Presidential Election: President Obama vs Mitt Romney

I suppose I will go out on a limb and make a prediction on the election. Just to make sure that I'm clear from the onset, I will be casting my vote for Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson. I made that case awhile back on this blog and nothing has changed for me on that. I don't believe that Romney or Obama are candidates who represent the sort of real change it's going to take to get our nation back on track from a fiscal standpoint or an international one. Gary Johnson is the type of leader we need. He is a candidate that is willing to talk about the issues facing our country in an adult manner. If Gary Johnson had been given just half the media attention the two mainstream candidates have been given and he had been in the debates, I am of the opinion that we would be looking at a real three way race. Instead, the Democrats and Republicans keep the power on lock down and the nation is worse off for it. 

That said and out of the way, I believe Mitt Romney will win the White House on Tuesday. I admit that I am not some political prognosticator and I've never been good at figuring out what polls and such mean. We've seen polling off time and time again over the past couple of decades and I feel like they could be off again this time as the dynamics of the country continue to change. People are more cynical about politics these days and the ability to reach people to do polling is getting more difficult, especially when trying to identify who will actually go out and vote. 

An example of this is the recall election for governor from a couple years back in Wisconsin. The polling had it a virtual tie, but the final vote was a 7 point win for Scott Walker. That's some major league fucking fudging up right there. 

I posted this (below) on an online forum today and this is all my "reading the tea leaves", and comes from no real experience in doing so. Take what I say with a grain of salt, as I'm simply interested in politics and the dynamics of the race.

The polls, however, ARE showing it close in Florida, yet nobody is campaigning significantly there at this time, but they are going nuts in Ohio. The RCP (realclearpolitics.com) average in Florida is closer than Ohio and Wisconsin, so it seems like THAT would be the battleground state that Romney would be hammering on, but again, it's not.

The time they are spending in Ohio and Wisconsin really says that those two states are in play more than Florida. Follow me.....Florida is a 1.4 on the RCP to Romney. Wisconsin is a 5.4 for Obama and Ohio is a 2.9 for Obama. From looking at the polls, it doesn't seem to make sense that Obama would be making 3 stops in Wisconsin today. If he really had it locked down, why is he there just as many times today as he was in Ohio?

Given that, it's likely that those two states hold the keys (Wisconsin/Ohio) and are really in play, despite the polling suggesting that Obama has a lead. A bigger lead in those two states than in Florida, yet Obama is doing most of his campaigning there. If Romney can't win the White House without Florida, and it's really just a 1.4 lead for him, it seems like he'd be spending a lot time there, but he's not.

There has to be something that is running that dynamic and I'm interested in trying to figure out what that is. Do they have internal numbers that are showing the reality of the race and the public polling is off? Hell, RCP has Virginia a dead heat, yet there is little action there.

You can also look at where they are spending their money and see how it could play into what the campaigns are seeing. Romney is spending roughly 5.5 million on ads in Ohio and about 5 million in Florida. Obama is spending almost 6.5 in Florida and 9.5 in Ohio. The highest spending PAC for Obama is outspending the highest PAC for Romney in Ohio. PACs for either campaign are not spending much in Florida at all. In Wisconsin, Obama is spending over 3 million and Romney is spending 1.5. By virtue of the spending, it looks like it's all about Ohio for Obama, as he is spending nearly double what Romney is in the state.

Romney is also making trips to New Hampshire and Pennsylvania. He's making trips to Democrat leaning states when Florida and Virginia tied? Either Romney is sunk and trying to throw "hail mary's" all over the place, or he is sitting comfortably in those two states.

Can you see how that is sort of strange? Are the polls off like they were for the Wisconsin recall? The polling there had it a dead heat, but Walker won by 7 points.

In watching a couple of speeches today, Obama has been wildly negative on Romney, while Romney is talking about getting to work on November 7th. Obama's crowds are very small compared to '08 and Romney is getting a lot of people out. Definitely anecdotal, but just part of "reading the tea leaves" that I find interesting.

UPDATE: Romney is going to Virginia twice on Monday and Bill Clinton will be in Pennsylvania for 4 rallies. Obama will be in Virginia and Ohio. It's probable that the candidates are going to hit as many stops as possible and we will likely see each of them stop in as many as 3 states on Monday. 

With all that in writing, I will go a bit further and predict the battleground states and the electoral margin. I think Romney will win Ohio, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Iowa, Colorado, and pick up a big upset in Wisconsin. I believe Obama will take Nevada, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Minnesota. 

Electoral Count? Romney 295 Obama 243

As a reminder, please do not take this as any sort of endorsement of Mitt Romney from my end. I just thought it would be fun to make a prediction. No matter how it turns out, it will give me a topic next week! 

Gary Johnson for President in 2012!

