The Pretender

I have never before in my lifetime seen such divisiveness emanating from a Presidential campaign then what we are currently seeing from the Obama camp. I am offended by it and digusted by it. Romney nailed it the other day when he said Obama is hoping to tear people apart and cobble together 51%, which is quite a departure from his unity, hope and change message of just 4 years ago. Nearly everyday he, or his surrogates, are out on the stump or in the media personally attacking either the rich, people of Faith, big corporations, the republican congress, white people, or any other person, or group du jour. How anyone can get behind this campaign and vote for this fraud is beyond me.

Now of course liberals will whine and moan about the birthers, and to be fair, there was a faction on the right that went a little over the top even for me. But that IS a legitimate issue that Obama could have put to rest real quickly, instead Obama chose to play it out and allow the issue to become even a bigger issue so that he had a wedge issue he could rally his base around. Just another cause to divide people with and it certainly did divide us. In fact this country is more polarized today than at anytime I can ever remember. And it shouldn’t be. We have some serious issues to confront and it will take serious people to resolve them and one thing I have learned about Obama, is that he is anything but serious. He refuses to reconsider his policies despite obvious and proven failures. He is prepared to double down on another stimulus, is prepared to throw away more money at the green industry which isn’t even close to a mass produceable platform, is still trying to slow down fracking despite the demonstrable success in North Dakota, is still denying the Keystone Pipeline, is still standing behind the Dodd Frank Act which Is strangling the credit that use to be easily accessible by small business, and is still wanting to raise taxes which by his own previous admissions is not the right thing to do in a recession.

On the social side, if anyone has an extreme position on abortion that should be reconsidered and is outside the main stream, it is the democrats. They still support federal funding for abortion and partial birth abortion, which according to most polls is opposed by the vast majority of Americans. In fact, Obama still hasn’t backed away from his support for a live birth abortion. I wonder why the media hasn’t called him out on that? Just kidding, I think we all know the answer to that. Folks, these are serious times and we need a President that will be serious. Not a President that prefers to golf, campaign and hang out with Hollywood.

63 thoughts on “The Pretender

  1. neocon1 August 22, 2012 / 6:56 pm

    Folks, these are serious times and we need a President that will be serious. Not a President that prefers to golf, campaign and hang out with Hollywood.

    One who is not a marxist, doper, buddys with chicago thugs and gangsters, or who never ran a lemon aid stand.

    Moderator: let’s keep the focus on substance.

    • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 6:44 am


      an admitted marxist and felon (doper) who had no experience and ran with chicago thugs is not substance?


      his hollywood buds and golf are?

      funny the other side thinks these are items of substance,
      Romney = playground bully,
      Romney = felon (bain)
      Romney = tax cheat

      • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 7:29 am

        Will the Romney Campaign Demand Release of the Obama-Khalidi Video?
        By Edward Olshaker

        Will this be the year we finally see a presidential nominee with the guts to make an issue of his opponent’s extremist associations?

        Actually, it’s already happened, but not in the way many of us wished. President Obama recently accused Mitt Romney of allying himself with “the radical fringe of his party,” in an e-mail highlighting his occasional fundraising events with Donald Trump, and now the president’s campaign is warning that Paul Ryan is a dangerous extremist.

        The audacity of this line of attack naturally brings up the issue of Those Whose Names Must Not Be Mentioned — Obama’s own collection of terror supporters and actual terrorists he chose as mentors (and whose influence is disturbingly evident in his foreign policy). If Romney was waiting for some kind of formal invitation before attacking the president’s most glaring weakness, that invitation has arrived.

        Obama’s fundraising off Romney’s “radical” associations is an example of either chutzpah he will get away with or hubris that will come back to haunt him by inviting scrutiny of Obama’s closeness with terrorists who appear with him in the suppressed Los Angeles Times video of a 2003 anti-Israel gathering — former PLO operative Rashid Khalidi (who dedicated a book to Palestinian murderer Yasser Arafat), Bill Ayers (who dedicated a book to Palestinian murderer Sirhan Sirhan), and Bernardine Dohrn.

