While reading some nonsense New York Times article about who Mayor Bloomberg intends endorse for President I came across this image:
It’s the Electoral College breakdown as of today and I find it rather remarkable. Firstly, it’s in the New York Times and honest about the swing states. North Carolina is clearly back to leaning GOP, whereas Wisconsin is probably up for grabs, a reality many Democrats won’t confront. The map admits both as reality. Which both are.
Secondly, it’s remarkable how close the race is. Only 2 months ago almost every MSM talking head was yapping about Obama, the sure winner. If the election were today I’d pick Obama by a whisker as I’m not convinced Romney can pull off Pennsylvania. But the election is not today.
If this map remains unchanged until October then I’ll pick Romney to win with some ease and throw Michigan into the “up for grabs” stack, too. Late breaking voters usually break for the challenger, a dynamic that’s building this year as no poll tracks the annoyance factor.
I suspect annoyance with Obama is wider than we know. Empty suits, even ones with some initial charm, grate after a while. There’s always a moment when the whispered grumble in the crowd of “That guy’s full of shit. ” hits a critical mass. Obama’s campaign tactics thus far seem to be inviting this moment. The President keeps bursting into the room, yelping something, (waronwomen! Gay marriage! Immigration!) posing for pictures, then retreating to The View or the golf course. Everyone who expected him to talk about jobs or the economy – finally – thinks to themselves, “Wait, that guy’s the boss? He’s a clown.”
Granted, I find thinking up a positive Obama re-election narrative nearly impossible. I’ve tried. The cupboard is bare. My best shot: SCOTUS guts Obamacare. Obama runs as the final line of defense against the GOP devils. That might work. John Roberts throwing gimpy children off the cliff is pretty rich stuff. If Obama stops lecturing and serves up the class warfare with a smile it’s even richer.
Then again, I’m not running a presidential campaign. Surely, OFA higher-ups knew they’d need to sell something….didn’t they? Surely, they watched Romney dismantle Gingrich and Santorum…didn’t they? (Admittedly, both men are pikers but still – Mitten’s machine was harsh). Surely, Axelrod didn’t design a re-election plan consisting of Big Obama Speeches circa 2008 and the occasional distracting talking point dart from brush…and nothing else…did he? Does Obama’s team still believe their man is good at politics though all the accumulated evidence now suggests he’s a rotten communicator with no leadership skills to speak of? It seems they might. Obama’s lack of a positive narrative so far implies his team doesn’t think he needs one, or he doesn’t think he needs one. It appears weird and self-destructive. From the outside looking in narcissism usually does.
Late breakers break for the opponent. The map indicates a close race. Therefore, the most remarkable truth to be extrapolated from the map is this: The race is now Romney’s to lose.
Oh, and Willard may well find a way to lose it, too. The media is aching for the Romney windsurfing moment. The man is more than capable of supplying it. If he doesn’t? Then today’s map is bad news for Obama.
Well reasoned thoughts. But, when it comes to Obama – never rule out the sleaze factor. Nor should the narrative spun by MSM be discounted. They’ll defend him in the end, and repeatedly beat the message into the heads of those who still listen. They’ll report that “polls” have O as the clear winner – over and over and over. And, that large segment of voters who, lacking either time or desire to dig more deeply than CNN and the other Obama cheer leading MSM, will vote as the think others are voting.
I think it could be very close, but in 2008, it was clear that there is no low too low for Obama and the Dem Party leaders. They may do some very creative election antics.
freespirit
The MSM –and blogisphere– is as entrenched in their positions as in 2008. The words aren’t the same but the bottom line remains the same. I have seen not one single newspaper or magazine or TV show or personality, or blog, that supported Obama in ’08 switch to supporting a Romney vote. The one change to the bottom line I’ve noticed is bloggers and commenters who didn’t support Obama in ’08, and criticized or even attacked him in his first three years, now taken in by his campaign manipulation, and as I predicted a year and two ago it’s clear Obama’s getting these votes he went after.
This plays to two elements of basic human nature, tribalism and conformity.
