Obama, Hillary, Benghazi and an Electoral Collapse?

From Allahpundit discussing the rumor that Hillary is to be thrown underbus by Obama over at Hot Air:

My guess is no, they wouldn’t dare, but the Daily Caller and Tom Maguire make a fair point. In the span of about 18 hours, we’ve had Biden and Carney each insist that blame for Benghazi’s security failures lies outside the White House. It’s State that’s responsible for protecting U.S. diplomats in the field, which means if the buck doesn’t stop with Obama here, then it must stop with you-know-who. Normally that wouldn’t be a problem, as cabinet members are expected to take the heat for the president when something goes badly wrong. But in this case you-know-who has her eye on running in 2016 — possibly against (heh) Biden himself — and surely doesn’t want Benghazi staining the foreign policy credentials she’s worked hard to build.

Throw Bill Clinton, official Obama campaign surrogate, into the mix and we’ve got the makings of a nuclear clusterfark of ego, ass-covering, presidential ambition, and Clintonian drama…

For us on the right this is a “pass the popcorn” moment – but we’ll likely not get it until after November 6th – if Obama loses then Obama-bots will try to lay some of the blame on Hillary (others will seek to blame Biden) while Team Clinton will be desperate to build an impervious narrative that Obama was a failure from start to finish while Hillary heroically tried to keep him up on the rails for four years.  And even if Obama wins, given that Hillary has said she won’t accept re-appointment as SecState, there will be an effort to blame all that is wrong foreign policy-wise on Hillary, with the Clintons of course trying to burnish Hillary’s record and denigrating Obama’s.

Have I mentioned to anyone here yet my view that if Obama does lose in 2012, he’ll try again in 2016?  If I haven’t, then there it is – my view is that Obama will be more infuriated than anything else by an electoral rejection and so will try a come back in 2016.  It has happened before – Grover Cleveland after being defeated for re-election came back four years later to win a second term.  And here’s another prediction:  if Obama were to seek a second term after being defeated in 2012, the Democrats will nominate him.  Why?  Because the party bosses dare not do otherwise – to choose someone else over Obama would be a catastrophic blow against large sections of the Democrat base and so they would simply not turn out for the general election.  But, we’ll see about all that.

Meanwhile:  as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton bears a great deal of responsibility for whatever failures happened in Benghazi.  Ultimately, of course, it is the President who bears final responsibility.  In their dream world, both Hillary and Obama want blame assigned somewhere else and that, in my view, is why both State and the White House so eagerly leaped on the twaddle about a video causing a spontaneous riot which got out of hand:  had that story been true, then it would have mostly excused the White House and State (not entirely, of course, given the pre-attack calls for greater security).  I don’t know if it was a lie created out of whole cloth by State and/or White House or if it was something that someone just happened to remember at an opportune moment, but where ever the nonsense came from, Obama and Hillary were pleased to peddle it – for the self-serving reason that it got them off the hook.

Coupled with Obama’s disastrous debate performance, I think that Benghazi is causing a severe meltdown in support for Obama (and perhaps down-ballot Democrats, as well).  Keeping in mind that I always saw this race as “advantage Romney” and that if Romney were to win it would be by a substantial margin, I still view these two events as a catalyst for an Obama collapse – not just Romney winning, but winning very big.  As things stand right now, only about 10 States can be considered locked down by Obama.   As they include California and New York (with a total of 84 electoral votes between them) this keeps Obama definitely in the hunt for 270 – but this is a gigantic shift from as little as two weeks ago.

There is still a lot of time to go.  Two more Presidential debates are on tap.  Obama and his Democrats have a bucket of money to spend.  But the race has clearly shifted – Obama is behind and has to do something to change the dynamic if he wants to win.