I haven't written anything for this blog in about two months. That's an incredibly long stretch for me, and since I have my work week done, I've decided to get in some writing. 

I've pretty much been a Republican my entire adult life. I voted for Bush 1 over Clinton. I voted for Bob Dole. Hell, I voted for W.....twice! But enough was enough. I started checking myself and thought about my beliefs back in 2007. When I dissected how I thought and felt about the issues in a real and personal way, I started to find out that I didn't really buy into what the GOP was selling, especially on a social level. I still couldn't bring myself to vote for Obama, so I didn't vote at all. John McCain had gone from a middle of the road Republican to a right winger, just to get the nomination over Mitt Romney. This time, Romney has done the same thing and swung even more to the right. I still don't identify with the Democrats, and after seeing how Obama pretty much continued the Bush Administrations policies in many areas, I knew I was losing my political identity. 

But, in the last four or five weeks I have started seeing some articles about Gary Johnson. I took a couple of those "What are you?" political tests and saw that I fall in line, largely, with a libertarian point of view. I have decided to embrace that, while maintaining my preference to not strictly align myself with any party. It's a bit liberating to not have to defend the indefensible, which is the monopolized system we are currently in. 

Learn More About Gary Johnson!

You see, Gary Johnson gives me someone to vote FOR and not against. I don't see voting for the "lesser of two evils" as some sort of triumph in American politics. I see it as a disaster in the making, where politicians can pay lip service to the mainstream American as they gain power and wealth by setting our system up to cater to the wealthy and multi-national corporations. Why would a politician really address your concerns? You don't make large contributions. You don't throw fund raisers. You just vote. And if you only have one other choice, you just have to cling to the party you ALWAYS support as if this is one big sports rivalry like the Yankees and Red Sox. A two party system is agreeable to the Dems and GOP, because even if they lose an election, they are only one cycle from regaining power. They only have to fight the "other side" and they don't have to contend with other ideas. We have become a country of liberals and conservatives instead of a country of Americans. We have sold out the idea of America to belong to a club that we refuse to disagree with because we have invested in it on a prideful and psychological level. It's sad. 

With that, I am proud to say that I am going to vote for Gary Johnson. Johnson has more governing experience than either of the two major candidates and he has actually started a business from the ground up. When Johnson was in college at the University of New Mexico, he earned money by being a handyman. He went door to door searching out work opportunities. Over the years, he was able to grow from a one man show into a business that was worth $10 million! He didn't get that money from his daddy,and yeah, he built that! 

Johnson got into politics in 1994 for the first time and ran for governor in New Mexico. That's a really high place to begin for a guy just starting out in politics. Against conventional advice, he started his campaign using some of his own money and ran as a Republican. Mind you, New Mexico is a largely Democratic state, so not very many people gave him a chance to even get the party nomination, let alone to actually win the governorship. As these sorts of stories can go, he defied the odds and won the nomination and then the general election! Why did he win? Because he spoke to the ordinary citizen. He was (and is) a proponent of small, less intrusive government. He is a leader in the fight for personal freedom and he is a man of his word. True to showing that he wasn't bought and sold by any party, Johnson used his veto power to shoot down any piece of legislation that wasn't necessary to the state or the government. Wasteful spending was eliminated. 

When he ran for re-election, he simply campaigned on the success and fulfillment of his word from his first term. It was expected that he would have a tough time winning a second term, as he was running against a Hispanic opponent. The pundits proved how out of touch they can be by simplifying people down to being robots who are only capable of voting for "their own kind". Johnson won easily and continued to govern as he had before. He made the availability of school vouchers and the elimination of war on drugs central pieces of his agenda and he also opposed the building of private prisons. An industry that should give EVERY American pause about how we create and enforce laws. 

Meet Gary Johnson!

Gary Johnson is the real deal. He has a record that is one of success, met expectations, and kept promises. He tried to run for the Republican nomination, but was largely ignored by the GOP and the press. The party abandoned him, so he went about his business and embraced the Libertarian Party, much the way Ron Paul has in the past. Johnson and the Libertarian Party have worked hard and he is now on the ballot in 47 states. The Republicans have tried to block him from getting on the ballot in three other states, but Johnson is fighting those efforts. It's not likely that you will see him in the presidential debates, even though he meets all the criteria but one. He isn't at 15% in the polling. He may have never reached that point anyhow, but it's impossible to know because he isn't listed on polls and the pollsters only focus on Mitt Romney, Barack Obama, or "other". It's a bit of a scam. It is specifically designed to keep anyone except Republicans and Democrats out of the conversation about our nation.  

Is Mitt Romney Scared Of Gary Johnson?

I've been told I'm wasting my vote and I beg to differ in a big way! How is my vote wasted if I am voting for the person I believe in and who most reflects my values? Wouldn't I truly be wasting the right to vote if I simply cast my ballot for the "lesser of two evils"? Wouldn't I have to consider myself intellectually dishonest if I only voted for a person because of some sort of misguided allegiance to a party that doesn't have the countries best interest at heart? 