Zal + Anon, I side with you. Doyle McManus writes in the LAT last Sunday how despite the narrow race to date, voters aren’t any happier with R than O when it comes to fixing the economy, and that favors the incumbent by default. Ron Brownstein covers the “white working class” and he argues it’s shrinking, as we all can see, and that this last redoubt (especially male) for the GOP does not bode well given the Southwest Hispanic contingent rising in power and votes. I know a lot of you live in places where this is not as apparent, but from my admittedly skewed p-o-v as a near-neighbor of our JWS, it seems inevitable that the GOP in many states will continue to weaken. I see NV and NM and AZ in this pattern: in ’12, they may hang on, but as we saw with Reid last election, the unions can mobilize Latinos; the Dems conquer many local districts in the West. They are tilting that way as the exurbs sprawl, immigration continues, and Dems rule. The meme of the “racist” GOP against “immigration rights” runs deep and is repeated.
You’re right it’s not as obvious where I live but I see your point and agree with you.
The GOP needs Marco Rubio front and center. Now. I don’t know how Mitt would behave with Rubio standing next to him (I don’t know anything about Mitt’s private thoughts but he can’t let it show if he thinks of Rubio as the yard guy, if you catch my drift) but for the GOP a Romney/Rubio ticket is the one that makes the most sense to me.
The term is “preference cascade.”
It is heartening to see PA in the toss up column- though I wonder how they got that? NW and Central PA (Hillary Country) will never ever vote for the fraud- this whole area is safely in the NOT OBAMA column- but it matters not. Winner take all on electoral votes- and the districts in and around Philly and Pittsburgh override the rest of the state. Will o lose Pittsburgh? And will it be enough? He will not lose Philly- remember the black panthers and acorn exert tremendous influence there- and run vans to the polls too.
Not sure how the illegal amnesty thing is going to fly in Pittsburgh. There is a quite large pocket of illegal hispanic workers there. Is there resentment? Perhaps not as much as in the more northern counties where legal citizen restaurant workers have been know to call ICE when the mgt hires illegals.
I would be most extraordinarily pleased if that blowhard has his ass handed to him in PA.
http://www.politicspa.com/obamas-wv-problem-stretches-into-pa/36833/
This map of PA shows just how big of a problem Obama has there. Voters in the DEMOCRATIC primary are broken down by county who did NOT vote for Obama. It is a significant part of the state. When your own party voters will not toe the line in the fricking primary you have a problem. They obviously want to vote in down ballot races but not for President? Obama has reverse coattails and that spells major problems when Democrats can split the ticket in a general elections which they cannot do in a primary. Primaries especially for Democrats usually have the opposite problem with ballots being cast for Pres only and the down ticket races skipped.
Lulu- thanks for that map and article. If I am reading that correctly- his undervote was higher in the Pittsburgh area than in rest of the I-79 corridor! If that holds- WOW!
Wish I was better at analysis- I would need an overlay of the Congressional districts to see how that affects the electoral votes.
Fascinating map, Lulu! obama’s danger zone follows the Appalachians straight through PA, excepting a little pocket around State College.
This shows how soft support for barry is among working folks. (I’d say “working class whites”, but Hillary was called ‘racist’ for using that term.) The polls are still close now, but it could go in one colossal crash like an Antarctic ice sheet.
I’ve been saying for a while that PA could go for Romney. But if it does, so many other swing states went too, that it wouldn’t be decisive.
“The polls are still close now, but it could go in one colossal crash like an Antarctic ice sheet.”
A comforting image for me, ABO that I am.
“The media is aching for the Romney windsurfing moment.”
Heh, and maybe by picking ‘John Kerry to play Romney in mock debate rehearsals’ the O team hopes for some clues about where to direct the media’s attention?
Fits in with their rabbit’s-foot-stroking meme that this is a reverse redux of the 2004 race, huh?
It takes more than annoyance to turn people’s allegiance from one authority figure to another. Especially when the alternative fails to demonstrate how it’d be better.
In his whole life Obama’s only lost one election, that was to an opponent who out-African-Americanized him, and he never won an election on the strength of his record or anything he’s actually done. He wins by manipulating, and like every manipulator who’s won many victories Obama has, both, perfected his ability to mold his message to what will gain him most in the current environment, and become more vulnerable to being poked by anything he interprets as disrespect. The narcissist, psychopath, seducer, manipulator, cannot bear to have the truth of his emptiness revealed, and that remains Obama’s achilles heel. Romney won’t win because people are annoyed with Obama; the only way Romney will win is if Obama is poked the right way in the right place and the right time, getting Obama to reveal what’s behind his mask and people are moved from annoyance to revulsion.