UPDATE:  I want to quote from Mark Steyn’s article about Benghazi because it perfectly captures just what a disastrous failure this was:

…the State Department outsourced security for the Benghazi consulate to Blue Mountain, a Welsh firm that hires ex-British and Commonwealth Special Forces, among the toughest hombres on the planet. The company’s very name comes from the poem “The Golden Journey To Samarkand,” whose words famously adorn the regimental headquarters of Britain’s Special Air Service in Hereford. Unfortunately, the one-year contract for consulate security was only $387,413 – or less than the cost of deploying a single U.S. soldier overseas. On that budget, you can’t really afford to fly in a lot of crack SAS killing machines, and have to make do with the neighborhood talent pool. So who’s available? Blue Mountain hired five members of the Benghazi branch of the February 17th Martyrs’ Brigade and equipped them with handcuffs and batons. A baton is very useful when someone is firing an RPG at you, at least if you play a little baseball. There were supposed to be four men heavily armed with handcuffs on duty that night, but, the date of Sept. 11 having no particular significance in the Muslim world, only two guards were actually on shift…

Advertisements

69 thoughts on “Obama, Hillary, Benghazi and an Electoral Collapse?

  1. GMB October 12, 2012 / 7:15 pm

    Hillary taking the blame? I told you so. barky will throw Hillary under the bus and he will do it within a week most likely. He is losing and he knows it. He will do anything he thinks might get him an extra electoral vote.

    The question remains, what does Hillary have to return fire with?

    There are still a lot of hard core Clinton supporters out there. I do not think they will suffer being scapegoated kindly. This could even start a mini civil war within the donkrat party.
    Now that would be an interesting sight.

    • Count d'Haricots October 12, 2012 / 7:37 pm

      What does Hillary have to return fire?

      Bill

      My crystal ball has never been cloudier; by that I mean I have no idea what happens next. But, were I a betting man, I’d wager that pissing off Bill “Big Dog” Clinton with a few weeks to go before the election is a bad idea on many levels.

      Obama’s support among woman would collapse, and Bill would not play “Party Faithful” at this particular bus tossing, IMO.

      And, just as a point of order, scapegoat implies innocence, Hillary may not be completely to blame for this fiasco but she’s hardly innocent. A good buss toss is what she deserves, and it would be immensely entertaining to watch the Obama/Clinton immolation play out on every cable channel from now until November.

      That’s Entertainment!

    • GMB October 12, 2012 / 7:52 pm

      BTW, I agree with you that if he loses barky will run again next time. We will also get treated with four years of the msm giving him a soapbox to tell us how he “would of did it”

      Thank the good lord there is not a single televison in my household. 🙂

      • M. Noonan October 12, 2012 / 8:12 pm

        GMB,

        Don’t you know it – if Obama shows any sign that he’s interested in trying again then the MSM will come running to him on every big story to get their President’s take on it…along with “analysis” pieces stating that if we had done what Obama wanted rather than stupidly electing Romney then it would be so much better.

    • Count d'Haricots October 12, 2012 / 7:54 pm

      From Ed Klein; “My sources tell me that Clinton is working on a strategy that will allow Hillary to avoid having Benghazi become a stain on her political fortunes should she decide to run for president in 2016.

      Bill Clinton has even gone so far as to seek legal advice about Hillary’s liability in terms of cables and memos that might be subpoenaed by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which this week launched an investigation into the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. The committee will also examine the apparent Obama administration cover-up that followed the Benghazi attack.

      And this gem from a Hillary for President site; “We find ourselves in the giggly position that Hillary Clinton could throw Obama under the bus. She does not have to drive the bus herself. In Washington there is the wonderful world of “leaks”. Someone partial to Hillary and hostile to Obama could continue to leak information to Issa’s Government Oversight Committee which embarrasses Obama.

      Get da’ Popcorn Frank! ‘dis is gonna git GOOD!

      • M. Noonan October 12, 2012 / 8:12 pm

        Count,

        I saw that, too – and this could get really fun.

  2. Rick October 12, 2012 / 7:34 pm

    Hillary is too old to be running in ’16

    • Count d'Haricots October 12, 2012 / 7:38 pm

      Old Pantsuits Never Die, they just Fade Away.

      • neocon1 October 13, 2012 / 9:31 am

        Count ROTFLMFAO……..

    • M. Noonan October 12, 2012 / 7:50 pm

      Rick,

      Indeed, she is – and not just old, but old news…but that won’t stop her from trying, I’ll bet.