        Read more:

  2. bloodypenquinstump August 22, 2012 / 7:07 pm

    “I have never before in my lifetime seen such divisiveness emanating from a Presidential campaign then what we are currently seeing from the Obama camp. I am offended by it and digusted by it. ”

    Yah only four years of claiming he is a kenyan traitor who wants to destroy all of america,

    Moderator: again, let’s talk substance

  3. Cluster August 22, 2012 / 7:50 pm

    Let me help provide an example of substance – earlier in the year Obama submitted his budget which was voted down 98-0 in the Senate, I believe, and 414-0 in the House, yet he has never submitted another one. Not one single democrat voted for the Presidents budget Obama wont even work with his own party. How can anyone take him seriously?

  4. Casper August 22, 2012 / 10:03 pm

    Ok, here goes.

    “He is prepared to double down on another stimulus,”

    Considering the first one created or saved between one and three million jobs, not such a bad idea.

    i”s prepared to throw away more money at the green industry which isn’t even close to a mass produceable platform,”

    And yet:
    “WASHINGTON (AP) — At least 3.1 million Americans are employed in green jobs, a sector that now accounts for about 2.4 percent of the nation’s total employment, the Labor Department said Thursday.”

    “is still trying to slow down fracking despite the demonstrable success in North Dakota,”

    Considering the dangers of fracking to water supplies, that’s not a bad idea.

    “is still denying the Keystone Pipeline,”
    Again, a good idea considering the environmental impact it could have.

    is still standing behind the Dodd Frank Act which Is strangling the credit that use to be easily accessible by small business,

    The biggest problem with Dodd Frank is that it isn’t strong enough. We need to go back to the Glass–Steagall Act.

    ” and is still wanting to raise taxes which by his own previous admissions is not the right thing to do in a recession.”

    Not on everybody, just those that can afford it.

    AS for Obama’s campaign being divisive, I don’t see it as divisive as Romney’s or Bush’s last campaign.

      • casper August 22, 2012 / 10:42 pm

        You realize the article you linked was written 2 and a half years ago, don’t you?

      • tiredoflibbs August 23, 2012 / 5:27 am

        You realize the article you linked was written 2 and a half years ago, don’t you?

        So what cappy, it does not change the fact that those numbers are wrong. Is that your response? Can’t you provide proof that the numbers have been certified rather than obAMATEUR making an exaggerated claim?

        Didn’t think so….

        You must remember that obAMATEUR started with the stimulus “creating 3million jobs” then he had to add the other qualifier “or saved”?

        MSNBC reported that the White House changed the way to calculate the number correctly to match their prediction:
        ” It’s no longer about counting a job as saved or created; now it’s a matter of counting jobs funded by the stimulus.”

        So it went from “jobs created” to “jobs created or saved” to “lives touched” or “jobs funded”.

        What is ironic,MSNBC also ran an article that day touting the stimulus for CREATING millions of jobs. It seems that they can’t keep their talking points straight.

        Another fact is that you just regurgitate dumbed down mindless talking points.

      • Count d'Haricots August 23, 2012 / 1:44 pm

        That’s 3 million jobs saved, created or imagined.

    • Cluster August 22, 2012 / 11:18 pm


      You are a dyed in the wool liberal and will look past a lot of obvious, common sense things if it fits your agenda. As for myself, I am obviously conservative but will support anything, even liberal agenda items, if they make sense.

      As for the the tax cuts, here’s some common sense. The tax increase Obama is calling for “might” generate enough revenue to run the government for 8 days. So it’s not a practical common ssnese proposal. It is strictly agenda driven. I say might, because it assumes that all the taxes will be collected, of which we all know they won’t.

      Regarding fracking. There is no danger to fracking and to believe so is too have a complete lack of confidence in our engineers of which I choose to believe that America can do anything. I have contempt for people who chose the negative time and time again, especially when it is agenda based as yours obviously is.

      Regarding the stimulus, let’s just assume that it did “save” (which is a joke) or create 3 million jobs. That would be an extraordinarily insane amount of money per job, which is senseless. And furthermore the government does not create jobs, the private sector creates not only sustainable jobs, but they also create the government jobs, so you and Obama have that completely backwards.

      And you may not even realize it, but Dodd Frank obliterates the personal relationships small business have with local bankers. No longer are those relationships important because those bankers no longer have the authority to invest in their community. They can no longer make that decision, which makes no sense, and demonstrates a lack of confidence in the American people. Your comment that it didn’t go far enough, shows that you too have more confidence in a central authority, than you do the individual, which is sad.