Thanks for your “concern.” But that pro-Obama meme being pushed is a bunch of tripe as anyone who’s paid attention to *any* election knows — “throw the bums out” is, in fact, a very common refrain in many elections where the only reason people “turn” their “allegiance from one authority figure to another” rests entirely on their annoyance with the incumbent & the challenger simply being not the other guy. In fact, that is exactly the meme used by Obama in 2008.
Interesting note: I don’t think I’ve seen a president as an ‘authority figure’ since W was elected. I miss the reverence I used to feel for the office of POTUS, but it is most certainly gone (or at least in hibernation).
I’m neither concerned nor “concerned,” whatever your little quotation marks are supposed to imply.
There’s nothing pro-Obama about anything I write.
That’s stupid. Stating as fact that “anyone who’s paid attention to *any* election knows” the same thing about voter annoyance with an incumbent is just asinine. Even the very definition of annoying, and for that matter “authority figure,” can vary between people who pay attention to elections.
No, dear, the meme Obama used in 2008 was not that Bush had been annoying, or that Hillary and Bill had been annoying, and Obamabots didn’t turn on fellow Democrats because they saw Obama as merely the other guy. His meme was that his opponents were part of the past not the future, they were what had allowed or brought on all the things that Obama, The One We’ve Been Waiting For, was going to Change. Characterizing Obama’s meme as him portraying himself as simply “the other guy” makes it seem you weren’t even on Planet Earth in 2008.
A guest who is at first charming but uses too many towels and leaves them lying around everywhere is annoying; guests who start wars and ruin the host’s finances and are dull relics of the past, as Obama painted Hillary and Republicans in 2008, are much more than annoying, they’re a menace.
Well said, Zal! All through the 2008 primaries I waited (and waited, and waited, sigh) for someone to poke fun of/ jokingly question Obama and his messages – just a little, tongue in cheek, amiably – because I knew there’d be a pretty good chance he would then show his true self and act piqued, pissy and peeved.
He doesn’t take critique well, and certainly doesn’t know how to take being made fun of – even Michelle Obama’s occasional jabs makes him look befuddled – and his handlers must be seriously concerned about the growing criticism of him and his ‘governing’, as it – the now open criticism – might very well lead to more bold and direct questions being asked. Will they be able to keep on shielding him from that?
Oh boy do I agree. Bill Clinton instinctively knows how to push buttons and he is doing it masterfully, discretely and in an ever accelerating manner, while individuals are sent out in a random manner to punch at Obama. And this is from Democrats! My bet is that Romney has a professional psychological profile of Obama and it is not pretty. Probably the same for his most elite staff also. The random stunts like the bus circling and honking, Solyndra press conference, and protesters in Boston to pester Axelrod play into their insecurity and self-importance, constant fundraising reports making Obama’s constant high visibility pandering seem less successful (Romney is doing the same but it is not all over the press), and Romney giving short snappy speeches contrasted with Obama the droning bore reading recycled garbage are aimed at making Obama seem off balance, aggrieved at having to work harder, and just generally pissy. I think Romney’s intent is for Obama to be a mental and physical wreck by the time for debates. And Romney enjoys this game-playing which McCain did not.
Excellent examples, Lulu, what we’ve seen and heard from Bill Clinton and Romney the past month or so.
And if Mitt Romney was as successful a venture capitalist as Clinton says, he likely has a very good grasp of psychological profiles and how to use them.
I don’t see how Obama has 217 at this point. The biggest lie of 2008 is that Obama ran a “nearly flawless campaign.” Bullshit. All Obama had to do was *not* be Hillary & then *not* be the Republican candidate. Because as we all well know, Obama didn’t even win the 2008 Dem. nomination — DNC stealing delegates, disenfranchising voters in FL & MI, crooked caucuses & a lapdog MSM screaming “Why won’t the b!tch quit” — and he still had a mere 60 delegate lead over Hillary & certainly didn’t have enough delegates (without the super delegates who were strong-armed into voting for him) to secure the nomination when he gave that ridiculous “the moment the planet healed” speech marking his “clinching” of the nomination in June 2008.
And even with the MSM fluffing him, covering for him & spinning for him over everything from gaffes, poor debate performances, Rev. Wright and everything in between, and outspending McCain 6 to 1, it wasn’t until the October crash that he *finally* was able to pull ahead & win in a year any Dem was going to win. Even still, by a margin that wasn’t nearly as large as it should have been.