  3. Retired Spook October 12, 2012 / 11:38 pm

    The best line I’ve seen about the Benghazi mess is, “The President got the 3AM phone call and went to bed.”

    • Amazona October 12, 2012 / 11:51 pm

      …..and then skipped the security briefing the next morning.

      • bozo October 13, 2012 / 3:52 am

        Exactly like the run up to the first 9-11, only this one is way worse.

        If only the Republicans were completely in charge this time, too…

      • GMB October 13, 2012 / 7:35 am

        bozo, Why do you not demand that your people except the same level of responsibility that you demand of the Bush Administration?

        Why are you giving them a pass on this?

        Had this happened under Bush, bozo, you would be screaming bloody murder and demanding impeachment and you know it. Not with barky. No never, barky can do no wrong.

        Ambassador Stevens and three others are dead and to you it is just all for the cause, Right?

      • bozo October 13, 2012 / 8:47 am

        Who is giving who a pass? You righties have all become your own echo chamber. Because you said so, I must be cheerleading our ambassador’s death “for the cause” – whatever that could POSSIBLY mean. It must be true, since you just read it on the internet right after you wrote it.

        Hillary, as much as I am not a fan of hers, called for a better funded security force for just this reason, but no. Republicans demanded a more conservative approach. This is the fruit of that conservative approach.

        But you blame barky. After all, it’s the conservative mantra – pay less while demanding more. Then when it all goes wrong, blame the person/agency/system YOU defunded. I swear you righties hold kids down, chop off their hair, then blame them for getting hair on your shoes.

        I’m now waiting for you to claim barky sent in the Seals to assassinate the guy just so he could redistribute more job creator cash to poor Libyan Muslim homosexuals.

        I know, without a doubt, that the perps are not long for this world. Justice will be served. Cold. Unless Herman and Eddie Munster get elected before the job is done. Then…well..they just don’t think about it that much. BOMB IRAN!

        BTW, how did my howls for justice work out for Bush personally? Republicans don’t know ’cause they won’t get near the guy.

      • Amazona October 13, 2012 / 10:23 am

        “Hillary, as much as I am not a fan of hers, called for a better funded security force for just this reason, but no. Republicans demanded a more conservative approach.”

        Yet the State Department spokeswoman said, when asked, that the refusal to send more security into Benghazi had nothing at all to do with funding.

        In other words, freaky, you are just trying, as usual, to shift all blame and responsibility away from where it belongs——the Obama administration—–and onto those wascawwy wepubwicans, dem bastids.

        If you have something to say about the Republican vote to not increase funding for security over and above the more than 100% increase they had already voted for, please do so. Tell us why more money was being requested, where the allocated funds were already being spent, how much of the already allocated funds had been spent, why they were not adequate, how additional funds would have been spent,etc.

        Cite any proof that security was not amped up in Benghazi even after repeated requests that this happen, because of financial shortfalls.

        Oh, and while you are at it, explain the State Department policy that having armed Americans in Benghazi would “send the wrong message” to Libya. (Evidently “we fight back” is the “wrong message”.)

      • Amazona October 13, 2012 / 10:33 am

        freakzo, you seem even more overwrought than usual this morning—might wanna shift over to decaf.

        “…..when it all goes wrong, blame the person/agency/system YOU defunded.”

        See, you have lurched from not further increasing funding to DEfunding, in one shrill post. That could be attributed to your natural bent for hysterical hyperbole, or just to your willingness to invent things (what we call ‘lying’) if it supports your obsession with blaming the Right for everything.

        But once you get wound up, there is no stopping you, as we see with this odd declamation:

        “I swear you righties hold kids down, chop off their hair, then blame them for getting hair on your shoes.”

        Worked on that for quite a while, did you? I suggest you wipe the spittle off your keyboard and put a cool cloth on your head.