      So we agree to disagree once again, but I am right. And you know I am.

      • Cluster August 23, 2012 / 12:16 am

        Also a comment on the green industry. The fact is Casper that there is no mass produceable green energy alternative and we are not really even close to one. So my tax money should strictly be used to incentivize the private sector to find one, and let them pay the salaries and benefits for those jobs. That’s not the governments role.

    • tiredoflibbs August 23, 2012 / 2:31 pm

      Yes count, “imagined”, like cappy’s perception of obAMATEUR non-divisive campaign.

      Cappy only sees what he wants to see. He is a very intellectually dishonest person and have been proven so here in this blog.

    • Amazona August 23, 2012 / 8:44 pm

      The sad thing about casper is that he has no mirror. He is completely incapable of seeing himself as others see him, or of caring when he makes a complete fool of himself.

      The silliness about fracking and the pipeline are great examples of this. Some Lefty talking head yammered on for a while about how scary and dangerous fracking and the pipeline are, or would be, or could be, and casper just regurgitates it here.

      Part of this is that he lives in a bubble. He is a middle school teacher in a very conservative little city, and probably can’t discuss politics with anyone except Mrs. Casper, who after all is the one who gave him his cherished Obama necktie. So he surreptitiously listens to spewers of toxic crap like Ed Schultz or whoever else he can relate to, and then comes here to lecture us on the nonsense he has absorbed.

      There is no excuse for it, but casper is so intellectually lazy he just can’t be bothered to do any research and learn the truth. And he seems to live in fear that his secret identity as Casper’s Liberal will be revealed, as shown by his panic when I asked if the parents of his students know that he thinks believing in the Constitution as the best way to govern our nation means wanting to return to slavery and depriving women of the vote.

      So he vents here.

  5. Cluster August 22, 2012 / 11:49 pm

    Here’s another dose of substance:

    Most recent polls are a blatant over sampling of democrats, as is this one. Check out page 31:

    Click to access AP-GfK-Poll-August-2012-Topline-FINAL_politics.pdf

    But I encourage Democrats and the media to keep doing that. I want you to have a false sense of Hope before we Change.

    • bozo August 23, 2012 / 6:52 am

      I still, for the life of me, can’t figure out how anything of value can be gleaned from asking if a voter approves or disapproves of Obama/Congress/American Idol without asking why.

      It’s that Goldilocks methodology that shows you 66% of the porridge is disagreeable, but without further information, it’s worthless data. In theory, politicians who are doing everything just right for the entire country and not just their party should ALWAYS get something like a 33% approval / 66% disapproval rating. The liberals think he’s to conservative and the conservatives think he’s too liberal, while the bell curve middle thinks he’s just right.

      I’ll even give you that same complaint when referring to Bush’s 22% final approval rating. If 39% thought he was too liberal while 39% thought he was too conservative, then that’s a perfect score. But if the 78% disapproval group all share the same dislikes (the Iraq War, the AIG/GM bailouts, flatline middle class wages), then it’s a disaster.

      Without more data, it’s just talking-point blabber.

  6. bozo August 23, 2012 / 6:37 am


    Don’t bother reading all ten pages of accomplishments by this pretender so far. You won’t find “outlaw abortion in cases of rape” on the list anywhere, despite millions of Americans, including Romney and Ryan, calling for personhood amendments.

    Fire the bum!

    • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 6:47 am

      Fire the bum!

      We intend to.

      • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 7:35 am

        Obama (failure) and the Asphalt Plantation

        Upon his election in 2008, President Obama had the political capital to tackle this problem, but he wasn’t up to the task. In fact, the task doesn’t, in retrospect, appear to have even been on his agenda.

        The lack of interest he showed for the plight of the poorest constituents in his Illinois State Senate district should have been a clue as to his intentions – or better, his disinterest in the matter.

        When Barack Obama said “I’m not the president of the black America,” he was telling the truth. He hasn’t been blacks’ president, because he hasn’t acted as the nation’s president.

        And so it is that in the nation’s urban centers today, too many black communities remain asphalt plantations where corrupt politicians are the overseers — most from the same political party that the president leads.