Gary Johnson is the only candidate willing to be an adult. To be open and honest about the state of the country and what needs to be done to start us going in the right direction again. Here is a rundown of a few of Johnson's beliefs and proposals for restoring America;

1) simplify the tax system, abolish the IRS

2) a strong defense that isn't into nation building and forcing our political will on others

3) he opposes censorship

4) he opposes the War On Drugs as it is currently

5) he wants to cut the federal budget by 43%, and allow states to get involved with Medicare to suit their citizens better

6)  he advocates state's rights

7) he is for balancing the budget immediately

8) he believes the Federal Reserve is devaluing our currency and wants to eliminate it

9) he supports the rights of individuals over the state

10) he believes corporate welfare should be shut down

11) he is against lobbying

These things are not out of step with most Americans. Gary Johnson is for all the things that most Americans say they are for and what the two major parties SAY they are striving for. But the results have not shown it. The Democrats and Republicans work their agenda the way they want to, not how the American people want it done. Those parties work for the wealthy and corporations. Sure, they will throw out some sound bites that make people believe they are in tune with people who have lost their jobs, their homes, and are struggling to pay their bills. These parties are directly responsible for the destruction of our manufacturing base which has crippled the middle class, but they will NOT do anything to solve those problems. 

The choice is simple for our country. Continue down the path we are on or start making changes. Gary Johnson may not win this election, but the tide has to turn somewhere. Why not now? Why not here at this point in history? Why can't we look back at 2012 as a point in time where we decided that things had to change? If Johnson got just 10 or 15% of the vote, it would be a huge wake up call for our mainstream politicians and this country. A voice will have been heard. I think our nation is worth it.

Rick Santorum: We Can And Must Do Better

Once again I have to start another blog by qualifying my positions. I am a former Republican, who has never voted for a Democrat for the office of the presidency. I have voted for Democrats for other offices, such as John Yarmuth for congress, here in Louisville. I still consider myself to be fairly conservative on fiscal issues, but socially I've started going the other way. That is due to several things, one of them being the distaste I see from many on the right for the poor. And perhaps I should qualify that remark also. Maybe saying the right is to broad, how about the right wing? Most Republicans and conservatives don't fit that bill in my opinion. But, that element has over taken the Republican party and has become its leadership by being more energized and more involved than the run of the mill party member who is just trying to work, raise their kids, and have a good life. I have also started realizing that the right wing religious zealots (and lay-Christian, I'm not talking about you), who want to hasten the end of times by creating a theocratic government for our nation, are gaining way too much power and influence.This notion that homosexuals should be singled out to be denied civil rights under the law of this land is another problem I have with some on the right.

That is what brings me to this blog. There is a right wing zealot running for the GOP nomination for president that is dangerously close to actually getting the nod. His name is Rick Santorum. He is a former Republican senator from Pennsylvania (1995-2007) who was handily defeated for re-election in 2006, when the Democrats made huge gains in congress. Before I get into why it's a shock to me that the guy is doing so well, I want to say that Santorum does have a noteworthy positive attribute; he was for responsible tax policy. That's about the last time you will read anything remotely positive about Rick Santorum from me. 

I am shocked that this guy has made such a push in this race. Now, Mitt Romney may not be the most stable guy in the world when it comes to sticking to his gun on policy matters, but he is a fairly moderate politician. He has had to move right to run for the GOP nod and to fight off attacks from the likes of Santorum, Newt Gingrich, and former candidates Rick Perry and Michelle Bachmann. Ron Paul is still hanging in this race, but he is way into personal freedom and that just doesn't fit in well with the right wings view of the country and the world. Newt Gingrich (yes, THAT Newt Gingrich) is another candidate that has been courting the right wing vote. Both Santorum and Gingrich have played the game better than Romney in getting the right wing to back them. It's necessary. And it could very well keep the Republicans from making a real run at Obama in November. 

Here is the thing with Rick Santorum; he is a right wing zealot who espouses a belief system that is better off left at home and not put on display as the backbone of his campaign. But see, you don't get to know that unless you follow politics closely. Most people don't have the time to watch debates or do a thorough check up on the candidates. They hear water cooler talk. They listen to Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh. They turn on FOX, CNN, or MSNBC for ten minutes at a time and go about their day. What they don't get to see is what people like me (people who spend WAY too much time giving a damn about this stuff) get to see. And to be frank here, I don't want you to take anything above and apply it as credible information. I'd rather you check for yourself. And, anything I write after this sentence should also be checked on. How do you know I wouldn't lie, just to deceive you to my side? I wouldn't, but you shouldn't trust anyone to feed you information about important matters without checking up for yourself. 