      • Amazona October 13, 2012 / 10:41 am

        “Exactly like the run up to the first 9-11…”

        ..except for being completely different, of course. Instead of having a President attending his security briefings, and being told that there was vague and unspecific chatter about an impending attack that might involve airplanes, sometime, somewhere, we had a President NOT attending security briefings, and ignoring specific warnings of attacks to mark an anniversary—that is, on a specific date, and in a specific place, and after more than 200 previous incidents that proved intent to harm.

        Yeah, in freakville this MIGHT be “exactly like…” In reality, not so much.

        “…… only this one is way worse.” because as we all know, killing four people is, like, WAAYYYYYY worse than killing almost 3000. And people losing their lives in service known to be dangerous is, like, WAAYYYYYYY worse than average citizens just going to work in the morning at an office in NYC and then being burned to death.

        I suggest switching to Ovaltine—-my old auntie used to say she found it very calming, and would drink a hot cup before bed.

      • Amazona October 13, 2012 / 10:51 am

        “I know, without a doubt, that the perps are not long for this world. Justice will be served. Cold.”

        Without a doubt, eh? Oooooh, I get chills just hearing such absolute certitude. “Perps”? You mean, like CRIMINALS? Not terrorists, you understand, but CRIMINALS? Maybe we could get them lawyers and have big show trials in NYC!! Gee, that sounds cool! (Ominous music in background…) “JUSTICE WILL BE SERVED. COLD. ” What now—you are channeling Steven Segal?

        “Unless Herman and Eddie Munster get elected before the job is done. Then…well..they just don’t think about it that much.”

        Awww, you’ve been up all night again,working on your cutsies. That is so pweshuss. I’ll bet you have quite a list of names and slurs you have been compiling for people on the Right, along with proclamations about their thoughts, their motives, their beliefs…

        In other words, nothing but Identity Politics, which people like you aren’t even smart enough to realize is a foolish and petty substitute for decisions based on the best political system for governing the country.

      • Amazona October 13, 2012 / 12:53 pm

        Obama’s new Big Lie, dutifully regurgitated by blog lemming bozo, is debunked, as usual. (emphasis mine)

        “Comparing FY 2011 actual funding versus the FY 2012 estimate, there appears to be a reduction in Worldwide Security Protection and Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance. But that reduction does not account for additional funding in FY 2012 from Overseas Contingency Operations funds amounting to $236 million for Worldwide Security Protection (p. 63) and $33 million for Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance (p. 467). As a result, total funds for Worldwide Security Protection for FY 2012 are estimated to be $94 million higher than in FY 2011, while Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance is estimated to be $61 million less than FY 2011. Together, there is a net increase.

        In terms of people, the budget justification reported that Worldwide Security Protection had slightly fewer positions budgeted (1,777 in FY 2011 versus 1,707 in FY 2012) and Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance had the same number of positions budgeted (1,014 for both years).

        In its budget request for FY 2013, the Administration requested significantly more funding for embassy security—mostly through the Overseas Contingency Operations budget—but retained the same number of positions, apparently on the assumption that security staffing was adequate. Regardless, that budget, even if approved in its entirety, would have entered into effect after the events in Libya.

        http://blog.heritage.org/2012/10/11/libya-security-lapse-the-budget-for-embassy-security-is-not-responsible/

        Also, a question here because I do not know the answer—–is assignment of active military personnel to embassy security billed to the State Department as an expense to that department, or is it an expense of the DoD, included in overall military budgeting?

      • Amazona October 13, 2012 / 12:56 pm

        ” Was the refusal to provide more security caused by budget cuts to embassy security? “No, sir,” Charlene Lamb, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Programs, told the committee.

        Lamb said that the State Department was right not to grant Nordstrom’s request for more security. “We had the correct number of assets in Benghazi on the night of 9/11,” Lamb said, per The Cable, citing the Libyan security personnel.”

      • Amazona October 13, 2012 / 1:08 pm

        “We had the correct number of assets in Benghazi on the night of 9/11”

        Translated from bureaucracy-speak:

        “We had the right number of U.S.-paid foxes guarding the embassy henhouse in Benghazi on the night of 9/11.”

      • bozo October 13, 2012 / 7:17 pm

        Ammo, you seem overwrought as usual this morning—carry on!

