White House 2012 is Now White House 2016 and We’ve Moved to WhiteHouse16.com

Bookmark and Share   With our wounds licked since the victory of President Obama in November, White House 2012 has moved on and is now looking towards the future with White House 2016.

The new home for the old blog is now WhiteHouse16.com.

There you will find a redesigned website with new features such as a White House 2016 chat service that will enable readers to debate among themselves and the contributors to White House 2016.

While White House 2016 will continue to focus on the evolving race for the White House in 2016, we will also continue to bring you news, commentary, and analysis on the important political issues of the day.

White House 2012 has been covering politics from a conservative perspective now for over two years and great success.  We look forward to continuing our efforts with you, the readers in, the years to come.  So please visit us at and subscribe to us at our new web address;

http://whitehouse16.com/

Also “Like” us on Facebook at

http://www.facebook.com/WhiteHouse2016

and follow us on Twitter at

https://twitter.com/GOPwh2016

Bookmark and Share

Congratulations President Obama. So Now What?

Bookmark and Share  As of 11:45 pm, with Ohio called for the Obama-Biden ticket, while the states of Virginia, and Florida remain too close to call, President Obama has received 290 electoral votes and secured himself a second term in the White House.  For myself, as Editor-in-Chief of White House 2012, I am quite humbled and even embarrassed by the wide disparity in the projections which I presented, and the actual results.  And as an American I am disappointed.  I am disappointed by the fact that our nation will be hindered by a spender-in-chief who has done his best to change the American way instead of doing his best to preserve the American way.

Yet despite the disappointment and even the fear over another four years of Barack Obama, I remain cautiously optimistic that not even Barack Obama can destroy what it means to be an American.  This nation is greater than any one person and it is not defined by any one man.  So while I have lost some faith in the political process, I have not lost any faith in our nation.

Now it is up to President Obama to deal with the divisions in our nation… divisions which I firmly believe he has largely been responsible for.  His divide and conquer strategy of class warfare and his attempts to pit Americans against each other in order to win reelection, now puts him in the unenviable position of having to bridge the existing divide.  His inability to do so will make his victory a hollow one and the mission of his next four years as President impossible.

Not only does Barack Obama become the first President reelected with a smaller Electoral College vote than he was elected with, he also faces an an American electorate and Congress that is probably more divided than it has ever been since the Civil War.  After orchestrating one of the most divisive and empty campaigns in recent history, how he will pivot and try to create goodwill will be interesting.  And even more interesting will be how quickly he can do it because he  must work fast.  With a fiscal cliff only weeks away, true leadership is required.  His lack of leadership has brought us to this cliff and so far there is no indication that it will be able to avoid it.   But hope springs eternal.

So tonight I congratulate our President.  His campaign put together a brilliant ground game.  His Party increased its margins in the U.S. Senate.  And except for a loss of seats in the House of Representatives and possibly even the popular vote, he won and there is no denying it.  But did America win?  And what does his victory mean?  Will it mean more of the same that has gotten us into an economic crisis so severe that it is considered a national security threat?

I don’t know the answers to these questions but I do know that President Obama’s win tonight leaves us with more questions than answers and more uncertainty than certainty.

Bookmark and Share

First Exit Polls in Ohio Show It May Be Tough Going for Romney

Some of the first exit polls being released by Fox are showing that Romney is winning working class whites by 55% to President Obama’s 43%.

While  exit polls usually underestimate trends, if Romney was on a clear path to winning the Buckeye State’s 18 electoral votes, these numbers should be better for him.  These early figures are by no means conclusive but if anything they confirm that the race is close.  A clear sign that Romney was headed to a victory in Ohio would be that he was winning this demographic by at least 15%.  He is not far off that mark and as indicated previously, these numbers are probably understating Governor Romney’s lead with this demographic.  But so far, depending upon which side of the aisle you’re in. all signs are that the election may be too close for comfort for Republicans or Democrats.
Bookmark and Share

Key Early Counties To Watch Tonight For Signs of How the Election Will Go

  Bookmark and Share   If the election turns out to be as close as predicted in the battleground states, many states will not be called for one candidate or the other for hours.  In the case of one of the most critical swing states… Virginia, although polls close there at 7 pm EST, if exit polls from throughout the day and actual returns are very close, we may not know who won till maybe 10:30 pm … some 3 and a half hours after polls have closed.

But signs of who may ultimately win the presidential election can still be found by looking at the returns of several key counties in a handful of early states.  Here are some of the counties in the earliest state closings of the evening which typically act as electoral bellwethers, and what to look for to get an idea as to how things are shaping up for Romney and the President.

7 p.m. Eastern – VIRGINIA:

  • Prince William County

2004: Bush 53–47     2008: Obama 58-42

Obama 93,386 to McCain 67,589

If Prince William County shows Mitt Romney trailing Barack Obama, Romney is in trouble.  If he trails the President by more than 2% here, he probably will have no chance of winning Virginia and he will probably be underperforming in many other battleground states.

  • Loudoun County

Obama 54-46

Obama 74,607 to McCain 63,328

Romney needs to reverse these numbers if he is going to win Virginia.  If he can not trounce President Obama in Loudoun County, he can not win the presidential election.

7:30 p.m. Eastern – OHIO

These counties will help tell us if President Obama is underperforming. In order for President Obama to be on track to win Ohio, he must produce pluralities that are large enough to discount the pluralities that Mitt Romney will receive on other counties.  If the President is not beating Romney in these counties by  30% or more in Cuyahoga, 25% or more in Franklin and Lucas counties, and 5% or more in Hamilton County, than he is in trouble.

  • Cuyahoga (Cleveland):

2004: Kerry 448,503 vs. Bush 221,600 (+226,903);

2008: Obama 458,422 vs. McCain 199,880 (+258,542) (69-30)

  • Franklin (Columbus):

2004: Kerry 285,801 vs. Bush 237,253 (+48,548);

2008: Obama 334,709 vs. McCain 218,486 (+116,223) (59-40)

  • Hamilton (Cincinnati):

2004: Bush 222,616 vs. Kerry 199,679 (+22,937); Bush 52.5 – 47

2008: Obama 225,213 vs. McCain 195,530 (+29,683) Obama 52-47

  • Lucas (Toledo):

2004 Kerry 132,715 vs. Bush 87,160 (+45,555);

2008: Obama 142,852 vs. McCain 73,706 (+69,146) (65-34)

8 p.m. Eastern : FLORIDA, NEW HAMPSHIRE, PENNSYLVANIA

FLORIDA:

  • Pinellas County

2004: Bush 49.6 – 49.5           2008: Obama 54 – 45

If Obama is to have any chance in Florida, he must come within at least 5 percentage points of Mitt Romney.  The President will not need to be ahead of Romney here, but if he can limit Romney’s lead in Pinellas County, the President will be underperforming and is not likely to see him defeat Romney in the final numbers.