        Read more:

    • J. R. Babcock August 24, 2012 / 8:42 am

      Don’t bother reading all ten pages of accomplishments by this pretender so far.

      Actually I did, and, well I have to tell you — he’s certainly got my vote.

    • Amazona August 24, 2012 / 9:07 am

      ferakzo, I only slogged partway through the list before I had to stop to send money to the RNC(again!) and to the Romney campaign.

      Many if not most of what you call “accomplishments” are the very reasons I want Obama out of office. Oh, the spin tried to make them sound good, but in reality, they are for the most part just praise for the expansion of government.

      You’ve got to be about ready for a new set of kneepads…….

      • Retired Spook August 24, 2012 / 9:26 am

        but in reality, they are for the most part just praise for the expansion of government.

        Amazona, not only an expansion, but, for the most part, legislative expansion. If Obama has accomplished all those things on his own, we could save a boatload of money by just firing Congress and proclaiming Obama Emperor.

    • Amazona August 24, 2012 / 9:13 am

      And how DARE anyone try to officially classify babies as people! We’ve been down this road before, with slaves, American Indians, Chinese coolies, and women, and just look at the mess created when THEY were finally granted ‘personhood’ status and their existence and rights did not depend on the whims of whoever controlled them!

      Will we never learn????????

      • bozo August 24, 2012 / 9:38 am

        It blows my mind that small government advocates would call for a violent criminal rapist’s sperm to be protected by the full force of federal government powers, with criminal penalties for anyone attempting to stop it from impregnating their rape-surviving mother/sister/wife/daughter/self.

      • J. R. Babcock August 24, 2012 / 1:46 pm

        It blows my mind

        So that’s what’s happening with your avatar.

      • Amazona August 24, 2012 / 5:07 pm

        Actually, R.R., I think the avatar is explained by the fact that the freaky clown is nothing but a clump of his father’s sperm.

  7. tiredoflibbs August 23, 2012 / 8:10 am

    It is amazing how cappy uses the “you do know that article is over X year(s) old” excuse on undisputed FACTS. As if UNDISPUTED FACTS have expiration dates…..

    …But cappy uses the same OLD REFUTED TALKING POINTS, time and again, as his “facts” without question and undying loyalty. The unverifiable and uncertified “3 million jobs created or save” dumbed down talking point is all the proof you need to see it as truth to his syndrome.

    Pathetic, yet predictable.

  8. sarahbloch August 23, 2012 / 8:35 am


    I don’t think you understand some clearly fundamental things about politics. On both sides of the political spectrum, there is a base of voters. For the Right it is suburban middle class, middle aged, white voters, those who vote their religious values over their economic needs out of traditional beliefs some people call these folks values voters. For the Left their base are college students and many of their professors, Hollywood actors, blacks, Latinos, the GLBTQ community, the Pro-Choice bloc and people who live in urban centers. Now when you put candidates against each other who have to throw red meat to these clearly polarized groups on a regular basis you have to expect it to become something more than a genteel afternoon gathering to tea and scones. There have been outright lies on both sides. Romney continues to run ads saying Obama has removed the work requirement from welfare. That’s a move to keep his base that see welfare through a prism that brings back images of Reagan’s black welfare queen who was gaming the system when actually the bulk of people getting TANF in the US are white. A pro-Obama PAC ran a patently false ad trying to gain traction with blue-collar white voters where a man lied about his wife’s death because she didn’t have health care after Bain closed the plant where she worked. I don’t expect the mudslinging to get any better and personally I would rather see more factual mudslinging than falsehood based negative ads. Obama knows that if this race is about personality he will win; if it’s about his performance over the past four years he will lose. Romney’s choice of Paul Ryan gave him no bump but people don’t vote for the VP if they did President McCain would be running against Democratic Party challenger Clinton right now. If Romney can convince suburban independents to vote for him he wins. If we’re still talking about Todd Akin and rape in September and Obama’s advantage among women continues to grow you might be looking at a 1984 type landslide for Obama.

    • tiredoflibbs August 23, 2012 / 8:43 am

      The “dead” forker, formerly a Civil War soldier killed at Gettysburg (i believe) while posing as a man, chimes in with the usual race and anti-religious BS.

      Her “profile” is all you need to determine the sanity and logic short-comings of this whack-job.