      • Amazona October 13, 2012 / 7:44 pm

        freakzo, I suggest that you ask Spook for tutorial on the Rule Of Holes. (Hint: One part of it is, when proved, absolutely and totally with no room for doubt, that you are not only utterly wrong in every way but probably lied as well, you are better off just slinking off in quiet shame and coming back later on a different topic.)

    • Amazona October 13, 2012 / 10:42 am

      “If only the Republicans were completely in charge this time, too…”

      Couldn’t have said it better myself…………..

      • bozo October 13, 2012 / 7:15 pm

        Yep. It all went so well last time.

        I do find it interesting that these days Republicans have the exact same opinion of Bush as Bush did of bin Laden. They really just don’t spend that much time on him, to be honest with you.

        This is like Roosevelt saying in June of 1942, just six months after a devastating attack on Americans, that he really didn’t spend that much time on Hirohito or Hitler.

      • Amazona October 13, 2012 / 7:50 pm

        No, what you “find interesting” is an imagined way to drag Bush into this.

        No one is avoiding President Bush. He served his country honorably and well, he is now a private citizen and not a media whore like a couple of other ex-Presidents I could name but don’t really need to, and he has earned the right to live a private life.

        He is not the President, he has not been the President for nearly four years now, he has nothing at all to do with the administration’s total muck-up of affairs in the Middle East, and the RRL obsession with trying to drag him in every time you guys screw up would be funny if it were not so pathetic.

        One great reason (of SOOO many!) to elect Mitt Romney is to free the nation from the incessant drumbeat of the Left trying to blame Bush for everything.

        Though it would really be funny to see Mitt commenting several times a week on the mess he INHERITED. Snark is not his style, but in this case I wish he would give it a try. But he is a real man, a man of dignity, and not a whiner/blamer.

      • Amazona October 13, 2012 / 7:52 pm

        You know, freakzo, there is now this Interweb thing, where you can look stuff up. Maybe with a little coaching you could figure out that Bush is not the president, Bin Laden is dead, and Obama gloating over getting him killed has stirred up murderous rage in the Middle East.

      • Cluster October 13, 2012 / 11:15 pm

        This is like Roosevelt saying in June of 1942, just six months after a devastating attack on Americans, that he really didn’t spend that much time on Hirohito or Hitler. – bozo

        Funny thing though freak man, when Hitler was killed, the war was over. By bragging about UBL’s death, your little boy Obama has incited more killing, so maybe Bush was right.

  4. Cluster October 12, 2012 / 11:56 pm

    Rush had a good take today saying that Biden through the NIA under the bus on the Benghazi issue, but then leaned on the intel department when he adamantly stated that Iran had no missiles to launch any mpnuclear strike. In addition, wasn’t it the democrats that blamed Bush for believing the NIA on Iraq?

    These people have no shame. But this is pass the popcorn time. Hard to believe Obama has fallen so hard, so fast. Love it. And again, Biden was a complete ass in that debate.

    • bozo October 13, 2012 / 9:02 am

      No. Not even CLOSE. It was not the Democrats who blamed Bush for believing the NIA on Iraq. It was for ignoring the NIA and any intel they provided that contradicted Curveball. All 16 intel agencies told Bush that he was making more terrorists in Iraq, and his response was “stay the course.” You’re too old not to know that, so why lie?

      • neocon1 October 13, 2012 / 9:37 am

        blowzo

        you know you are getting close when ole blowzo posts multiple posts and states “his” opinion”, thats gotta sting….eh blowzo?

        the fact is barry max and the amateur hour blew the whole thing (not willy) and now the SHIITE is sticking on them.

        The “making more terrorists” BS line is laughable, and made up by chicken shit little leftists, ….funny fighting Germany didnt make MORE NAZIS, but hey it sounds good and it its alinsky to a tee so keep up the goog work Komrad!!

      • Cluster October 13, 2012 / 10:54 am

        Bozo,

        Every single intel agency throughout the world, including Clinton’s, stated unequivocally that Iraq had WMD. Yet when it was discovered there were no WMD’s, or more accurately relocated WMD’s, the Democrats claimed Bush lied.