I am going to give you a few quotes from Rick Santorum and make a few comments. I am hoping that this will spur you to do some checking around and find out who is wanting to lead this country and represent you. 

“It’s [contraception] not okay because it’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. They’re supposed to be within marriage, they are supposed to be for purposes that are, yes, conjugal, but also [inaudible], but also procreative.”

Read that carefully. He believes using contraception is a bad thing. He is saying that there is a way "things are supposed to be" in regards to sex. Wonder where he got that idea? One would have to assume that Mr. Santorum doesn't think anyone should be having sex outside of being married. Now, it's OK if he wants to believe that, but what kind of leader will this person be to the normal human adult who is free to make their own choices as to how, when, and with whom they should have sex with? He won't be representing most citizens of this country or any other will he?

“I don't want to make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money; I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money.”

He said this about welfare reform while campaigning in Iowa. Could he have just said "poor people" or "people on public assistance"? Sure. But he chose to do what so many people do in a thinly veiled form of stereo-typing, and said "black people". Sure, there are a greater ratio of black folks on welfare within their population as opposed to white people, but still, there is just a high of a percentage overall of white people on public assistance as black people. Can a person who says this be trusted to even be honest with himself when talking about issues? Are black people the problem? If not, why use them expressly to make the point about giving someone else's money to the poor?

“I'm against discrimination for people who should not be discriminated against because of their sexual orientation. If they can, and do their job, they should. But that doesn't mean that we should change the laws of this country......to destabilize the American family, to change the way we look at religious liberty in this country, to accommodate a different value structure.

It's not about them, it's about values. It's about what America's basic moral American values should be that would be reflected in the laws.

And so, I've taken the position that the moral values reflected in the laws should be the moral values that built this country, which is the Judeo-Christian values, and that the laws should try as much as possible to comport with the higher law and also should comport with what reason would dictate. And what reason dictates is that children need mothers and fathers. … Some say well, through technology, same-sex couples can have children. Well they can, through either adoption, or artificial insemination…but they don’t get the mother and a father.”

Could that stuff get any scarier? He obviously doesn't believe that someone who is gay should have the same rights as ANY OTHER American citizen. It's right there. Marriage is only a religious institution if you choose to make it one. The union between two people who want to make a life together should be protected as a civil right. There used to be laws against white and black people marrying. Wanna go back to that? Would that be a violation of family values and religious liberty? Certainly not. That is absurd. But, you can plainly see that Mr. Santorum isn't just saying those are his beliefs, he thinks that the nation as a whole should not pass laws that treat everyone the same. And there he goes with the comments on religion and their place in our laws. Many of the Founding Fathers, including the man who wrote the Declaration of Independence were theists, who believed in God, but didn't hold religious beliefs. And if they did, they did damn well to keep that sort of thing out of the documents that our nation was built on. This country is for all of us to make our way in. Not just the wealthy. Not just the white. Not just the heterosexual. Not just the Christian.

"Would the potential attraction to Mormonism by simply having a Mormon in the White House threaten traditional Christianity by leading more Americans to a church that some Christians believe misleadingly calls itself Christian, is an active missionary church, and a dangerous cult?" 

Here we can plainly see that he doesn't care about any other religion except the one that he is in bed with. It's OK to be a Christian, but you need to be the right kind of Christian. Can you imagine that? A right wing Christian zealot who thinks women should stay at home and raise kids and that gay people shouldn't be protected by the laws of our country is calling someone else's religion a cult. Pure insanity. 

"If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual [gay] sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. ... That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing."

So, here we are at the gay thing again. This one is easy pickings. He does not believe that you have the right to have sex with whoever you want to in the privacy of your own home. That sounds like to me that he is actually for making homosexual sex illegal. Is that what YOU want in your heart of hearts? No matter how you feel about homosexuality, is that what we need? Do we need to start down that slope of the government telling you what you should and shouldn't do in your home? 

Is it me or is this not the craziest stuff ever? How can this man be doing so well? I don't want this for my country. We need more freedom, not less. They already listen to our phone calls, and keep track of the websites we visit and what we post on the 'net. They already tell us what is OK and not OK to put into our own bodies. Are you willing to give them that inch and pray they don't eventually take the mile? I'm not. 

If this man gets the GOP nod, and all these things start running on commercials, the Republican party will be set back for years. Then, we'll be down to one party and won't that be sweet. One party knowing the people won't vote the other way. What kind of hell on earth will that be? Not having a real choice. The real Republicans and conservatives who are for personal freedom, equality, religious freedom, and the rights for all to make a life for themselves in this country, should be shouting this guy down. We need people who want to shape America into a place where we can all live, work, and play without fear of persecution or becoming second class. Aren't we coasting far enough down that road without hitting the gas?

What say you?