  • Hillsborough County

2004: Bush 53 – 46     2008: Obama 53 – 46

If he is to be competitive in The Sunshine State, Romney needs to produce at least a 5% plurality over the President in Hillsborough and that is cutting is close.  To really feel confident about which way Florida will go, Romney should optimally lead Obama by as much as 8%.

NEW HAMPSHIRE:

  • Hillsborough County

2004: Bush 51 – 48     2008: Obama 51 – 48

If we get news that Romney or Obama are leading the other by 3% or more here, it may not be an accurate measure of national trends and the final popular vote but it will certainly be a sign of which way New Hampshire will go.

PENNSYLVANIA:

  • Chester County

2004: Bush 52 – 47.5  2008: Obama 54 – 45

Romney needs to take Chester County by 7% or more if he is to win Pennsylvania.  Anything less than that will make the race too close to call and likely a win for President Obama.

  • Bucks County (Philly Suburbs, north)

Obama 54-45

178,345 to 149,860

If Romney has any chance to win Pennsylvania, he needs to win Bucks County or hold President Obama to a 4% lead or less.

  • Delaware County (immediately southwest of Philly city)

Obama 60-38

170,949 to 109,766

President Obama will be in trouble if he does not win Delaware County by at least 55%.

  • Montgomery County (northwest of Philly)

Obama 60-39

249,493 to 163,030

If President Obama does not see at least a 10% lead over Mitt Romney here, than the race in Pa will be too close for comfort for him.

  • Westmoreland County (Pittsburgh suburbs)

McCain 58-42

96,786 to 69,004

Romney needs to win this County by 15% or more to be in the running for Pennsylvania’s electoral votes.

Stars01.gif picture by kempite

For a detailed look at signs to look for on election night and poll closing times, visit White House 2012’s Election Night Guide

Below the poll closing times you will find a White House 2012 timeline which includes when each state will probably be projected for Governor Romney or President Obama and it also provides an estimated running total of the Electoral College that each candidate probably will have at the top and bottom of each hour.

Bookmark and Share

NY Daily News Endorsement of Romney is a Clear Sign that Obama’s Base Has Eroded

   “The presidential imperative of the times is to energize the economy and get  deficits under control to empower the working and middle classes to again enjoy  the fruits of an ascendant America. So The News is compelled to stand with Romney.”

Bookmark and Share   And with that, the traditionally liberal oriented Daily News which endorsed Barack Obama in 2008, endorsed Mitt Romney for President in 2012.

The endorsement is probably meaningless in terms of its effect on the final result in the election, especially the expected result in New York City which The Daily News covers. Few if any committed voters in the New York tri-state area will be changing their minds based upon this endorsement.  First of all, millions of people in this area are homeless, or without power and busy throwing their belongings in to garbage bags and dragging them to the curb as they try to salvage their flooded homes.  So many of them are not seeing or hearing about the endorsement and those that might, probably won’t be convinced to change their minds because of it.   But while the endorsement may not make a difference, it is still an important verdict.    It is further evidence of a national sentiment which is not being accurately measured in most state and national polls.

Polls which are basing their results on the 2008 turnout models are giving President Obama an overwhelming and undue edge by assuming that voters are as excited by and as enthusiastic with Barack Obama as they were in 2008.  That model does not accurately gauge the sentiments of voters who four years later are disappointed by Barack Obama and as seen in the opinion of the liberal editorial board of the Daily News, that disappointment even exists among the President’s base.

Ultimately, an incumbent can not run away from their record.  President Obama has done his very best to run away and hide from it, but like his own shadow, he has not been able to distance himself from it.  And it is that record which The Daily News based its decision on.

The Daily News dedicated more than half of their editorial outlining the failures in President Obama’s record, including his two centerpiece legislative agenda items… the economic stimulus packages and Obamacare.  And when it comes to the promised hope and change that Barack Obama rode to victory in 2008, The Daily News points out that very little changed and hope under Barack Obama has become a distant memory.  This point is made most apparent in their describing the process that Obama used to pass healthcare reform as a partisan mess.

The Daily News put it this way;

“R.I.P. and never to be resurrected — Obama’s promised bipartisanship.”

Meanwhile, the editorial board of the News did not base their decision entirely upon a desire to vote against Barack Obama.  In their editrorial they offered numerous reasons to vote for Mitt Romney.  They write;

“Critically, he has tailored his policies to create jobs, jobs, jobs.

The centerpieces of Romney’s plan call for spending restraint and rewriting  the Internal Revenue code to lower rates by 20%. He would make up much of the  lost revenue by eliminating deductions and loopholes that have made the tax  system a thicket of strangling complexities. On its own, paring the personal and  corporate rules to the basics would catalyze business and consumer spending.”

The endorsement goes on to praise Romney for his energy plan, Medicare proposals, immigration strategy.  In other words, even The Daily News sees Romney as candidate solid enough to vote for and not as a protest vote against Barack Obama.

No, the Daily News endorsement won’t change the minds of many voters and possibly not even any voters at all.  But with two days to go till the election, it doesn’t matter.  As demonstrated by the liberal Daily News, even the President’s base is finding it hard to honestly say that the last four years have been a success and they finding it even harder to say that another four years of the same will be any more succesful.   Most moderates, independents, Libertarians, Republicans and conservative have known that for quite some time now.  But it is becoming more and more obvious that even many Democrats and liberals are accepting that.  Such is not a recipe for victory for Barack Obama.  It is a winning formula for Mitt Romney

The polls are not picking up on those conclusions.  Instead the liberal hacks and leftist manipulators of numbers like Nate Silver over a the New York Times are trying to convince us that Mitt Romney has about an only 20% chance of winning.  If they truly believe that, than they are far less intelligent than I have until now known liberals to be.

More realistic indications of the national sentiment are reflected by those like Michael Barone, one of the most prominent and less partisan political analysts in the nation.  Barone projects a Romney win in the Electoral College with 315 electoral votes.   White House 2012’s own projection is close to Barone’s, with two exceptions.  While Barone projects Romney will take Pennsylvania and lose Nevada, White House 2012 believes Romney will take Nevada but lose Pennsylvania.  We will defer to Barone’s expertise on the issue but a more likely outcome is that the Romney-Ryan ticket will win neither Pennsylvania or Nevada.  But fear not.  Such a result would still produce a Romney victory in the Electoral College with 295 electors. Of course if this is the landslide that both Michael Barone and White House believe we are headed towards, Governor Romney could win both and seal the deal with a 321 to 217 Electoral College win.

Either way, the writing is on the wall.  The momentum remains behind Mitt Romney in these closing days of the campaign and as President Obama continues to wreak of desperation on the campaign trail, a cool and confident Mitt Romney is seeming more and more and presidential on the campaign trail as he continues to win over over undecided voters and energize his base.