        Can’t have your cake and eat it to bozo. As they say, dem der is da facts.

      • bozo October 13, 2012 / 7:40 pm

        Remember Blix? He had the best access of all with 200 inspectors on the ground in Iraq pre-war and SAID NO WMDs. Most certainly “every single intel agency throughout the world” did NOT state unequivocally that Iraq had WMD. From what dark place did you pull that fiction?

        Before “shock and awe” the head of the IAEA, Mohamed ElBaradei, reported that there was no evidence that Saddam Hussein had any nuclear weapons or was in the process of acquiring them.

        Facts use to matter.

      • Amazona October 13, 2012 / 7:59 pm

        And Bush said this and Bush did that and FDR did not do the other and Lincoln put his face on a flag and……….

        The invasion of Iraq was in 2003. It was approved by several bipartisan votes of Congress and by the U.N. It happened. It was nearly ten years ago. Get over it.

      • GMB October 13, 2012 / 10:30 pm

        No wmds? LOLzer bozo big time. I suggest you use your intelligence to do a simple search for “mustard gas ied” Maybe try “sarin” too.

        This silly little game of gotcha is getting so old.

        BOOOOSSSSHHHHH!!!! I BLAME BOOOOSSSSHHHH!!!!

        Thats your standard answer for everything. Maybe you should just copy/paste it from now on.

      • Cluster October 13, 2012 / 11:10 pm

        OK excuse me bozo, every credible intel agency in the world claimed Iraq had WMD, largely based on the fact that Iraq had previously used WMD’s against their own citizens. Remember that?

        You are interesting study in dementia bozo.

    • neocon1 October 13, 2012 / 9:40 am

      Hard to believe Obama has fallen so hard, so fast. Love it. And again, Biden was a complete ass in that debate.

      The Farther they fall and the faster the better, biden is the epitomy of a complete ass he was just playing the part of ,…..well joe biteme.

      • neocon1 October 13, 2012 / 9:43 am

        blowzo

        give it up schmuck, you know the fork is in when all you can do is argue what the LAST POTUS did four and eight years ago. You cretins are toast for the NEXT FORTY YEARS

      • neocon1 October 13, 2012 / 9:50 am

        Shot Fired Through Window at Obama Campaign Office in Denver…
        Will The Election Results Cause Riots?

        you can COUNT on it……

      • neocon1 October 13, 2012 / 9:56 am

        I say BRING IT….in fact YOU LEAD it Moo ha MAD…….white turbans reflect sight lasers beautifully……..

        Al-Qaeda Leader Calls for Holy War Against the U.S. Over Anti-Islam Film</b

    • Amazona October 13, 2012 / 10:12 am

      freakzo, you are purposely trying to shift the comment on NIA info on Iraq to a later period, when there was some disagreement about how long to stay.

      But for a long time the NIA told us Iraq was making WMD, as did the intel agencies of every nation working in the ME—-BEFORE we went into Iraq.

      Now our intel informs Washington that Benghazi is targeted for further attacks, and this is ignored. Our intel informs Washington that the attack was a terrorist attack, and is ignored—-and misrepresented.

      You appear to be what rico would call “pragmatic” and believe intel from the NIA when it fits into your personal bias and dismiss it when it does not.

  5. GMB October 13, 2012 / 9:55 am

    Ot. Funny none the less.

    • neocon1 October 13, 2012 / 9:56 am

      Great one GMB

      • GMB October 13, 2012 / 9:58 am

        On topic. I apologize for that. 😛

      • neocon1 October 13, 2012 / 10:00 am

        ole BiteMe was “shining” during the “debate….LOL

      • Retired Spook October 13, 2012 / 10:25 am

        ole BiteMe was “shining” during the “debate….LOL

        Neo, I think it was Charles Krauthammer who said after the debate that it appeared Biden had prepped for the debate by watching “The Shining”.

      • neocon1 October 13, 2012 / 3:49 pm

        spook

        yes it was

  6. Richie October 13, 2012 / 9:59 am

    Mark – beware of Ohio. Ohio has been very badly brainwashed into believing Obama saved their economy and their Republican Governor is not getting any credit. Ohio is the most crucial state. I believe Romney will win FL, NC & VA. But the midwest remains up for grabs, and I am very nervous.

