouGov poll, 76% of independents favored decreasing federal spending and almost half would include entitlements within these cuts.
On the other hand, they are closer to Democrats on raising taxes: 36% of independents favored increasing taxes across the board versus 43% of Democrats and 7% of Republicans.
Moreover, a Sept. 27 YouGov poll revealed overwhelming support for raising taxes on the wealthy: 55% of independents favored raising taxes on families earning over $250,000 (versus 43% of Democrats and 7% of Republicans), and 72% of independents favored raising taxes on families earning more than $1 million (versus 88% of Democrats and 46% of Republicans).
Among the leading Republican presidential candidates Mitt Romney has consistently done the best among independents nationally. He normally splits the independent vote with President Obama (38% to 38% in the Dec. 22 YouGov poll), while Newt Gringrich trails among independents by 13 points. But to win, Mr. Romney would have to do better than split the independent vote.
Neither President Obama nor the eventual Republican nominee has the independent vote locked up. How the candidates explain their plans to get the economy moving, and the crucial trade-offs among deficits, jobs and the safety net will determine how the crucial independent vote goes in the 2012 election. Preaching to the choir of Republican primary and caucus voters may well be necessary to win the nomination. But independents hold the key in November 2012.
Mr. Brady is deputy director of the Hoover Institution and a professor in the Graduate School of Business at Stanford University. Mr. Rivers is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor of political science at Stanford. He is also chairman of YouGov America, a survey and research company.
"More Americans now call themselves independents than Democrats or Republicans, and New Hampshire, the site of Tuesday's GOP primary, is no different."
But 80% of them still vote for the party they left so they could call themselves independent. Until further notice of a change in those stats, the so-called "independents" should be treated as fleeing Democrats, too cowardly to put on the other team's uniform, too scared to keep their own on. So they dress in civilian garb so they can pretend to be something other than what they really are.
From WSJ Political Diary:
Will Newt Stand Down?
The buzz is getting stronger that GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich will pull back on his planned $3 million ad campaign that accuses rival Mitt Romney of "looting" companies and ruining workers' lives when he headed Bain Capital.
I'm hearing from Gingrich insiders that several top campaign brass want the former speaker of the House to withdraw the 28 minute ad -- which has been universally panned by conservative leaders in recent days. Even Mr. Gingrich himself is said to be having reservations. But other senior advisors of the Gingrich Super PAC, Winning Our Future, want to continue full speed ahead. They dismiss complaints that the ad should be withdrawn and say doing so would only help the Romney campaign.
If Mr. Gingrich backs off, it could be one of the biggest tactical blunders in the history of modern campaigns. It could not only drag down his already dismal numbers in South Carolina and other states to come but also taint his political legacy.
Radio talk show host Mark Levin reported Wednesday that Mr. Gingrich will pull back the ads, but the Gingrich campaign has denied that. I've talked to several major Gingrich donors who say they are disgusted by the class-warfare tactic. Rush Limbaugh likened Newt Gingrich's attacks to Barack Obama's assaults on free-market capitalism and rich people.
Some Gingrich advisors want to change tactics and use the Super PAC money -- mostly donated by Las Vegas casino hotel owner Sheldon Adelson -- to run positive TV ads on Mr. Gingrich's economic growth ideas or to criticize Mr. Romney on issues such as healthcare and gay marriage.
Mr. Gingrich probably can't win the race for the nomination. The only question is whether he will lose with any dignity. With Mr. Gingrich, you never know whether common sense will prevail. That may explain why a campaign that looked so promising one month ago has crash landed.
-- Stephen Moore
Warren's Haul
If you thought Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown's $3.2 million fundraising haul in the fourth quarter last year was impressive, think again. The campaign for his opponent, Harvard law professor and consumer advocate Elizabeth Warren, announced Wednesday a jaw-dropping $5.7 million haul over the same period. And it's only January.
Campaign donations are pouring into the Bay State because the Brown-Warren contest is one of the few toss-ups in an election year widely expected to be dominated by Republican victories in the upper chamber. Massachusetts is a left-leaning state, and the election of Mr. Brown to Ted Kennedy's former seat in January 2010 was a symbol of the tea party wave that culminated in the Republicans winning the House that November. Now Democrats want to take back "the Kennedy seat."
There's no better candidate to rally the liberal troops than Ms. Warren, who stands for more spending, more unionization, more green energy and a host of other populist left-wing tropes. Much of her support is with the Democratic elites. Her fundraising map shows that in-state donations are largely concentrated in the greater Boston area. A large proportion of her campaign funding is also coming from outside of the state.