So while The Daily News endorsement of Mitt Romney will not change the outcome of the election, it confirms that there exists a negative sentiment of President Obama that has even spilled over to liberal partisans who despite trying quite hard to find any excuse to support their ideological standardbearer, can’t find any.

Bookmark and Share

Critical Reminders Before You Vote

In a society that offers a 24/7/365 news cycle, four years is a long time. Indeed, for most of us, Obama’s first term has been an eternity. Before Tuesday’s epic election, all citizens should take some time and consider carefully the vote they will cast. With that in mind, and in hopes of sparking your memory, let’s take a quick trip down memory lane. Here are a few things that happened during Obama’s first term.

Let’s start where Obama started — healthcare. Remember the dirty deeds involved with the passage of Obamacare? It was truly a low in American politics. There was the Corn-husker Kickback. There was liberal demi-god, Dennis Kucinich, basically saying — even though I’m against it, I’m for it. Of course, political favors will change even a demi-god’s mind. The late Arlen Spector claimed he was promised increased political clout for his vote but after providing it, he got shafted. Think about that for a minute. Spector was a Republican that jumped to the Democrats. He was a turncoat. Yet once the liberals got his vote, they slit his throat. That’s how dirty this deal got.

Do you recall the stupid sales pitch that Obama-care made fiscal sense? The math wizards used 10 years of revenues versus just six years of expenses for that dandy. How about San Fran Nan’s insightful nugget about how Obama-care had to be passed before the people can see what’s in it? As if it was a present waiting under the tree. Crafty one, she is. Little did we know the pretty paper and ribbon was hiding incomparable tax hikes and bureaucratic death panels. Is it starting to come back you?

The Obamacare circus was an insanely partisan environment. Not one Republican in the Senate voted for it. The House of Representatives has had 33 votes to repeal it. The citizenry was so rip-shit when it passed, that numerous Democrats that supported the bill were voted out during the mid-term elections of 2010. By the way, demi-god Denny got changed out too – he lost his seat at the table earlier this year.

But politicians aren’t the only thing that has changed—so has the price tag. Obamacare was originally said to be a $900 billion pursuit. The last analysis came in at over $2.6 trillion. Ultimately, it is a massively huge tax hike. But we have to have a massively huge tax hike because the $700 billion Obama stole from Medicare just isn’t enough to fund it.

Obamacare is a bad law rammed through by liberal-progressive zealots and it is filled with political poison. Consider that retiring Democrats, as if giving their last confession, have spoken out against it. So bad is Obama-care, unions and businesses that support Democrats demanded exemptions from it. Which, of course, they were given because you can’t jeopardize those campaign contributions, now can you? Obamacare has forced businesses to stop hiring and halt expansion. Numerous states have revolted against it because they are revolted by it. All of this is not anti-Obamacare spin. This is documented reality. In June, Chief Justice Roberts’ ruling basically told us that to rid ourselves of Obamacare, we must rid ourselves of Obama. Well, that time has arrived.

But there are many more sweet memories to cherish from Obama’s first term. It’s well known that Obama has violated the constitution numerous times. Legal scholars have been crying foul almost from his inauguration day. He stands at the podium and talks of love of country but undermines or ignores his constitutional responsibilities. His two-faced behavior was never more evident than when, after blathering on and on about his grave concerns regarding the law, Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). As a reminder, this law allows the president, on just his say, to target American citizens for detention and hold them indefinitely or to actually have them killed. Incidentally, Obama signed this law under cover of New Year’s eve and a holiday. Political cowardice? You tell me.

This is a president that has made illegal appointments during congressional recess, granted amnesty to illegal immigrants and has directed the DOJ not to enforce laws on the books. If you do your research, you will find that some scholars rate George Bush’s constitutional behavior as quite poor. You will also find that others feel Obama’s record is worse. Combine these two presidential terms and we have twelve years of presidential government that routinely violates the constitution. If nothing else, Obama needs to be fired to send the message to future presidents that this will not stand. Dictators and tyrants be warned. The citizens have had enough of constitutional violations, unresponsive government and political corruption.

And speaking of corruption—we have Solyndra, Energy Conversion Devices, Raser Technologies and numerous other “green” businesses that have put us in the red. Obama gave political friends truck loads of cash that has ended in hundreds of billions in losses to American tax payers. There is also the on-going Delphi Pension scandal where, as part of the auto bailout, non-union workers lost huge chunks of their pensions while the pensions of union workers went untouched. Does Obama plays favorites?

And some of his favorites are dangerous. He grants government access to individuals and organizations that have been determined by a court of law to support terrorism. The propaganda press hides it from us. But it is true. What is also true is that scandals involving money and political favoritism are one thing. Scandals that result in the deaths of Americans are something else.

Operation Fast and Furious cost Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry his life. And the killing of ICE Special Agent Jaime Zapata is also suspected to be the result of a Fast and Furious gun. This scandal remains unresolved because the supreme ruler claimed executive privilege to stop the investigation. Could it have reached him? It seems likely. And of course we have the Benghazi consulate attack.

There were four Americans killed in Libya on September 11th when the US consulate was attacked by men armed with guns, rocket propelled grenades and mortars. These details were included in the very first news reports. Yet, instead of standing tall and assuming responsibility as a real leader would, Obama shunned accountability. He misled the American people by claiming the assault was the result of disgruntled protestors upset by an insignificant and amateurish anti-Muslim video.

The details continue to trickle in but to date we know the administration knew almost from the start that the attack was preplanned. We know that personnel within the consulate sent numerous requests for additional protection well in advance of the attack. All of these requests were denied. We also know some security personnel, as the attack was unfolding, were inexplicably ordered to stand down. They didn’t. They fought and ultimately gave their lives to protect others. Meanwhile, tucked safely away in Washington, Obama and his administration have displayed shameful behavior. Clearly, if Obama intentionally misled the public he should be fired. And if you negate malicious intent, then the incompetence displayed by Obama to protect Americans are the grounds for his dismissal.

But there are other gems that should be considered before you vote. For instance, the country’s credit rating was down-graded under Obama’s watch. The first and only time this has occurred. Recall the debt ceiling battles when House Speaker John Boehner said an agreement was reached but then fell apart because Obama moved the goal posts. And even after changing the game, it was Obama that walked from the table, like a spoiled child taking his ball and running home.

Obama has proven himself to be among the most, if not the most, anti-business president in the history of the country. Statements like you didn’t build that and the economy is doing fine are more demonstrative of his disdain for business and capitalism than they are verbal miscues.