Obama is running the *exact* same campaign he ran in 2008 and the people running it are being exposed as the hacks they always were because now that he actually has a record to run on — for the first time in his life — there is only so much the MSM can do to cover for him. Seriously, I have read several articles in places like the NYT & WaPo trying to tell me that Obama, the incumbent and THE President of the United States of America, was *really* the underdog and that Romney, the challenger, was really the incumbent. Poor David Axlerod — it isn’t as much fun (or easy) playing defend the establishment.
And with the new media, I wouldn’t be holding my breath about Romney screwing it up for himself– the whole meme that a man who built a hugely successful career in the private sector then became governor as a Republican in Mass-afucking-chusettes — is some half-wit, drooling moron who can’t string 2 sentences together isn’t going to sell in the new media era. Not only have we seen a quick responses to every single b.s. meme/distraction Obama and the MSM has tried to push against Romney by his team while Romney stays focused on the economy, just yesterday MSNBC tried to use the old deceptive editing tack to try to create a “GHWBush scanner moment” with Romney at Wawa & that got debunked less than 2 hours after it aired. (Oh, and for the record, Andrea Mitchell et al who were making fun of Romney going to Wawa are the same ones who order the California Roll in sushi restaurants. Screw them with their fake sophistication).
It always comes down to this:
In 2008, Obama had to spend almost a billion dollars to win because nobody knew who he was.
In 2012, Obama will have to spend almost a billion dollars to win because we all know exactly who he is.
I mean, don’t underestimate the MSM’s ability to drag him over the finish line (again) nor the Chicago mob’s ability to steal votes, but realistically, given Obama’s actual record in office, he should win 3 states — NY, CA & pick one. Romney should win the other 54.
This!
“In 2008, Obama had to spend almost a billion dollars to win because nobody knew who he was.
In 2012, Obama will have to spend almost a billion dollars to win because we all know exactly who he is.”
LOL
Yes. And I’d say that WI is more in the leaning toward Romney column. I haven’t chimed in yet about my thoughts about what happened in WI. Suffice it to say that areas of formerly controlled Dem districts (esp. Dave Obey’s one) have switched Republican, despite massive union support. They switched in 2004 and not only remained as such but got another R gain during the recall. The 250,000 vote margin Walker won by is just too large to be account for by Dems being outspent (which they weren’t) or voter fraud. The outlying areas will vote for Romney. Farmers have not received assistance & are receiving more fines due to Obama regs; factory towns are becoming ghost towns. I still contend that the polling is not showing what people really feel here. In the once-predominant union areas where blue collar workers thrived, they are even growing more anti-Obama. More pro-union voters don’t see Obama as the last vestige to save workers rights and applaud labor’s decision to cease funding Obama’s campaign. The tide has turned here, despite our close proximity to Chicago.
angienc,
what you said – and said so well!
I don’t see how one legitimately can put VA in the toss-up category — it’s at least Romney-leaning. And the notion that AZ, IN, MO, and NC aren’f firmly in the Romney camp is laughable.
The way things look now, the real map favors Romney, notwithstanding MSM b.s.
Good catch on Indiana. That’s a Romney state for sure. Polling does show BHO with a small lead in VA. Though I get it will slip. Personally, I bet NV goes Romney too.
This is an interesting thread. I see Zal’s point and think it’s correct in all particulars. I also think Romney is a different animal than any BHO has faced before. None of Barry’s previous wins went against an establishment. Certain people who are very powerful did not want Hillary or McCain. Many of the same people now DO want Romney. This establishment is more powerful than the Chicago cabal, DNC, or media establishment…all of which could pull it out for Obama. But there is no foregone conclusion this time.
Angienc also makes great points. The jabs from Romney are thoughtful and well landed. Since he clinched the nom. there’s only been one or two moments of flailing. Whereas Obama’s camp has been flailing all year.
1) If you threw out the partisan, skewed polls like PPP, Ipsos, & MSNBC, that map would look redder;
2) If it looked much redder, the phrase “We need Hillary” would shift from Dems’ minds to their tongues;
3) Which is why pollsters like PPP, Ipsos & MSNBC are paid to skew their results. (Actually MSNBC are slut monkeys who do it for free);
4) obama’s numbers are SOFT. Even in those yellow & hashed-blue states, his approvals are below 50%;
5) The queasiness incumbent with the prospect of enduring another 4 years with this Incumbent won’t set in until after Labor Day.
I don’t know, the Clintons are about as establishment as politicians get.
Who?
NES, I want you to be right. But I wouldn’t be so certain about IN. The Chicago arm reaches deep into the Indiana territory. The votes from Indiana were late to be “counted ” and reported. I think they wait until they’re told who to give those votes to. I agree about AZ and MO. As I said I want you — And angie to be oh so right.
Zal — I’ve always been on to you, here & at the Crawdad Hole, but *this* statement:
I don’t know, the Clintons are about as establishment as politicians get.
proves definitively that I’m right. Thanks, as always, for your “concern.”
Leslie, you sound a sensible note of caution about Indiana; I’ve taken heed.
It comes down to truth, justice and the American way. Obama will be lucky to win 3 states, a special hat tip to a very funny lol line > Romney will win the other 54. Obama will get the cult followers, who are so defensive and delusional they cannot even hold a civil conversation without repeating tired old lines from MSNBC, while attacking Romney, and then you. The cultists had no substantive narrative in 2008, and their default settings were placed to a very effective, though pathetic and destructive mixture of race baiting along with white guilt. While Obama ignited and supported these lines of attack, let us not forget, Obama is a Chicago politician. It was Obama’s hyper inflated ego blended with an abstract mixture of hope and change, which would somehow would link and connect America and the entire world. So the MSM and the DNC, went “all in” as they drafted behind Obama supercharged, high octane false ego. However, they kept circling the Daytona speedway, ultimately ending up where they started. It was NASCAR at Harvard. If Wisconsin proved anything, people are tired of this. No one really trusts Obama anymore, nor do they want to defend him for another 4 years. When the ship hits the rocks they will ask their captain to rescue and right the ship of state. Only then, will they finally realize, captain Obama, has left, in fact he was never really there. From this betrayal, the American people will rip off Obama’s self placed and Wintour designed epaulets, and will politically and publicly court marshal this messianic fraud. It will be a landslide. Obama could place fear and hope into the minds of Americans. Most Americans square root is truth, justice and the American way. No matter what the MSM has done to pervert the election process, Andrea Mitchell is the latest example. They really want the truth, or close to the truth, Romney will have a response team, waiting and watching, and then exposing each perversion, deception and falsehood, which comes from Team Obama. That is how Obama rolls. Just look into Obama’s brain trust, Valerie Jarrett and Michelle Obama, they are the chief architects of Obama’s re election strategy. That by itself, is a losing formula. Obama is modern Greece, he sold himself as Socrates, each day, another thread becomes undone. My “reach projection’ is Obama will not even make it through the process. He will collapse under the mammoth weight of a less than zero ego. He will be smothered by zero gravity. When his celebrity star dies, as Cecil de Mille once said, “six pr people working over time can do horrible things to the human spirit.” No industry is more polished and exact as Hollywood when it comes to discarding non-bankable and uninsurable stars. As Eric von Stroheim said “in Hollywood you are only as good as your last picture.” Because Obama told his fellow celebrities, at S.J. Parker’s town house in NYC they are the final arbiters. They won’t be however Hollywood’s silent dance of slowly embalmed death will. Obama’s story is a painful tragedy which the country will have to watch and witness, so this is remembered, and does not happen again, hopefully anytime soon.
Yes I’ve noticed your nastiness towards me; what exactly are you on to about me, what do you think you’re right about me?
Be specific.
I’m not ashamed or defensive about who I am or what I believe or what I do. Say it.
obama’s never lost an election in which he cheated in some way. he’s run in but one fair election, and got clobbered.
And that was the Bobby Rush race. Bobby summed up Obama perfectly, calling him “an educated fool.” So true, so true.
Zal, I chose my article specifically – ” an establishment.” There is more than one faction. Except the one time Obama lost he’s always been an establishment candidate. I suppose Jack Ryan (was that his name?) represented a minor faction but Obama was so ruthless it kinda “made” him when he slaughtered Ryan. It’s why i expected Obama’s team to be better this time. But they’ll bring out the hatchets yet – I predict. And no one cared about Ryan anyway.
Of the 3 possibilities in 08 Clinton, McCain, Obama, it was evident early that Obama seemed to be the choice that could aid the powerful the most. The right weenie at the right time. Mccain’s was the wrong party for 08 and a hot head too. Clinton thought for herself too much, though she isn’t radical in any sense. So the money flowed to Barry.