In a blast email to supporters Wednesday, the Warren camp noted that "approximately 23,000 people" in Massachusetts donated funds in the fourth quarter, with an "average contribution of $64." Presumably, that's a bid to brand Ms. Warren a non-elite who connects with the average voter. That may be working, given that she's polling evenly -- and sometimes ahead -- of the incumbent. But Mr. Brown is no slouch and has a $12.8 million war chest of his own. With these sums in play, it's a fair bet that this race will turn ugly sooner rather than later.
-- Mary Kissel
BAIN IS THE BANE OF MITT ROMNEY.
Having seen how Boxer took out Fiorina in CA with negative commercials about HP firing people, it was clear to me that Obama would use the same strategy against Romney if Romney were to get the nomination. Boxer has done nothing for CA in the many years she has represented it. Yet, Fiorina never figured out how to answer the 'firing' charges or how to attack Boxer. Because of the 'firing' attacks, Fiorina was never able to get her message out about how she'd create jobs.
The fact that Newt has used the Bain strategy against Romney is unfortunate. It's also backfiring. Have no fear, though. When Obama uses this negative strategy, it will be effective. This is because it'll encompass the Occupy movement and the press will highlight it, as well as the DOJ going after Wall Street firms. As said before: "Any attack on Wall Street is an attack on Romney" -- and there WILL BE many upcoming attacks on Wall Street by the WH. Accorn will surface with a new name. The Occupy movement will return in the Spring. And there are probably new negative stories on Romney about Bain that hasn't surfaced yet. The fact that the MSM has not attacked Romney much makes me think what we all have said before -- that Obama really wants to run against Romney.
I think it's a sad state of affairs that people think Romney can win against Obama -- because he probably can't -- and vote for him on that basis. I also think it's a sad state of affairs that Iowa and NH have the strength they have in determining a candidate.
The MSM attacked Newt for taking money from Freddie Mac. I don't see anything wrong with this, as he was no longer in office. However, no one called this an attack on Capitalism, which it was. And why no attack on the politicians that took money from Fanny and Freddie and who are still in office? That's the real shame.
"A large proportion of [Elizabeth Warren's] campaign funding is also coming from outside of the state."
Yes. No doubt it's coming from Wall Street -- either directly or through the DNC. Where's the MSM media on this hypocrisy?
"[In 2010], Republicans benefited from a low Democratic midterm turnout."
In 2012, there will be low Republican turnout, if the electorate cannot get excited by it's candidate. And very few are excited about Romney.
January 12, 2012
Dear Bourgeois GOP,
Most of you have never met me, or should I say us, we are a group of people who are unified by God, principle, and purpose. We come in every shape, color, and religious denomination, many of us worship The Cross some The Star of David, I have even met a Muslim, who drove a cab, who was a Republican. None are perfect, but we strive do the right thing every day, day in and day out, we know that it is not possible to protect our children, our wives, or our husbands in the manner we would want to if we could. Many of us work a job we absolutely hate, this is certainly true in my case, we do it because we know that to give that job up in this economy would be to put our family at financial risk, so we put our heads down and bite the bullet and do what we must to provide for and protect what we hold dearest to us. Our engagement in politics springs forth from that base, we do not care a rats a$$ that a few Marines saw fit to urinate on a few enemy that a few moments before were trying to take our greatest national treasures life. We do not care that Mr. Romney is being attacked by people we would rather win the nomination of the GOP like Mr. Gingrich and Mr. Perry, or for some Mr. Paul. Which brings me to the crux of this letter.
They are right. Albeit very in artful with their approach. And if I was not so concerned about losing my home, and my family, I would get in my car and volunteer to write either of them speeches and/or do what I could to get either of them into the Oval office in January. But to do that I would need to behave like Mr. Romney has, and I’m not about to do that and neither would most Americans. Mr. Romney is a good businessman and that is a great thing. I wish he was busy building and creating more wealth, but he believes that he can convince America that Washington D.C. is similar to some corporate turn around project? That’s nuts. Washington D.C. is chock full of people that are the Bourgeois of the nation, Democrat and Republican, they live and breath off of the efforts of others. Without all of us they would scream like children who need their diaper changed and their warm milk, and they know it. I’m ok with that, so long as I don’t need to be their friend or live near them. They annoy me and anyone who actually lives a normal life because they are by definition not connected with the 99% of us who make this nation move; and this notion is the root of what Mr. Perry and Mr. Gingrich were so badly trying to communicate.
That said. As with the battle in 2010, my goal, our goal as the unpaid and unappreciated, if not hated, foot soldiers of the GOP I will do my utmost to see to it that we win as many races as possible in 2012. Yet, like those Marines who were relieved at being alive and hence forth relieved themselves on the enemy; it would be nice if you not only gave me something to fight for, but with. As someone whose done a fair amount of selling in his day I can’t sell excrement on a shingle no matter how much whip cream I put on it. Can you?
That is all.