    The “blue collar working class white democrats” – they are the ones that could put Obama back into the driver’s seat. And that’s certainly something we don’t want. Too many people support Obama in this country, and that’s not a good thing at all.

    As hopefully-our-next-President Romney said today, “We need to win Ohio”. Ohio will be the decider in this election.

    By the way – Mark, you mentioned that you said there are encouraging signs of heavy GOP voting in early voting in Ohio – could you provide a link? I actually need something to perk my spirits up and help me to believe even more that we can win Ohio.

    Thanks.

    Richie

    • neocon1 October 13, 2012 / 10:02 am

      Richie

      brain washed, brain dead union bots, If Ochimpy gets back in I hope it is they who pay the price first after it is what THEY wanted so let em have it.

    • M. Noonan October 13, 2012 / 1:23 pm

      Richie,

      I had figured Ohio to be a dogfight right to the end with the winner coming out with 50.1% – my view was that Romney would be the winner but, let’s face it, when things are that close then anything can happen. But of late I’m getting more confident that Ohio will fall rather easily to Romney.

      Here’s a link to an article about it:

      In a remarkable reversal of fortune for President Obama in Ohio, the GOP has closed the huge gap in absentee ballot requests used by early voters that favored the Democrats and the president in 2008, setting up what one state analyst said could be a Mitt Romney blowout on Election Day.

      While in 2008, 33 percent of the 1,158,301 absentee ballots went to Democrats and just 19 percent to registered Republicans, a 14-point gap, this year 29 percent are being requested by Democrats and 24 percent by Republicans, a five-point gap…

      Democrats are still ahead in the early voting, but not by anywhere near the numbers they need – remember, McCain won Ohio on voters who voted on election day but got blown out among early voters by such a large margin that he couldn’t make it up. Romney, at worst, will only narrowly lose early voting and its almost a certainty that he’ll beat McCain’s 2008 election day performance…and there is still the chance that Romney will even beat Obama on early voting given that Romney is polling much better than Obama among independents.

      Meanwhile, the number of registered Democrats in Ohio has dropped like a rock over the past couple years and Romney is drawing huge crowds – some are even starting to compare Romney’s crowds to the sort of crowds Obama got in 2008.

      Its still a long ways to election day and many things can happen – but each day’s news only makes me more confident of victory.

      UPDATE: Here’s another article:

      …“You know what? There’s a growing crescendo of enthusiasm,” Romney said. “People rec.ognize that this is not an ordinary campaign, this is a critical time in the country. There’s more energy and passion. People are getting behind this campaign.”

      Romney was previously greeted by huge crowds in Cuyahoga Falls on Tuesday night (12,000 people) and in Sidney, Ohio, on Wednesday night (9,000), and both he and Ryan have campaign stops scheduled in the state today. Ryan also added a noon rally in Cincinnati on Monday…

      Those are pretty big crowds – and when a campaign is adding stops then it is being overwhelmed by enthusiasm…

  7. Richie October 13, 2012 / 10:16 am

    NeoCon –

    I know. They are complete drones that would vote Democrat even if they had a gun to their head. Nothing will prevent these morons from voting for Democrats.

    I absolutely despise these filthy unions and closet socialists that come out to vote for the Democratic Party. They vote Democrat so they can continue to steal from legitimate corporations and private businesses without any regard to the free market and the US economy. The country has turned into a toilet and Ohioans still want to vote for this disgusting, miserable piece of garbage that we have in the white house. And let me say this also – I couldn’t give a rat’s fart about the “poor”. The Democrats love class warfare. I work hard and I’ll be damned if a tribal leader like Obama wants to continue to steal from the successful.

    If the Republican Party cannot win this election, I agree that it’s time for the Party to be shut down. This is one last chance to save our country from the brink.