There is a real, powerful and large contingent that does NOT want Obama to win again. Not the GOP diehards, they are expected…a lot of the financial class has ditched. They are who matters. The man hasn’t done 100 fundraisers for fun…he’s done them because his team is scared shitless. Of this anti-Obama faction we see the frontman fools like that Vegas Billionaire. And cracks in the facade – like the Booker/Clinton/Ford fiasco. But past those people in the foggy mist is a quieter boatload of money that will come to Mitten’s aid – is coming actually. Citizens United changed everything. They can now buy the White House out in the open and they’ll certainly try this time. This is not new, but the game is on a different level now. And not having all the big factions pulling for Obama is certainly new – for Obama. Besides, if you were mega rich who would you chose to protect your wealth? Obama or Romney? Both will do what it takes. Romney has the added benefit of being competent…with money at least.
As I always say, I have no idea who will win. Yet. I do know that unlike 08 Obama has competition. It’s hard to imagine Romney winning, it’s equalling hard to imagine Obama serving another term. He’s angered too many of the people who brung him to the dance. Last time Hollywood money was cushion cash. This time it is his wellspring. That is not a good sign.
I agree with everything you say here, and although I still think Obama plays dirty enough and has enough people seduced to pull off re-election, even I’m now thinking there’s a possibility Mitt could squeak in. Mitt’s game is much better than I expected. (As I said in another thread, Mitt winning will piss me off as much as Obama winning because that’ll give bots and Obama a chance to write their historical narrative in their favor. And in terms of policy a President Romney will be no better for America, or the world, than Obama again. That said, though, Obama is a psychopath, Bad News with a capital B that goes beyond policy, so I remain ABO.)
I missed the specific article you chose in “an establishment,” and you’re right it changes what you wrote from what I interpreted. Good writing on your part, sloppy reading on mine. Thanks for pointing it out. The Clintons are establishment, not radical, and you’re absolutely right Hillary thinks for herself too much for the Big Boys to be comfortable with her over a push over like Obama. Well said.
You’re right that to an extent the financial class has ditched Obama, mostly the older set from what I hear. A lot of the Millenials who were all in for him in ’08, though, remain with Obama, at least in what they say (the privacy of the voting booth may be another story) if for no other reason they have peer connections that require that lip service: turning on Obama now is nothing short of racist and abandoning The Team.
BTW, regarding what I said about Millenials in the financial sector (and media sector for that matter) continuing to support Obama – from what I can tell online of the names I know, most who donated to Obama in ’08, and donated large as they could, have not yet ponied up this time around. That’s probably why he’s squeezing what he can from dried out flowers like Anna Wintour and Sarah Jessica Parker. Millenials are not generous, they’re selfish, and for them “giving” is never about what it’ll do for someone else but what it’ll do for them; looks like giving cash to Obama doesn’t have the cache it had three years ago.
John, very well said. You’re correct in surmising that Romney will have all the money he needs, and O can’t compete in that game. Hollywood is small potatoes compared to what Romney’ll bring in. I think the business and financial worlds were done with O around 2010 and have been sitting on their money and biding their time until he’s out. I predict there’ll be a big investment swing after January 20 that’ll kick-start the economy, even if only temporarily.
PS: Obama has actually attended well over a hundred fundraisers…as many as appx. 150 right? Your point about that being a terrible sign for him is spot-on.
PPS: Apart from being a hot-head, McCain was anathema to the establishment because of his campaign-finance-resource bugaboo. Can’t have that in an errand boy!
Corrigendum: “…his campaign-finance-reform bugaboo.”
Interesting. This map looks very much like the one I made at 270towin.com right after Walker’s win.
In reading these posts, it appears that even our views of the make-up of the American people, are very much a product of our particular experiences. A couple of statements though, “White working class”, could also be called “White unemployed working class” . There also seems to be an assumption that other Latinos support illegal immigration, or that illegal immigrants Can vote in large numbers. As to the first: legal Latinos have a higher unemployment rate than Whites, and secondly: Romney seems to have a very sharp team, and while they can’t be everywhere, they Will be in the areas where illegals’ voting will most likely be attempted… I think at least, a strong attempt will be made to prevent undocumented’s voting.
I read about O’s latest presser, which was widely banned. One reporter thought O was ‘completely out of it.’ on that occasion, he may be cracking a bit.
It seems undeniable that O has become a smaller fish in a very big pond. Not sure he has yet grasped that Chicago pizza does not sell well, outside of Chicago. Neither Jarrett nor Michelle have ever really left Chicago, which is why there have been so many downright stupid actions and policies. No one ever sang of Chicago “if you can make it there, you can make it anywhere”
Hi there, I read your blog regularly. Your humoristic style is awesome, keep up
the good work!