Here’s Why

Rob Lowe, interviewed by Imus some time ago, was asked why Hollywood was so Liberal, replied Mr. Lowe (paraphrased) “ I’ve thought about that, our careers are based on being able to communicate a ‘feeling’, to connect with things on an emotional level, we get in touch with ‘feeling’ as the vehicle for performance. Liberals tend to ‘feel’ their way through issues; feelings are what they’re connected to, it’s what they do.” He contrasted that with Conservatives who are more analytic and logical in his view; it made sense to me as a valid and thoughtful analysis on the part of Mr. Lowe. Feelings may not, however, work in Liberal’s favor this time around; twelve reasons absent wonkish economic commentary, why Mr. Obama will not be reelected.

Reason one. The electorate ‘feels’ differently than they did four years ago; less secure, less wealthy, less sure that their vote four years was, in hindsight, wise. The emotions of 2008 were significant and broad; emotions seem less intense, less significant than in 2008. Those who do not pay attention to wonkish detail ‘feel’ that we may not be on the right path.

Reason two: The Conservative / Republican base will show up. Loving the Republican ticket or not there is no love lost for the Obama administration. Polling of independents indicates that the convention may or may not have ‘humanized’ Mr. Romney to the masses, but it did that to the base that was actually watching. A long term Romney skeptic, after the closing night of the convention texted me; “I want him now! Finally someone I can voter FOR!!” It wasn’t the policy, it was the point of view and more importantly it was the man as represented by those whose lives he touched. There is no dirt on Romney that has stuck. The MSM has not even dared to pull a ‘John McCain Mistress story’ on Romney. No one will believe it. It would be a death gurgle.

Reason three: No great Romney groundswell is required. Bits and pieces; a bit of the African American vote, a few percentage points from Hispanics here and there, Gays, the disenfranchised young, Reagan Democrats, Jewish voters. Just a bit of each combined with a strong base leads us to reason four.

Reason four: James Carville’s polling says that independent voters favor Romney by a 60%+ margin. This poll is consistent with an embedded question in a Fox News poll that has three of four Independents agreeing with Conservatives; things are, to paraphrase, going to Hell in a Hand Basket.

Reason five: Back to feelings. There was genuine energy four years ago. Hope and Change did have resonance; it resonated all the way to the White House. “Forward” on the other hand sounds like a simple command to confused, weary, battle fatigued troops who are uncertain of which way to turn; the enemy seems to be everywhere.

Reason six. Candidate Obama was presented, by design, as a blank slate; it was the primary strategic imperative. Millions projected their own interpretations on that slate. Specifics were few and far between. There is no blank slate anymore.

Reason seven. There will be an argument over promises made versus promises kept. The specifics do not matter. The promise broken was the promise of leadership; we’ve not come together, we are far from post racial and there is little evidence of the President serving as a bridge between ideologies. For more months than I’ve kept track of the ‘wrong track’ numbers have hovered around 66%; two out of three of us. This is the critical number.

Reason eight. To many, opportunities that, absent high analysis by the average American, seem to make no sense; Keystone, shutting down the coal industry, the Gulf oil production decisions, Afghanistan’s deadline, roughing up Israel, failing to support the Green Revolution in Iran and budgets his own party won’t vote for. It’s hard to make sense of it in terms of traditional American policy; either party!

Reason nine. Mandatory hypocrisy. Legislators, acting as surrogates, who refused to vote for the President’s budget will be called upon to defend his economic policies as represented by the budget they refused to support; unless, of course, they simply disqualify the Senate from supporting the President in public. That might be noticed! Hypocrisy will be demanded of anyone not on the extremes of the party: Catholics, traditional marriage advocates, and fiscal rationalists. If they opt out, only the extremes will speak for Democrats.

Reason ten. Main Stream Media bias is no longer a dirty little secret. Slowly, very slowly the MSM is beginning to worry about a Presidential downfall. Regurgitation of reporting that already exists in the alternative media is beginning to find its way to ……. wait for it ……. The New York Times! If you’re prone to analysis, calculate the number of column inches over time dedicated to support vs. criticism of the President and his people.

Reason eleven. Self identification as a Democrat is at a modern low.

Reason twelve. The President is having trouble finding a center for his campaign. Many themes have been trotted out and abandoned: Bain, war on women, Romney’s taxes; back to the policy that got us in trouble. These themes are not moving voters in the President’s direction. The chief surrogates are also failing to move voters. It’s in the numbers!

EXTRA! Reason thirteen: Too structured. Seen one, seen them all. The Obama Campaign is doing something the Romney Campaign should avoid. Talking points so tight, so scripted that to hear one spokesman is to hear them all. If folks tune it out, the potential number of impressions drops like a rock and you won’t see it in the numbers. The numbers don’t tell the “I’ve had enough” story.

My prediction in advance of seeing the Democratic Convention is Romney 54% Obama 46%, give or take the numerous 3rd party folks. Maybe 53% – 46%. The Presidents ceiling is 46% – 47%. The story is how it mixes in the six states.

  • D.D.Mao

    Reason 14:

    “Selecting Paul Ryan is further demonstration of an individual self confident enough to bring in folks who will challenge him intellectually and take responsibility for results.”…”Management Styles DO Tell A Story”….Landreaux 28th August 2012

  • Bill Hedges

    “this site isn’t “anti-Newt” as you wrote but we can not back a candidate who we aren’t comfortable with and have to spend more time defending his blemishes than his accomplishments either.Mr Romney fits this definition also”

    “D.D.Mao Jan 13th, 2012 at 4:32 pm Capitalism Under Attack?“

  • Bill Hedges

    D.D.Mao did you tell Landreaux your new urban slang, dirty, vulgarity insult word ? So far I have restrained from following in your footsteps. Maybe Landreaux or even Nate will want to use too. I did REPORT DD Mao twice today.

  • D.D.Mao

    No I wasn’t a supporter of Mr.Romney’s I was for Mr.Ryan for President but HE DIDN’T DECLARE HIS CANDIDACY.Everyone accused me of looking for the perfect candidate or stated “WE CAN’T LET OBAMA WIN AGAIN”.Well Mr.Romney picked Rep.Ryan as his running mate and now I’m on board.Just as so many voted for Sen.McCain after he picked Gov.Palin.

    BUT WAIT SOME PEOPLE STILL AREN’T SATIFIED!If I was a supporter of Ms.Bachmans or Gov.Perry during the primaries do you think they would say anything if I was now a supporter of Mr.Romney? I seriously doubt it.Why then do they raise this so called hypocrisy now? Could it be because I brought to light the character of Mr.Gingrich to often? Could it be that I brought to light that President Bush(W)was A BIG GOVERNMENT CONSERVATIVE? Could it be THE LORD PROTECTOR OF ALL THINGS REPUBLICAN HAS A REVENGE MOTIVE?

    Landreaux expressed 13 good reasons why Mr.Romney should be elected.HE’S THE CANDIDATE NOT ME !

  • Bill Hedges

    This was written first and should be answered first. Not let you crawl away in the confusion:

    “THE TITLE OF THE ARTICLE WAS “TIME TO SHELVE THE POLITICAL CONVENTIONS” THERE IS NO DOUBLE MEANING BY THE AUTHOR”

    You have a misunderstanding about links. They are not absolute. THEY provide back up evidence for one’s views and data.

    This author also wrote:

    “The conventions have their defenders. “They create dialogue and debate and discussion about issues, and that’s a good thing,” Pennsylvania delegate John Rodgers told me last week. “Plus, it’s a celebration of our democracy.” The editors of USA Today argue that conventions “still matter” since they serve as “a wake-up call of sorts for the politically disengaged, reminding them to start paying attention” to the looming presidential election. For David Gergen of Harvard’s Kennedy School, the conventions — though too long — enable Republicans and Democrats to introduce “rising stars,” and force the parties to spell out their beliefs in a platform.”

    http://articles.boston.co…..pad-apps/2

    Goes along with your first link you gave in this article by Mona Charen who WAS speaking about convention as I proved by quoting her entire article. What I must do to show YOU LIE. YOUR INSULTS don’t slow THAT TRAIN going down those tracks.

  • Bill Hedges

    Going along with use of cnvention by Landreaux in this article…

    Landreaux wrote a lot of points why NOT to vote for buma. In point two:

    “Polling of independents indicates that the convention may or may not have ‘humanized’ Mr. Romney to the masses, but it did that to the base that was actually watching”

    What did DD Mao say about conventions usefulness ??? Part of it was “B.S.”…

  • Bill Hedges

    In previous article “D.D.Mao Sep 3rd, 2012 at 7:25 pm” wrote:

    “YOUR RAMBLING AND REPEATING YOURSELF AGAIN BUT YOU OFTEN DO THAT TO COVER YOUR POSTERIOR!”

    “THE TITLE OF THE ARTICLE WAS “TIME TO SHELVE THE POLITICAL CONVENTIONS” THERE IS NO DOUBLE MEANING BY THE AUTHOR.”

    “I SUGGEST ANYONE WHO IS AS CONFUSED AS MY OPPONENT SIMPLY READ THE ARTICLES THEMSELVES……OR TAKE THEIR MEDS!”

    Yes I repeat because DD Mao ignores much. Expecially obvious wrong comments of his.

    Yes about title of his second link and I quote from it.

    First link of his he wishes to forget. The link was ALL BOUT THE convention which he denied. A major PROVEN LIE OF HIS.

    So I AM “CONFUSED” OR “TAKE THEIR MEDS!” Time to return fire. 2 different urban slang insults to spit out by DD Mao today. Though I curbed myself today with just reporting him. Tomorrow I swim with the fishes with him. Let the S.O.B.s fly tomorrow until……….. Longer than last time DD Mao pulled this.

    I expect nothing to be done like last time against DD Mao. Up to ME…

  • Bill Hedges

    DD Mao called me “THE LORD PROTECTOR OF ALL THINGS REPUBLICAN” several times lately. I’ve told him I’m Tea. SO I’m going to call him __ Asshole __ since that type of Language is allowed here & brought in a lot of commenters to this site…

  • Bill Hedges

    Well. No Asshole writing comments today. Must be a closet Democrat watching the Democrat convention. You learn so much from conventions. As Landreaux. I stepped into my house and before I could change channels (thank God for Netflix) the opening remarks for convention said little change occurred after RC. Reason was less undecided. They also expect less poll change for Democrats after convention. That wrapped butt breath probable is chewing on frog turd saying HE’S RGHT. D showed be a baseball player. He’s a card. One thing the little mind giant said that’s correct more are watching segments of conventions expecially twitter. Which is only logical. As a boy there were few channels on tv. Shows were limited in hours per day. We have gone from hardly ever leaving a 500 mile radius from where we where born to we could be in Paris tomorrow. Still got to have convention to have clips of convention. And article on convention as D.’s first link was though he can’t read and comprehend that (so I’ll prove AGAIN_ He reminds me of Forrest Gump without luck & cuteness).

    Why is it Asshole is first to draw naughty words from the well or say such HHHolmes things.

    “D.D.Mao Sep 3rd, 2012 at 7:25 pm from previous article:

    “YOUR RAMBLING AND REPEATING YOURSELF AGAIN BUT YOU OFTEN DO THAT TO COVER YOUR POSTERIOR!”?

    I close this comment with “COVER” my “POSTERIOR” as YOU say. I call it proving your statement is a LIE. Notice ALL THE anger in your sentence ? Is what they call ALL capital letters like that. I use that only on certain words/phases for effect. THAT point may be lost on D.. Vive la différence!

    Why does D. spit out his versions of “you know” every 400 words ? Part of it may be slow wit. Can not come up with answer to challenging comments. Frustration responding to stimuli facing him (his boo-boo has come to haunt you and has no rational response to bandage the wound). Giving Butt licker a little credit, he may be the latter. he does come up with answer they just are not always _ co·her·ent _ ones. Like rattler he strikes with his fangs NOT REASON as we civilized folks SHOULD.

    I follow in shit breath’s footstep BUT FOR entertainment purposes ONLY. He comes up with one word lines (LOW CLAS). One word 3 times and one fresh word once. I prefer more eloquent THOUGHTS. Imagination has not germinated in your defective lobotomised frontal lobes region. They may have applied too much force with the chisel. Too many degrees applied.

    Airhead attacks my comments claining I have “REVENGE MOTIVE?” Pointing out DD Mao’s first link in previous article WAS all about convention unlike what he said. My comment IS FACTUAL not “REVENGE MOTIVE?”. Yes I will repeat again this data. STUFF JUST doesn’t sink into that skull of yours or you “CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH” ( FOR years you could not copy and paste except with rare exception. Overnight a miracle, ”You SAW THE LIGHT” and can. Only took YEARS. You will never be accused of being “FAST EDDIE”):

    “My praise was for,and the quote was from Ms.Charen’s article not Sec.Rice’s speech in my post of 10;10 AM today.”

    “D.D.Mao Sep 1st, 2012 at 6:02 pm previous article”

    YOU did not give FULL QUOTE BY AUTHOR. Would proves author got her idea for article from convention THAT YOU DENY. Oh well (don’t you hate immortalized comments that bite YOU IN THE AS so often), here is her full story:

    “Among the most stirring moments in an effective convention came during Condoleeza Rice’s speech. She delivered (beautifully) a number of well-chosen one-liners that hit bull’s-eyes with Republicans and conservatives, warning, for example, that “when a nation loses control of its finances, it eventually loses control of its destiny.”

    “She touched on the problem of failing schools and the challenge they represent to the American dream. “The crisis in K-12 education is a threat to the very fabric of who we are,” she said, to thumping agreement. But when she mentioned her own story, the hall erupted. “A little girl grows up in Jim Crow Birmingham. The segregated city of the south where her parents cannot take her to a movie theater or to restaurants, but they have convinced her that even if she cannot have a hamburger at Woolworths, she can be the president of the United States if she wanted to be and she becomes the secretary of state.”

    “The house went wild with joy. The Republicans in Tampa, Fla., metaphorically lifted Rice onto their shoulders and carried her around the arena. Why? Because Americans such as Rice ratify what Republicans believe about this country — that our triumph over racism and discrimination — not the history of it, is what defines us. It’s the opposite of the Democrats’ message — that racism, discrimination and injustice are deep-dyed into the American character.”

    “Democrats go further, too. They encourage the prejudice or to put it more bluntly, circulate the slander that racism and discrimination are not to be found among Democrats but still persist is in the hearts of Republicans.”

    “Just as painting Paul Ryan as a monster who wants to throw grandmothers off cliffs becomes impossible when voters actually see the man, the Tampa convention has made peddling the myth about racist Republicans a good deal more difficult.”

    “Mia Love, the beautiful, articulate daughter of Haitian immigrants who is running for Congress from Utah, became an instant Republican star after her speech to the convention. She radiated love of country, telling the delegates, “Our story has been told for over 200 years with small steps and giant leaps; from a woman on a bus to a man with a dream; from the bravery of the greatest generation to the innovators and entrepreneurs of today. … This is the America we know … because we built it.” In the 24 hours after her address, she raised more than $150,000. The roof was raised also for Ted Cruz, Bobby Jindal, Brian Sandoval, Susana Martinez, Nikki Haley, Artur Davis and Luis Fortuno. All sounded the same themes in different ways — that the American idea and ideal of opportunity and freedom retains its power and that Americans from all races and backgrounds who believe in free markets and free people are welcome — no, lionized — in the Republican Party.”

    “Democrats and members of the press (but I repeat myself) keep the old racism charge going with ever more ridiculous allegations. Efforts to combat voter fraud by requiring a picture ID are evidence of racism, though why minorities should be any less likely to have an ID than anyone else is not explained. Mentioning that President Obama has granted waivers to states to permit watering down the work requirement in the federal welfare law brings shrieks from MSNBC’s Chris Matthews: “You know what game you’re playing, and everybody knows what game you’re playing: It’s a race card.”