It is no secret that the supreme ruler has decided that he—not private industry—should determine America’s energy future. He has created a militaristic EPA that takes more pride in shutting down power plants than working to plan out a realistic future for America. Contrary to his debate lies, he has severely restricted oil permits for drilling. He also rejected the Keystone pipeline. His “green” agenda has closed hundreds of coal plants. This has forced t he price of energy up but worse, it has destroyed the lives of thousands of citizens that rely on the coal industry. And as you know, when plants and coal mines close the restaurants, stores and other small businesses supported by them start to suffer. It is a Domino Effect that can destroy towns. West Virginia in particular has been hammered mercilessly. The pain within West Virginia is so acute and the bitterness is so severe they gave almost half of their Democratic primary votes to a convicted criminal rather than Obama. Hopefully, on November 6th, with your help, they will see a light at the end of a very dark tunnel.

But his wrath is not just directed at oil and coal. Any business is fair game. Recall the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) brought suit against Boeing because it wanted to build a “non-union” factory in South Carolina. It is just coincidence that after Boeing gave a machinists union a new four-year contract extension the NLRB dropped the case? Gibson Guitar Corp., a guitar manufacturer owned by a Republican contributor, was targeted, raided and its assets confiscated. After months of legal hearings and business interruption, the case was dropped. Gibson was fined $350,000 big ones and spent some $2 million defending itself. Who knows how much money they lost in sales. Lawsuits against businesses and states are a regular tactic used by Obama to get his way. You can look all this up.

His goal is to grow government, not business. His goal is to expand entitlements, not the American economy. He bad mouths the rich implying they all cheated to make their money. He is a classic tax and spend guy that will fund anything with other people’s money as long as it buys him a vote. His approach to leveling the playing field is not to raise people up. Rather, it is to force people down. Romney promotes the idea that he wants to help make everyone rich. Obama seeks a level playing field where everyone is poor. His spread the wealth philosophy is really spread the pain.

Every budget year credited to Obama has had a $1 trillion deficit. That is a staggering and horrifying situation. Try to name anyone working anywhere in any field that would retain his or her job after spending $1 trillion more than was brought in. Obama has done it year after year after year. Obama submitted a 2012 budget and it was rejected 97-0 in the Democrat-controlled Senate. In April, a proposal based upon an Obama 2013 budget plan lost in the House 414-0. His spending is out of control. Just for kicks, inform the government you can’t pay your taxes because you over-spent last year and see how it responds. And adding $6 trillion to the federal deficit in just one presidential term is an insult to each and every American citizen that will have to pay it back. And their kids. And their grandkids. And their great-grandkids.

But he cares not. American citizens are not his priority. But because we can stop him from meeting his priorities, he hides his socialist agenda as best he can. He spins stories and tells partial truths because if most of America knew what he was really up to, he would be out of a job faster than a West Virginia coal worker. And don’t think he doesn’t have an agenda. Remember, he got caught with an open-mic promising Russia “more flexibility” after he wins re-election. Ask yourself — if you have the courage — what else might he do after re-election? Another open mic incident let us know he true feelings toward Benjamin Netanyahu. Of course, we really didn’t need this dose of reality as he has stuck it to Israel regularly during his first term. But it’s nice to have it on record.

Let’s see, what else is there? Obama allowed Seal Team Six operational details to be leaked to try to glorify himself. Perhaps worse, he gave information to a movie crew about the bin-Laden operation so his hero narrative could be captured on film. Think of it, Obama’s daring and personal courage captured on celluloid. No doubt, because Hollywood worships him, it will be an Academy Award winner. But unearned admiration is nothing new for the anointed one. After being elected he earned a Nobel Peace Prize for — well, just because. Obama’s ego and pursuit of celebrity has few limits. His remembrance tribute at the passing of a real American hero, Neal Armstrong, included a picture of himself, not Armstrong.

But no matter how handsome the smile, or how “cool” the persona, it is a facade. Barack Obama is about himself, not the country. His first term and his re-election campaign have demonstrated that he is a small, petty and selfish man. It is now openly discussed within political circles that Obama is a square. He rarely meets with members in his own party and virtually never meets with Republicans. Even now, Democratic politicians across the country are livid because he refuses to support down-ballot campaigns. We know his jobs council hasn’t met since January 17th and that he skips out on his Presidential Daily Briefs (PDB). In September, Marc Thiessen at the Washington Post wrote, “Obama attended his PDB just 536 times — or 43.8 percent of the time. During 2011 and the first half of 2012, his attendance became even less frequent — falling to just over 38 percent.” Imagine going to your job, if you’re lucky enough to have one, and blowing off more than half your meetings. How long would you last? This man didn’t even take the time to prepare for his first debate. Is this the type of guy you want running the country?

What we need to remember about Obama before we vote is what we have learned about Obama during his first term. He is a skilled orator, a mediocre politician and a poor leader. He is a political provocateur, not a statesman. Please, do yourself, your loved ones, your neighbors and your country a favor, vote for Mitt Romney so we can toss the Obama administration on the trash heap of history where it belongs.

Follow I.M. Citizen at IMCitizen.net 

Unions Impeding New Jersey’s Recovery From Hurricane Sandy

   Bookmark and Share  This is why unions suck.  As nearly a million people remain without power in storm ravaged New Jersey,  utility crews from throughout the country who have generously traveled to the Garden State to provide much needed assistance in the state’s recovery effort, have been told by crews in New Jersey that they can’t help because they are not union employees.

This is precisely why unions have become only slightly more popular than cancer.

While they once had a very necessary purpose that rightly protected the rights of workers, an endless array of federal and state laws have long since been enacted to serve that purpose and in most cases do.  However, nowadays unions are no longer fulfilling a need to protects workers rights, today they are serving the greed and desires of union bosses and mindless dues paying members who are more concerned with hoarding overtime pay for themselves than they are with the well being of the public who provide their salaries and whom they are suppose to be serving

Supporting this claim is the fact that here in New Jersey a utility crew from Huntsville Utilities out of Alabama was headed toward Seaside Heights, New Jersey, one of the hardest hit coastal communities to pounded by Hurricane Sandy.  But before they got there, New Jersey utility crews turned them away because their workers were non-union, and the New Jersey crews are only allowing unionized crews to assist.

If there was ever a better example of just how detrimental contemporary unions have become to our nation, this is it folks.

People are suffering here in New Jersey and yet unions are refusing to speed up the process that could at least alleviate some of that suffering because the people who are willing to help are not union members.

President Obama promised to do everything to make sure that no red tape got in the way of recovery efforts.  Well now is his chance to deliver on that promise.  Unions are in his back pocket.  The two are tighter than thieves when it comes to soaking the public for all their worth.  So perhaps now is a good time for the President to use his influence and denounce the reprehensible and irresponsible conduct of unions.  Because right now  his union buddies are strangling the millions of people in New Jersey suffering in the wake of Hurricane Sandy with the same red tape he promised to cut through.

And by the way, Governor Christie isn’t off the hook on this either.  His big mouth is more than large enough to address this issue loudly and clearly, and if he doesn’t… there is no reason why someone else can’t be given the Republican nomination for Governor next year.