      • sarahbloch August 23, 2012 / 8:49 am

        Can you speak to any of the real political opinion that I put forth? Or are you just here for conservative comic relief?

      • tiredoflibbs August 23, 2012 / 12:26 pm

        Dead Civil War forker: “Can you speak to any of the real political opinion that I put forth?”

        There is no way to respond to uninformed and baseless hatred you call “political opinion”. I deal in facts. And the fact is you (and you porno blog) claim to be something you are not. You and your ilk are so miserable you cannot exist in the real world and you have to create this land of make believe in which you “live” (even though you all claim to be dead). I also notice you did not deny my accurate description of your “autobiography”.

        Again, pathetic.

    • Cluster August 23, 2012 / 9:02 am


      I have to give you credit, that was a pretty well thought out post. Allow me to rebut. First of all, I think you are too generalized in your assumption of the individual bases. Romney does have quite a bit support from college students, and Obama has a pretty large base of white, religious voters, mainly the Jewish vote. I would categorize more as a traditional voter who support Romney vs a non traditional voter, or someone for “fundamental change” who support Obama.

      I agree that throwing red meat to the base is tiresome, and wish they would speak more to substance, but the way I see it, Obama and his surrogates want nothing to do with substance because they actually have a record this time around. I think Romney is trying to stay on substance by bringing Medicare into the equation, which is risky, but a substantive conversation we need to have. I also think that his welfare ad is right, Obama did gut the main provision by allowing states the flexibility to determine that a basket weaving class, for example, is work.

      The Obama campaign will continue to try and win the election by scaring woman and seniors over outright falsehoods about their opponents. If Romney stays on substance and lays out sensible plans on Medicare and energy development, he wins.

      • sarahbloch August 23, 2012 / 9:37 am

        Cluster you make some good points. I feel the Medicare debate is one that must be had but it isn’t going to win Romney the election. If that were the case unemployment dropping to below 7% would assure an Obama win and it won’t. Romney has a likeability problem not a policy problem. His policies are fine and would be likely to turn the economy around [meaning unemployment under 6% and growth greater than 3%]by the first year of his second term. His problem is twofold; he chose one of the most anti-abortion congressmen as a running mate and Romney already has a woman voter problem and despite your assurance that he has a broad support base among college students he really doesn’t outside the state of Utah [ currently Romney is polling around 41% and Obama at 58%.]

      • Cluster August 23, 2012 / 10:19 am

        Romney leads amongst married women, and abortion is a low voter priority. Besides, both Romney and Ryan support the rape/incest exception as do I.

    • sarahbloch August 23, 2012 / 8:56 am

      I would certainly support that if it included converting 10% of all autos produced to CNG by 2016 and 50% by 2020.

      • Cluster August 23, 2012 / 9:04 am

        I don’t support government mandates, but do agree that incentives should be in place to move towards a cleaner burning fuel. The American consumer is the best driver of the economy, and they usually get it right.

      • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 9:11 am

        Heh Heh Heh

        Obama’s Oil and Gas Folly
        By Jeffrey Folks

        Obama’s campaign speeches always seem to include a line about how he can take credit for increasing domestic oil and gas production. As the official White House website has it, “domestic oil and gas production has increased every year President Obama has been in office.”

        On Wednesday, however, his administration put into effect yet another new regulation making it harder for America’s oil and gas companies to increase production. In fact, that regulation, as the head of the American Petroleum Institute recently wrote, would make American companies unable to compete with foreign competitors. That may be exactly why the president supported it.

        Read more:

      • Cluster August 23, 2012 / 9:17 am


        Today Romney plans to unveil a very aggressive plan to allow states to open up federal lands for oil and gas development, and to go forward with the keystone pipeline. This is huge.

  9. Cluster August 23, 2012 / 9:22 am

    Why do conservatives continue to put up with this?

    The moderator of the lone October vice presidential debate was previously married to a top Obama official, an association both ABC News and the left-leaning Commission on Presidential Debates do not view as a conflict of interest.

    Conservatives need to be more vocal about the blatant liberal bias in 99% of the media (that line was for Casper)

    Read more:

    • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 9:30 am

      Conservatives need to be more vocal about the blatant liberal bias

      Nevah hoppen grasshoppah!!
      we fight with pillows and when we REALLY REALLY “fight” we use 24 0z foam rubber gloves.
      THAT’ll teach em…….