Joe Doakes
Those YouGov figures sound like they were drummed up by a bunch of liberals who are trying to scare Republican voters into staying home. ObamaCare is a very unpopular law and it grows more unpopular by the day (just to give one example).
Romney is going to beat Obama by a convincing margin this November. 40-50 electoral vote margin perhaps.
Independents are a bunch of assholes.
Independent control the election in NM NV CO IA OH PA VA NC NH. That is a deal of authority for the disdained.
Ron Paul finishes a strong second in New Hampshire. That is a deal of popular support for somebody who is passed off as a wingnut, supported only by the marijuana vote.
Lou,
"Independents" are not rectal orifices, they are a necessary construct of the our capitalistic system. It creates so much free time that naturally a group of people does not need to care about politics in the day to day, so they vacillate with the wind until it is time to vote, giving thousands of political consultants jobs by conning their clients into thinking they know how to corral this aimless herd. When you really want to hit a deer . . . what's the first thing you do . . . you whistle . . . same thing with these independents . . . we need a candidate that knows when to do that . . . Romney is not that guy.
JD
I'm referring to the Prima Donna aspect of it, like a fat lady not being able to choose between a Sees and a Fanny Mae chocolate. "Oh.... Dear me!!! Whoever shall I vote for this year!!! Decisions, decisions." Laugh about it, shout about it, when you got to choose. Anyway you look at it you lose....
Well, I resent that, because I admire constancy. Ron Paul has stood for the same damned thing all his life. I've been a Libertarian since I was 25, voted close to straight party line ever since. Fought for the same idea ever since: Freedom. Live Free or Die.
There's a huge difference between the Republican and Democratic platforms now, especially in how they vote in Congress. Anyone who listens to Harry Reid speak for 5 minutes, and then Mitch McConnell (or Jeff Sessions) speak for 5 minutes, and tells you they can't make up their minds, is either a liar, a fool, or an a-hole.
Or all of the above.
If there's one thing worse than indecisiveness, it's feigned indecisiveness.
"marijuana vote"
LOL May I quote you?
Lou baby I see your point of view but I'm going to raise you a blonde in short skirt with lip gloss on; these politicians live, breath and fornicate in that world . . . so when you tell me that listening to one or another gives you some proof that their exists a difference . . . at that point I've got to beg to differ.
The only time you can trust a DC politician is when your mouth a wrapped around their you know what, or your tongue is in their you know what . . . (The women are as bad as the men, just more discreet)
I may be young, and woman tell me I'm better than average, but I've learned that that is what governs these people, and of course money . . . all I'm trying to do is survive it all . . . I suspect most of us are.
Final ObamaCare vote in the Senate:
Democrats & "Independents" - 60
Republicans - 40
Note that this wasn't a "I voted for it before I voted against it" vote or vice versa. It was a real live life-changing, Constitution-threatening vote. It's gotten to be a fairly common platitude here and elsewhere that "there's no difference between Dems and Reps - they all have to go" ... but at the same time that this is being repeated with more and more frequency, it's becoming less and less true.
You'd be quoting JB
"Ron Paul has stood for the same damned thing all his life."
I wonder if that grouchy old man has made a deal w/ Romney -- possibly for a cabinet appointment. After all, Paul has attacked everyone but Romney, so far.
He promised him he will get to see all of the gold in Fort Knox . . .
What he will not see is all of the plastic/styrofoam with gold paint underneath . . .
:)
That reminds me of an idea for the opening scene of an Austin Powers movie that I once idly devised:
Against the advice of his weary second-in-command, Dr. Evil and his henchmen break into Fort Knox, only to find the place as empty as Al Capone's vault, save for a filthy mattress, dozens of forty-ounce Colt 45 empties, and some used condoms.
"Are you frickin' kiddin' me!" he shrieks, his words echoing off the graffiti-strewn walls...
Grouchy Ron Paul may be, but he doesn't want to start any needless wars, unlike his GOP opponents.
"...One may smile, and smile, and be a villain..."
"Democrats & "Independents" - 60"
Those independents are not really independent. The one is a conservative Democrat who was abandoned by his party in a flush of "Netroots" activity. The other is a flaming liberal who thought the Democratic party, even in its most insanely progressive dress, was too conservative for him. I don't know how he keeps getting re-elected. Someday, Rhode Islanders will wake up.
Well, Lieberman at least kept the Public Option out of play. He slowed our descent on the slippery slope just a bit, and for that I am grateful.
BTW, Rhode Islanders can wake up all they want but it won't hurt Bernie Sanders because he's from Vermont.
Headline on Earthlink homepage: "Obama takes on Big Government - It has to change!"
Lou (gesture of sticking finger down throat)
Hey, Horrendo Revolver is on WABC, he could play the lead role.
Exactly. Recyle Al Gore, complete with hammer and ashtray. It's basically comic relief.