Bookmark and Share

Secretary of Business: Romney Takes Advantage of Obama’s Socialist Mentality

  Bookmark and Share   President Obama recently indicated that if he wins a second term he would appoint a Secretary of Business.  For anyone who understands the legitimate roles that government and the free markets have in our republic, the comment was one which should be enough to demonstrate to them that this President truly is a socialist.   And while Mitt Romney has avoided the use of such descriptions of the President, he did not let the President’s ignorant idea go unanswered.  On Thursday he released a sharp 30 second ad that hammered President Obama for his government-centric vision. (see ad below)

The ad may not play well with President Obama’s hand-out loving, government control seeking, dim-witted, liberal base but there is no need for it to.  Mitt Romney was right when he once told a group of campaign donors that his campaign will never be able to convince those people that he is the better candidate for them or the nation.  But what this ad does do is appeal to Romney’s base, the group of voters who in these closing days of the campaign he must make sure are energized to come out and vote for him and against the President.  This ad does that.  It gives freedom loving people who want less government control, another example of just how antithetical Barack Obama is to that goal.   But more important than even Romney’s base, are the independent voters whom this ad appeals to.

Independent voters tend to be open to good government but apprehensive about more government.   They tend to be more interested in government doing what it is suppose to do properly, than giving government more things to do incorrectly.  Romney’s new ad, entitled “Secretary of Business” helps drive home the point that Barack Obama does not share that view with them.

In addition to the new ad, Romney has also taken that message to the campaign trail where today in Roanoke, Va, Romney told the audience;

“We don’t need a Secretary of Business to understand business, we need a President who understands business “.

  He added “and I do”.

Bookmark and Share

Guide For Watching Election Night Results

   Bookmark and Share  The following is a schedule of the times that polls close in each of the states and the District of Columbia.  Keep in mind that many states are in between time zones.  This means that polls in certain parts of these states close an hour earlier than in other portions of each state.  However; the networks and their cable affiliates can not by law, officially call a state for any candidate until all the polls in that state have closed.  The times indicated here reflect the time when all polling sites in each state have officially closed.

In addition to these closing times, White House 2012 offers a timeline which includes when each state will probably be projected for Governor Romney or President Obama and it also provides an estimated running total of the Electoral College vote that each candidate probably will have at the top and bottom of each hour.

Throughout the day, the networks will be conducting exit polls.  By law they cannot reveal what the results of these polls are.  However; once voting has stopped, the networks can start using these exit polls to make their projections.  If there exit polls did not show a clear a winner in a state, that state may not be called right away.  In this election, expect that to be the case in several states.  The following timeline offers a prediction of approximately when each state will be called.

Of course there is a very good possibility that in several states, a combination of irregularities and extremely close vote totals could prohibit them from being projected for hours, days or even weeks.  If the race is actually as close  as we are being led to believe by the mainstream media in places like Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Virginia, Wisconsin, Florida, and Ohio, it could be a long night.  However, Wh12 believes that most states will be called promptly and that the longest delay we may see in the official projection of a state will be an hour or an hour and a half.  And the two most likely states for such a delay are Ohio and Wisconsin, where the election could actually be as tight as predicted.

7:00 pm Eastern Standard Time:

At 7:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, the first 6 states and 60 electoral votes in the presidential election could be called.  Unless there is a surprise result in the works, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, and South Carolina should quickly be called for Governor Romney, while Vermont is quickly called for President Obama.   Media outlets probably will not be quick to call Virginia.  That may not happen till some time around 8:00 pm.  But if the official returns show Romney with a lead in certain key districts within Virginia and their exit polls showed similar trends throughout the state, Virginia could be called relatively quickly.  If it is, expect it to be  a very good sign of who will win the election.  An early projection for one candidate or the other here would be a good sign that whoever won is running much stronger than expected, not just in Virginia but nationally as well.

Obama 3 / Romney 44+ (not including Virginia)

Possible Surprises:

If Virginia is called for Romney within a half an hour of 7:00, it would be a clear indication that the race in Virginia was not quite as close as some expected and a sign of just how inaccurate polling has been due to their use of 2008 turnout models, a decision which significantly underestimates Romney’s strength.  It would also be a sure sign that Romney is probably doing far better nationally than most analysts thought possible.

7:30 pm Eastern Standard Time:

On the half hour, polls close in North Carolina, West Virginia and Ohio.  Expect West Virginia to be called for Romney about one second after the polls close there.  North Carolina may take a little longer.  If it is called before 8:00 pm, that will be another sign of a strong night for Romney.

Obama 3 / Romney 49+ (not including Virginia, North Carolina, and Ohio)

The Ohio Factor:

Based upon White House 2012’s analysis and projection, if Romney wins Ohio he is certain to win the election.  If he does not win Ohio, Romney still has a good chance pulling a victory off.  That said, unless exit polling from throughout the day indicates a much stronger than expected show of support for one candidate or the other, the networks are not likely to call Ohio for at least an hour.

If Ohio is called early for Obama, it could be a sign that Romney is underperforming.  It would also indicate that Obama may be benefiting from a last minute surge that could possibly play out in other battleground states in the region, such as Iowa and Wisconsin.

If Ohio is called early for Romney, start playing Hail to the Chief for him.  Not only would a quick call of Ohio for Romney  mean that he is running much stronger than he was expected in Ohio but nationally as well.  Furthermore, according to the White House 2012 analysis, President Obama can not win the Electoral College vote without Ohio in his column.

8:00 pm Eastern Standard Time:

At 8:00 pm Eastern Standard Time, the results of 17 states and 172 electoral votes are to be determined.  The only surprises that could possibly occur within this set of poll closings exists in Florida, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania.

Obama 99 / Romney 92+ (not including Virginia, North Carolina, and Ohio)

Pennsylvania:

In Pennsylvania the surprise could be that it is not called for President Obama within a half hour of 8:00 pm.  If it is not called for the President by 8:30 pm, it will be another sign that the election is much tighter than anticipated in a state that should be solidly behind the President, and that he is in trouble.  While Pennsylvania should ultimately go for President Obama, in the small outside chance that it goes to Romney, the election will over and so is the presidency of Barack Obama. Given the certainty in how the bulk of other states are going, it is impossible for Barack Obama to reach the 270 electoral votes he needs to win reelection without Pennsylvania’s 20 electoral votes in his column.

New Hampshire:

New Hampshire is suppose to be close and while most polls give President Obama a slim lead there, White House 2012 is confident that these polls are over-estimating Democrat turnout by incorporating the 2008 turnout models into their 2012 polls.  This is a main reason why WH12 believes Governor Romney will ultimately win New Hampshire.  The only surprise here will be whether or not New Hampshire is called quickly for Romney.  If Romney is having a better night than expected, New Hampshire will be called for him within 15 or 20 minutes.  If President Obama happens to win New Hampshire, all this will actually mean is that Romney may not win with the electoral landslide that WH12 anticipates.