    • sarahbloch August 23, 2012 / 9:55 am

      Cluster did you read the Daily Caller post at all? Raddatz was married to this guy in 1991 and they divorced in Clinton’s second term in 1997. Obama appointed him to the post at the FCC in 2009. I don’t see why there would be any need for any sort of disclosure here. The Commission on Presidential Debates is a non profit bi-partisan group run by both Republicans and Democrats. They mention McCurry and Minow to Democratic Party big guns to be sure, in the DC post but they don’t mention Reverend John I. Jenkins the President of Notre Dame or Frank J Fahrenkopf Jr the former RNC chairman. The Daily Caller post makes the reader believe that it is a “progressive leaning” group and that isn’t the case at all. This is the problem with much of this conservative blogging not lies per se but omissions to make the story fit their agenda.

      • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 10:09 am


        ALL the “MODERATORS” of the “debates” are left wing sycophants
        the whole dog and pony show is nothing but a joke, why the GOP gets suckered into this every time around is astounding.

      • sarahbloch August 23, 2012 / 10:14 am

        Neocon I’d like to see a serious debate rather than the “sound bites” system it has become over the last few decades. Who would you have chosen as moderators?

      • Cluster August 23, 2012 / 10:18 am


        Neocon is right, all the moderators have a demonstrable liberal bias. Of course bias in the media, one way or the other is pervasive to the point that objective journalism is all but gone. That being said, they should have someone like Brett Baier, or someone from Fox moderate at least one of the debates.

      • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 10:31 am

        expect this
        Mr Romney….what do you think about Todd Aiken? should he resign??

        but NOT this

        Mr Ubama…….what do you think about maleMinnesota Democrat Caught In Oral Sex Tryst With 17 Year Old Boy at Rest Area
        should he be arrested and should he resign?

      • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 10:35 am

        the “debates” are nothing but a timed question and answer period with pre picked questions by left wing hacks.
        It has NOTHING to do with a “debate” they are a total joke.

      • Cluster August 23, 2012 / 10:35 am

        And expect this:

        Mr Romney – do you support no exceptions for abortion?

        But not this:

        President Obama – do you still support live birth abortion?

      • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 10:46 am



        Ann Coulter

      • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 10:48 am

        & Glenn Beck

      • Fredrick Schwartz, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H. [Journ.] August 23, 2012 / 10:53 am

        Still banned due to repeated racist and bigoted statements. What part of “banned” do you not understand? //Moderator

      • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 11:00 am



      • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 11:04 am


        but DID NOT RESIGN!!!!!

      • Fredrick Schwartz, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H. [Journ.] August 23, 2012 / 11:09 am

        Still banned due to repeated racist and bigoted statements. What part of “banned” do you not understand? //Moderator

      • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 11:13 am


      • dbschmidt August 23, 2012 / 12:30 pm


        Speaking of “lies of omission”, I have noticed that once again this election cycle that only the Republicans are indicating which party they are with. The Dems seem to be leaving that little bit o’ information off of their ads.

        Then again no one seems ready to look into the Chicago Annenberg Challenge with President Obama and William “Bill” Ayers creating more damage than success during their running of the award–basically leaving people worst off than they originally were kind of like he has done to the US in general.

        BTW, my choice for moderator would be someone like Chris Wallace or Megyn Kelly who do not let lies to go unexposed on either side. Then again there is the Lincoln-Douglass format.

  10. Retired Spook August 23, 2012 / 2:46 pm

    Looks like that Obama landslide that most of our resident Lefties have been predicting is slipping away

    A University of Colorado analysis of state-by-state factors leading to the Electoral College selection of every U.S. president since 1980 forecasts that the 2012 winner will be Mitt Romney.

    The key is the economy, say political science professors Kenneth Bickers of CU-Boulder and Michael Berry of CU Denver. Their prediction model stresses economic data from the 50 states and the District of Columbia, including both state and national unemployment figures as well as changes in real per capita income, among other factors.

    “Based on our forecasting model, it becomes clear that the president is in electoral trouble,” said Bickers, also director of the CU in DC Internship Program.