    “Who is the racist here? The 1996 reform had broad support from all Americans. A 1995 Public Agenda poll, for example, found that 69 percent of whites and 68 percent of blacks thought the system made it too easy to remain on welfare (71 percent of households receiving welfare also agreed). Fifty-six percent of blacks and 61 percent of whites said they would not increase benefits for mothers on welfare if they had additional children. In the aftermath of reform, Americans of all backgrounds agreed that it was a stunning success at reducing poverty — especially child poverty — and dependency.”

    “Democrats have been demonizing Republicans this way for decades. Republicans have often stumbled and stammered in reply — infuriated by the ugly and baseless accusation but inarticulate in their own defense. This is the party that was born in opposition to slavery, supported civil rights laws when southern Democrats blocked them, would have nominated Colin Powell in 1996 if he had run, and gave Herman Cain a serious look in 2012. Now, along with articulate and appealing nominees for president and vice president, the party is finding telegenic spokesmen who make nonsense of the Democrats’ libels.”

    “Tampa has turned a page.”

    http://patriotpost.us/opinion/14588

    If iron clad shut brain stem follows its normal habits, you may not write another comment until next new article. Running away from messes you made with your comments is NORM. ALONG WITH stupid stuff like “REVENGE MOTIVE?” Can you tell the difference between that and disproving? Dah. NO. Would have enjoyed having you as my opponent in FORMAL debate. Then, SO EASY & no sweat doesn’t foster growth of abilities.

    To sum it up I have more shocks to your nervous system I could deliver (like I’m smarter than a certain Yale Professor), but TKO or knock out is not necessary (you know a Orca sometimes will play with its food while still alive ?) . Rather have you resilient and able to come back for MORE black eyes & bloody noses. In that respect this comment my have reached the summit of my expectations. Just want to be the second animal species which is poisonous though not deadly.

    Do enjoy DD Mao THE “outer limits” of your pain threshold. Your naughty words confirms your THERE….

  • D.D.Mao

    I write when I want to stress a point. Others write in order to hear their own voice and stress self importance.

    If I have something to say you’ll hear from me !

  • Bill Hedges

    Is that so MOTHER FUCKER. GOING to say I started this round of nasty words ? Too bad I REPORTED THEM SO IS on record. Did you employed into your ass ? Nothing gets past you but what you do not want to hear. You can take a 1,000 word comment & comprehend NONE OF IT.

    YOU SURE LIED ABOUT YOUR FIRST LINK SAYING not about convention. Now you lie again. Ignoring the proof I provided doesn’t change you’re a GOD DAMN LIAR. Your name is in Guinness World Records for biggest BULL SHITTER. You use the language of the street when you are flustered and that is what you are.

    What is your nasty word for today ??? I guess you will say you don’t use them. Why stop your lies & vulgarity. I’m going to “stress a point” of what you !!!

  • Bill Hedges

    PART 2…

    Title of this article is “Here’s Why”. NOT “13 good reasons why Mr.Romney should be elected”

    All I have to do is open my eyes on ASSHOLE’S COMMENTS to find errors if NOT LIES. Could turn it into full time job:

    “Well Mr.Romney picked Rep.Ryan as his running mate and now I’m on board.Just as so many voted for Sen.McCain after he picked Gov.Palin.”

    D.D.Mao Sep 3rd, 2012 at 9:38 pm

    1. Maybe ASSHOLE you have heard of the Constitution. It gives very limited powers to VP. Other than that he serves at the President’s pleasure. Ryan could be the maid in the Oval office.

    2. How many voted for McCain because of Sarah. Yes Sarah was G R E A T. McCain polls WENT UP. IN Ryan case he did not raise the polls for Mitt. READ what author said in point two.

    3. Any one of the Candidates that ran for President I would vote for OVER BUMA. Your spin giving Ryan as YOUR REASON is hype. Set it by your DREAM CATCHER, WEEGIE BOARD, and NEVERLAND stock near where you sleep and dream.

    Asshole also wrote in same comment:

    “Landreaux expressed 13 good reasons why Mr.Romney should be elected.”

    Have you been lobotomised ?

    NO Landreaux DID NOT give “13 good reasons why Mr.Romney should be elected”. Am not counting but most was WHY NOT to vote for buma. See my 3. in this comment…