Florida:

Here again, an early call for either Romney or Obama will be quite telling.  In addition to proving the race is not as close as we have been led to believe, if it goes to Barack Obama, Mitt Romney is in trouble.  If it goes to Romney, the night is not over, but the fat lady will be warming her vocal chords up to offer a a final musical tribute the Obama years.  The only real surprise in Florida will be whether or not it is called for Romney early.  If  Florida is called for Romney within a half hour of polls closing, consider that to be further indication of Romney  outperforming  expectations nationally and a good sign that he will be President-Elect before the night is over.

Late Call in North Carolina and Virginia:

During the  8 o’clock hour, if North Carolina and Virginia had not yet be called for Romney, they will be.  If Florida, Ohio and New Hampshire still have not been projected for either candidate, late projections for Romney in Virginia and North Carolina would bring his total electoral vote count to 120.  At this same point, President Obama will have 99 electoral votes.

Obama 99 / Romney 120+ (not counting Florida, New Hampshire and Ohio)

8:30 pm Eastern Standard Time:

No race here.  Arkansas should be called for the Romney-Ryan ticket before the clock hits 8:31 pm.

Obama 99 / Romney 126+ (not counting Florida, New Hampshire and Ohio)

Late Calls from Ohio, New Hampshire

Somewhere between 8:30 and 9:00 pm, unless exit polls indicated that Romney was running much stronger than expected and the networks already called them, Ohio and New Hampshire should be projected for Romney.

That would leave us with;

Obama 99 / Romney 148+  (not counting Florida)

9:00 pm Eastern Standard Time:

**Romney declared the winner sometime during this hour**

13 states and 153 electoral votes will be determined during the 9 o’clock hour.  60 of them are likely to go to president Obama and at least 83 will be won by Mitt Romney.

Obama 159 / Romney 231 (not including Florida and Wisconsin)

Watch Out For Wisconsin and Michigan:

Both of these states have long been considered solid blue states for the Obama-Biden ticket but in the closing days of the campaign they have become much closer than Democrats had anticipated.  White House 2012 believes Wisconsin will be won by Romney.  The big surprise here is may be whether or not it is called for Romney quickly.  A quick decision in Wisconsin for Romney’s will most likely mean that if he has not yet been declared the President-Elect, he will be within the hour.  If Barack Obama wins Wisconsin this may only mean that Romney is not winning a landslide victory in the Electoral College, but he will still be on track to winning.

Michigan should not be much of a contest.  While Romney may poll far better than most polls indicate, President Obama should still pull this state out in his favor.  Again a late call of Michigan for him means the election is too close for comfort for President Obama and that a sign that he is underperforming nationally.  A quick call of Michigan for President Obama simply means that Romney is still on target to reach the 270 votes he need to win the presidency.  If Michigan happens to be called for Mitt Romney, he will officially become the President-Elect.

Late Call in Florida and Wisconsin Puts Romney Over the Top

Florida may not be called until some point during the 9 o’clock hour, probably towards the top of the hour.  Exit polls may convince networks that his lead is strong enough to allow the networks to project Florida before 9:00 pm but if they haven’t they will now, and that will give Romney the 260 electors votes to the President’s 159.

At some point during this hour, Wisconsin will also be called.  If it goes to Romney as WH12 projects, that will give Romney 270 electoral votes and make him the President-Elect.

Obama 159 / Romney 270

10:00 pm Eastern Standard Time:

Montana and Utah will be called quickly for Mitt Romney.  Nevada and Iowa may take a little longer to  but at some point during the 10 o’clock hour, expect all 4 states to go to Mitt and for Romney.

Obama 159 /Romney 291

11:00 pm Eastern Standard Time:

No surprises here and each state will be called quickly.

Obama 237 / Romney 298

12:00 am Eastern Standard Time

Alaska which Barack Obama has never been competitive in, goes for Romney and is called as soon as the polls close.

Obama 233 / Romney 305

Photobucket

 White House 2012’s final Electoral College Projection

For a deatiled analysis visit here.

Bookmark and Share

New Emails Reveal That The White House Knew Far More About Benghazi Than They Admit

   Bookmark and Share  Within at least two and a half hours  of the attack that killed our Ambassador and three other Americans at our consulate in Benghazi, Libya, the White House was told that Ansar al-Shariat, an Al Qaeda linked group of militants were taking credit for the attack.

No more than 2 and half hours after the attack, an email  identifying the group claiming responsibility for the terrorist attack was sent to  several locations, including The White House Situation Room, where President Obama was being made aware of the details as the tragedy unfolded.

According to Reuters news agency, the emails specifically mention that the Libyan group called Ansar al-Sharia had taken responsibility for the attacks. In addition to these emails being dispatched by the State Department’s Operations Center the White House Situation Room, they also went to offices in the Pentagon, within the intelligence community, and the FBI,.  All on the afternoon of September 11.

Below you will find copies of the actual missives. The names of the individual recipients of the emails are redacted.

The first email, contains the  subject line of “U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack,”.  It was sent at 4:05 PM, approximately 25 minutes after the attack began.  It describes an assault on the compound by 20 armed people.

Click on the image for a larger version

The second email was sent at 4:54 PM and it states that the shooting has stopped and the compound was cleared.  It further states that a response team was “onsite attempting to locate COM personnel.”

Click on the image for a larger version

The third email, was sent at 6:07 p.m. Washington time and had the subject line: “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack.”

Click on the image for a larger version

These documents were released from government sources who are reportedly not connected to any U.S. spy agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity.  So as is the case with most everything we have been learning about the events leading up to and following the attacks in Benghazi, the facts contained in these documents were not released by the White House.  Nevertheless, these facts do contradict just about everything the White House has been saying about what they knew and when they knew it.  And it especially points to attempts by the White House to cover-up the fact that this was terrorist attack, a description which both the Obama White House and Obama reelection team refused to admit to out of fear that it would be get in the way of the President’s reelection chances.

These emails now cast more doubt on the Administration then ever before.  They reveal that the White House knew that a terrorist group claimed responsibility for the attack even though they spent more than two weeks claiming that the attack was the result of a spontaneous protest over a YouTube video that was placed online back in July.  This now makes it hard for anyone not to be suspicious of what else the White House and the President knew.  So far, both the President and Vice President claimed to have not known of two months worth of warnings from Ambassador Chris Stevens about al Qaeda gaining strength in Eastern Libya and of his requests for additional security.  If true there is scandal in just the fact that this information never made its way to the Commander-in-Chief.  If it is not true, and he did know of those developments, than our Commander-In-Chief is absolutely incompetent and directly responsibly for allowing the events that killed Ambassador Stevens and three others to have gotten as far as they did.  But no matter how you look at it, right now there is either one scandal or two.  Are we left with a scandal dealing with an intolerable level of incompetence that killed our Americans in Benghazi, or are we left with one scandal regarding incompetence and another scandal regarding an attempt to cover-up the first scandal?