    • neocon1 October 13, 2012 / 10:20 am

      LOL

      I couldn’t give a rat’s fart about the “poor”. The Democrats love class warfare. I work hard and I’ll be damned if a tribal leader like Obama wants to continue to steal from the successful.

      aint communism grand?

      • neocon1 October 13, 2012 / 10:24 am

        OT

        75 degrees, cloudless sunny sky, definitely going to take the “horse” for a ride today……..

      • Richie October 13, 2012 / 10:27 am

        Indeed it is – communism is grand if people desire to live in poverty, disease, sickness and if they want government AK-47s being shoved into their rectum if they say something bad about the leader.

        But in all seriousness, I must say that Ohio remains to be seen. I know that Romney has been wonderful progress in gaining independents and is now substantially ahead with the independent votes. But the Democratic Party’s boots, flip flops and converse shoes continue to march across the Buckeye State in an effort to win Ohio for their King.

        It is going to be one hell of a fight to ensure that Romney carries Ohio. God help us.

      • neocon1 October 13, 2012 / 11:02 am

        mmmmm mmmmm mmmmmm

        Obama:
        “They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun”

        Obama to His Followers:
        “Get in Their Faces!”

        Obama on ACORN Mobs:
        “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!”

        Obama to His Mercenary Army:
        “Hit Back Twice As Hard”

        Obama on the private sector:
        “We talk to these folks… so I know whose ass to kick.“

        Obama to voters:
        Republican victory would mean “hand to hand combat”

        Obama to lib supporters:
        “It’s time to Fight for it.”

        Obama to Latino supporters:
        “Punish your enemies.”

        Obama to democrats:
        “I’m itching for a fight.”

        Capuano (Violent Democrats for Obama):
        “Once in a while you have got
        to get out on the streets
        and get a little bloody.”

      • neocon1 October 13, 2012 / 3:51 pm

        wOw

        Benghazi: Osama’s Revenge on Obama
        James Lewis

        Talk about chickens coming home to roost. Talk about the Mother of All Fiascos. It’s the revenge of Osama bin Laden from the bottom of the ocean, and the message is plain: al-Qaeda is very much alive, and America is a paper tiger

      • neocon1 October 13, 2012 / 4:06 pm

        Bizarre Biden Frightens Me
        Perry Drake

        The most frightening takeaway from Thursday evening’s vice-presidential debate is that for the last four years Biden has been a coronary, cerebral hemorrhage, slip in the shower, steak lodged in the windpipe, caught in flagrante delicto by an armed Michelle away from the presidency.

        The thought of that should send chills down the spine of every American who cares about the future of this nation.

        Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/10/bizarre_biden_frightens_me.html#ixzz29DB0grxA

      • Amazona October 13, 2012 / 8:04 pm

        I’ve always called Biden “Prudential Joe” because he has been Obama’s best insurance policy. No one would even consider taking Obama out with Joe as the next in line.

  8. GMB October 14, 2012 / 8:01 am

    Maybe if we were not giving $500 million to big bird we could have spent it consulate security? No?

    Naw we would of just given it to one of owl bores “green companies”

    FORE!!!!!ward

    • Amazona October 14, 2012 / 10:35 am

      Forget Big Bird—it is worse than that.

      “The $16 billion dollar State Department budget had plenty of money to for other urgent matters like “green” energy. Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA) notes in The Washington Times:

      [O]n May 7, the State Department authorized the U.S. embassy in Vienna to purchase a $108,000 electric vehicle charging station for the embassy motor pool’s new Chevrolet Volts. The purchase was a part of the State Department’s “Energy Efficiency Sweep of Europe” initiative, which included hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars on green program expenditures at various U.S. Embassies.

      In fact, at a May 10 gala held at the U.S. embassy in Vienna, the ambassador showcased his new Volts and other green investments as part of the U.S. government’s commitment to “climate change solutions.”

      The event posting on the embassy website read: “Celebrating the Greening of the Embassy.”

      While the embassy in Vienna was going green, the consulate in Benghazi was getting bombed, and little was done to stop it.”

      Priorities, man—priorities

  9. J. R. Babcock October 14, 2012 / 1:05 pm

    As the election heats up, so does the hate.

Comments are closed.