    According to their analysis, President Barack Obama will win 218 votes in the Electoral College, short of the 270 he needs. And though they chiefly focus on the Electoral College, the political scientists predict Romney will win 52.9 percent of the popular vote to Obama’s 47.1 percent, when considering only the two major political parties.

    “For the last eight presidential elections, this model has correctly predicted the winner,” said Berry. “The economy has seen some improvement since President Obama took office. What remains to be seen is whether voters will consider the economy in relative or absolute terms. If it’s the former, the president may receive credit for the economy’s trajectory and win a second term. In the latter case, Romney should pick up a number of states Obama won in 2008.”

    Their model correctly predicted all elections since 1980, including two years when independent candidates ran strongly, 1980 and 1992. It also correctly predicted the outcome in 2000, when Al Gore received the most popular vote but George W. Bush won the election.

    Of course there is still 2-1/2 months till election day; a long time in politics, so there’s still time for some unforeseen black swan event, but not enough time for any employment or economic factors to change significantly. I’m feeling a lot better about the direction this is going, particularly with this group’s track record over the last eight presidential elections.

    • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 3:12 pm



      This is very interesting! I never thought about it this way.

      The Lawyers’ Party, By Bruce Walker

      The Democratic Party has become the Lawyers Party.

      Barack Obama is a lawyer. Michelle Obama are (disbarred) lawyers.

      Hillary Clinton is a lawyer. Bill Clinton is a (disbarred) lawyer.

      John Edwards is a lawyer. Elizabeth Edwards was a lawyer.

      Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not graduate).

      Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school.

      Look at leaders of the Democrat Party in Congress:

      Harry Reid is a lawyer. Nancy Pelosi is a lawyer.

      The Republican Party is different.

      President Bush is a businessman.

      Vice President Cheney is a businessman.

      The leaders of the Republican Revolution:

      Newt Gingrich was a history professor.

      Tom Delay was an exterminator. Dick Armey was an economist.

      House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer.

      The former Senate Majority Leader Bill First is a heart surgeon.

      Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer? Gerald Ford, who left office 31 years ago and who barely won the Republican nomination as a sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in 1976.

      The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real work, who are often the targets of lawyers.

      The Democrat Party is made up of lawyers. Democrats mock and scorn men who create wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who heal the sick, like First, or who immerse themselves in history, like Gingrich. The Lawyers Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America .. And, so we have seen the procession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers Party, grow.

      Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail?….Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our nation. This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their clients, in this case the American people. Lawyers seek to have new laws passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side.

      Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine. But it is an awful way to govern a great nation. When politicians as lawyers begin to view some Americans as clients and other Americans as opposing parties, then the role of the legal system in our life becomes all-consuming. Some Americans become adverse parties of our very government. We are not all litigants in some vast social class-action suit. We are citizens of a republic that promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from lawyers.

      Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial decisions; we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big.

      When House Democrats sue America in order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to us, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.

      Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be brought to our nation by those lawyers who already largely dictate American society and business. Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work. Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will only make our problems worse.

      The United States has 5% of the world’s population and 66%of the world’s lawyers! Tort (Legal) reform legislation has been introduced in congress several times in the last several years to limit punitive damages in ridiculous lawsuits such as spilling hot coffee on yourself and suing the establishment that sold it to you and also to limit punitive damages in huge medical malpractice lawsuits. This legislation has continually been blocked from even being voted on by the Democrat Party. When you see that 97%of the political contributions from the American Trial Lawyers Association go to the Democrat Party, then you realize who is responsible for our medical and product costs being so high!

      • neocon1 August 23, 2012 / 11:37 pm


        The ad in Gainesville depicts two men in camouflage holding weapons. The text next to the picture, in a military style font, says

        “The Seals removed one threat to America,” a reference to the killing of Osama bin Laden. It continues, “Remove the other in November.”

        General Indeed!!!

      • sarahbloch August 24, 2012 / 1:30 pm

        Awful choice neocon. There 99 Democratic Party members of congress that are lawyers and 91 on the Republican side.

      • neocon1 August 24, 2012 / 3:20 pm


        CAN YOU READ??

        The Lawyers’ Party, *********By Bruce Walker***********

      • sarahbloch August 26, 2012 / 5:56 am

        I did read that. it seems the point of the post is that lawyers dominate the Democratic party and the GOP is rooted in other professions. that’s not really the case.

Comments are closed.