Bookmark and Share

Is Barack Obama Really a Good Friend to Israel? See the Video

   Bookmark and Share   While Mitt Romney did a good job in the last presidential debate, there was one thing I really think he was remiss in not pointing out.  When the topic of Israel came up, the Governor should have mentioned the unprecedented proposal that President Obama made in 2011 when he told Israel to adopt its 1967 borders. (See the video at the bottom of this post)

With all the attempts by President Obama to claim that he has established the strongest relationship with Israel of any previous President, there are many facts which contradict that claim. Between his refusal to ever visit Israel during his entire term in office, his recent refusal to meet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu while Bebe was visiting the U.S. last month, and a history of Obama snubbing the Prime Minister on many occasions prior to that, it is clear that the American relationship with Israel is not as warm and close as it has been under previous presidents. But one of the most egregious acts against Israel committed by President Obama was his attempt to have Israel return to its indefensible 1967 borders.   It is a point which has not gotten the attention that it should in this election but for good reason, it must.

By trying to have Israel return it’s pre-1967 borders, President Obama was providing Arab states and the Palestinians with the ability to launch ground and missile attacks on the Jewish state with ease.  As explained in this video, a return to those borders would make it impossible for Israel to effectively defend itself against the enemies who surround them and have a great capacity to exploit added opportunities to launch ground and missile attacks.  Yet this is the position that Barack Obama proposed one of closest allies in the world to put themselves in.

During the last presidential debate, Mitt Romney had multiple chances to remind voters of this major Obama foreign policy initiative. And he should have.  At one point Romney reminded voters about Obama’s the apology tour to the Middle East he went on when first coming to office.  Governor Romney reminded us that while the President took the opportunity to fly to Egypt and to Saudi Arabia and to Turkey and Iraq, he skipped Israel, our closest friend in the region.  It was around then that Romney should have at some point pivoted to President Obama’s 1967 border proposal by adding that while he has apologized to audiences that consisted of our enemies, he has also asked our friends to make fatal concessions to our enemies.  In this case it was a concession that would have moved Israel closer to extinction.

Obama’s attempt to have Israel adopt indefensible borders is a major issue.  It is another sign of his bass ackwards policies.  Policies which seek to placate our enemies and offend our allies.  A policy that is more in the best interests of enemies than our own nation.

When it comes to the Middle East, Israel is the only nation in the region that the United States need not fear a terrorist attack from.  If it is not our only real friend in the Middle East, it is certainly our best.  For that reason alone, it should not have a so-called friend who makes it easier for Israel’s enemies to destroy them.  Yet that is a part of the Obama foreign policy which was not mentioned in any of the debates.  So I have prepared the following video to make the point that Mitt failed to and that others have forget to.

Bookmark and Share

Apology Tour: The New Romney Ad That Highlights Obama’s Bass Ackwards Foreign Policy

Bookmark and Share  In the wake of last night’s final presidential debate of the 2012 election cycle, Mitt Romney has released a new 30 second ad which powerfully explains why many people believe Barack Obama’s foreign policy priorities are as bass ackwards as his failed economic policies

In addition to making its obvious point about the President, the ad also goes a long way in reminding Jewish voters that Barack Obama is not exactly the close friend of Israel that he would like us to believe he is.  That is a critical message for Romney get across to Jewish voters in important battleground states such as Florida where the Jewish is significantly larger than it is in other states.

Bookmark and Share

Romney Stings Obama With “Apology Tour” Remark

During last night’s debate, Mitt Romney stung Obama when he stated that the president went on an apology tour and conveniently skipped Israel. You could tell immediately the comment hurt. And why wouldn’t it? It’s true. And as the cliche states — “the truth hurts.”

Attempting to ease the sting, Obama got a little bit uppity. He leaned in, elevated his voice and went into a denial and distort story about visiting Israel before he was the President of the United States. He rambled on, as he is prone to do, but ultimately skipped addressing the Israel slight or the numerous speeches he made about “America is bad and we’re sorry” during the apology tour.

Romney’s jab is significant because it showcases how Obama conducts his foreign policy — as an weakling.

Look at the Libya events that took place just last month. Obama and his administration spent numerous weeks stating the violence was sparked by an anti-Muhammad video and apologizing to the Middle East for it. During that time, not a word was mentioned about the concept of freedom of speech nor that Obama was intent on protecting it.

Authorities actually approached Google (the owner of You Tube) and requested they squash access to the video. Isn’t that censorship? Consider, too, that the video-maker was identified, detained, questioned and even forced to do the “perp-walk” in front of national media. All this because he made a video. But making amateurish videos is not against the law. Nor is criticism or making inflammatory remarks. Yet, as of today, more authority has come down upon our video-villain than on the militants that carried out the attack that killed four Americans.

And this is the problem with being an international weakling — you end up making America look bad by undermining our founding principles. The reality is those that hate us already see America as bad, depraved and evil. We are the Great Satan. Who would be so naive as to think that validating their outlook will change their minds? Erroneously acknowledge we are evil to those that portray us as evil and you re-enforce their outlook — you don’t alter it.

The sad reality is that Obama and his liberal-progressive, utopia-loving lunatics actually believe in the preposterous “we can all be friends” approach to foreign policy. And they’re so desperate to prove it correct that they have become blind to reality. As a result, when things go wrong they can’t blame the other party because that would be admitting we really can’t all be friends. This would invalidate their life view. So to perpetuate their adolescent outlook, they claim it must be something we did. In the case of Libya it is “that terrible video insulted people beyond their ability to be rational, that’s why they hurt us. Take away the video and we can still be friends.”

We just can’t make videos. Or openly critique Islam. Or call radical terrorists — radical terrorists. It is an immature and self-destructive outlook. America has a black president. It has a woman that runs the State Department. Americans believe in freedom of speech and equal rights. At the same time, there exist cultures in the world that shoot children for seeking an education, lock people in jail for bad-mouthing leaders and don’t allow women to drive. Yet, to the apologists, it is our values that create the problems of the world.

If you believe the Left, foreign policy was a feather in Obama’s cap. The “courageous” decision to kill Osama bin Laden and Obama’s “heroic” drone attacks were scenarios the Left could spin a narrative around as a reason for re-electing Obama. Better still, if the Right attacked his approach, the Left could counter by claiming apologies do work because Obama has kept us safe.

Unfortunately, the terror attack against the American consulate in Libya shows this narrative to be just another lie.

Do you think they will apologize?

Video — Some samples of Obama’s Apologies

Follow I.M. Citizen on Facebook or visit at IMCitizen.net 

The Last Presidential Debate: Obama Hit Mitt Hard But Romney Won (See The Full Debate Video and Transcript)

   Bookmark and Share   Without question, President Obama had a good night last night but he failed to achieve his goal of beating Mitt Romney by landing political punches that successfully painted Romney as a clueless, warmonger whom Americans can’t trust on the world stage  (See the transcript and video of the entire debate at the bottom of this post).

From the beginning it was clear that the two men had two entirely different demeanors.  President Obama began and ended the night with an aggressive, combative almost angry quality that was often sarcastic and condescending.  For his part, Romney was friendly, respectful and un-rattled by the President.  But most of all, while President Obama failed to essentially disqualify Romney and his foreign policy vision, Governor Romney again passed the presidential test and proved to the American people that he is prepared to take on the job of President.

President Obama tried his best to describe Romney as “always wrong”, and “all over the map” and at one point he even spoke to the Governor as if he were a child after launching in to this diatribe about Romney’s call for a stronger navy;

“You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military’s changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines.”

For Romney, while he spent most of the night demonstrating that he is quite informed on matters of foreign policy and proving that he has a vision for America’s role in the world, he never exhibited the type of bitter and arrogant behavior that was put on display by the President.  And in one of his strongest remarks of the night, Romney turned the attacks against him on to the President ;

“I can say this, that we’re talking about the Middle East and how to help the Middle East reject the kind of terrorism we’re seeing, and the rising tide of tumult and – and confusion. And – and attacking me is not an agenda. Attacking me is not talking about how we’re going to deal with the challenges that exist in the Middle East, and take advantage of the opportunity there, and stem the tide of this violence.”said Romney.

Overall, President Obama may have actually won last night’s debate on the basis of his ability to defend his own unravelling foreign policy by aggressively trying to put Romney on the defense throughout the night.  But Romney was actually less defensive than the President and held his own.   In doing so Romney made this debate a draw, which for a challenger to a sitting President is ultimately a win.

Many may not initially see it that that way though.  That includes Romney supporters, who may have been disappointed by the fact that Mitt Romney did not beat President Obama over the head with Benghazi.  But as I suggested in a post prior to the debate  any attempt to go after the President so aggressively on Benghazi  risked “the creation of a new narrative that will suggest that Romney took legitimate questions about the events surrounding Benghazi and exploited them by over-politicizing them in a desperate attempt to win the presidential election.  Such a narrative just two weeks before Election Day would produce irreversibly damaging results for the Romney-Ryan ticket and future headlines in the biased liberal media will deal more with their accusing Romney of attempting to exploit Benghazi than the facts that make Mitt Romney right to make Benghazi an issue”.

I added;

“So while the temptation to confront President Obama with the evidence and questions surrounding the obvious foreign policy and national security blunders behind Benghazi, Romney would probably be best advised to allude to these legitimate concerns in broader terms.”

It is clear that Governor Romney agreed and instead he used this debate as an opportunity to apply a strategy that targeted listeners of the debate who’s votes he needs to win in key battleground states such as Florida and Ohio.  This too was a point I predicted Romney would take in the post refered to above.  Romney applied this strategy by offering a solid defense of his position on the auto bailouts, a point Romney proved the President to be wrong about when he mischaracterizes Romney’s real position.   Romney’s decision to spend time explaining that domestic policy issue during a foreign policy debate was a clear attempt by Romney to address the swing voters among Ohio’s  auto workers.

Romney also appealed quite well to the relatively large Jewish vote in the battleground state of Florida.  In one exchange between the two men, Romney eloquently laid out  how much “daylight” President Obama created “between ourselves and Israel”.

All of this means that Governor Romney accomplished all that he really needed to last night.  Not only did he avoid making any gaffe’s, he demonstrated a clear knowledge and command of foreign policy issues.  He also conducted himself in a way that avoided any negative impressions among voters who watched the debate.  While President Obama may have turned off some voters with his small and petty style during the debate, Romney was  strong, confident and principled.

In the final analysis Romney needed to demonstrate that he is presidential and on equal  footing with President Obama and when all was said and done, he did just that.  That means that despite President Obama’s strong but condescending performance, Mitt Romney won.  Why?  Because President Obama failed to change few if any of the undecided minds that he needed to if he wants to win this election.  But Romney’s inoffensive performance added to his credibility as a candidate and it quite tactfully targeted the voters he needed to speak to last night.  And with the momentum behind Mitt, President Obama failed to turn this election around.

Click here for or a complete transcript of the debate.  See the full video of the debate below:

Bookmark and Share

Watch the Final Presidential Debate Live Online at White House 2012

This Live Stream has ended but you can see the entire debate and read a transcript and analysis of the debate here

 

Bookmark and Share  Here we go.  This is it! Tonight’s final presidential debate begins at 9:00 p.m. EST.  You can view it live online from Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida , here at white House 2012.

While Mitt Romney has a perfect opportunity to hammer the President over Benghazi and use it to demonstrate how his Administration has been conducting a failed foreign policy and dangerously incompetent national security and intelligence operation.  But Romney may not too aggressive on the issue of Benghazi for two reasons.  First he does not want to be seen as overly aggressive and as exploiting the tragedy for political purposes.  The other reason is that all Romney needs to do to win tonight’s debate is hold his own against the President.  That standard should force Romney to play it safe tonight.

But President Obama has to take an approach different from Romney’s.

President Obama needs to score a knockout blow on Romney and reverse the momentum that is currently propelling him ahead of the President in national polls and battleground states.  whether he can achieve that or not is unknown but also unlikely.  But it will certainly be fun to see the President try to knock Romney out on foreign policy while his own foreign policy is unraveling before our eyes.

Watch it LIVE here:

Bookmark and Share

Framing Tonight’s Foreign Policy Debate and the Unravelling Obama Foreign Policy

Bookmark and Share  To frame tonight’s final presidential debate, American Crossroads released a new video: “Not Optimal.”

The video juxtaposes President Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 against the current unrest in the Middle East.

Bookmark and Share

A Foregn Policy Question for President Obama Not Related to Benghazi

  Bookmark and SharePresident Obama will try tonight to paint Mitt Romney as a warmonger with no experience and who is consistently wrong.  But at some point during tonight’s foreign policy debate, I would like to see President Obama answer this following question;

After opposing the war in Iraq and calling it a “dumb war”, and after carrying out the Bush timeline in Iraq and seeing that war through to its conclusion, do you still consider it to have been a “dumb war” and given the current situation in the Middle East, do you think we would be better today  if Saddam Hussein was still in power?

The question is one that goes to the heart of Barack Obama’s foreign policy or lack thereof.  It is a policy that is adrift and lacking any meaningful purpose.  And the question I put forth is one which if answered honestly, should shed some light on the President’s willingness or unwillingness to confront our enemies if he were to be granted a second presidential term.

Bookmark and Share

%d bloggers like this: