2012: The Sharpest Contrast - Right v. Left

[thread=172808]Link to discussion thread.[/thread]

Saturday, Sept. 11th, 2010 - - - - - - Former Vice Presidential candidate, and ex-Governor Sarah Palin, along with Fox News radio personality Glenn Beck, host a ceremony honoring the victims of 9//11 on it’s 9th anniversary in Anchorage Alaska. The speeches by Palin and Beck were broadcast by CSPAN, CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News live on Saturday evening. In the speech, Palin paid respects to the troops in Afghanistan, and honored victims of 9/11. In what was viewed by many grassroots supporters (and even some in the media) as a tip of the hat to those wondering about a 2012 Presidential bid, Palin concluded with what seemed to be a foreign policy appeal: “Americans need someone at the helm, in these troubled times, who understands the nature of the threat posed by those who caused September the 11th. We do not want someone who simply “weighs in on the wisdom” of whether or not its appropriate to house a mosque at the very site where fundamental Islam brought down our greatest symbols of economic prosperity. We want someone who can take a stand for what is right and what is wrong. We want someone who doesn’t simply say that they will defend our nation from an attack like this ever again, but someone who will actually act in such a manner. Barack Obama, don’t let the victims of this tragedy down!”


New PPP polling reveals potential 2012 match-up results:

Mitt Romney v. Obama: 44 - 45%
Mike Huckabee v. Obama: 43 - 46%
Sarah Palin v. Obama: 43 - 50%
Newt Gingrich v. Obama: 40 - 51%
Rick Santorum v. Obama: 34 - 49%
Tim Pawlenty v. Obama: 32 - 49%

Sept. 11th, 2010 (cont.)



On his popular hit Fox News show, Mike Huckabee confirms while chatting with his guest Chuck Norris, that he will positively not seek the presidency in 2012. He clarifies that for the sake of his television show, his position with Fox News, and his former political supporters, he feels the need to make this announcement early, and prior to the mid-term elections. “To those who so vigorously supported me and stood by me since 2007, I thank you, but must urge you to commit your energies in another potential candidate who stood for our principles of small government, fiscal responsibility, and family values. I’ll be communicating with you my opinions on this subject in the weeks and months to come, as the candidates make themselves known. Please stay tuned.”

Fox News Dynamic poll, released the following Monday show that Republicans think that Mike Huckabee should have joined the 2012 presidential race, 41%, as opposed to 28% who think he should have stayed out of it. 31% of Republicans had no opinion.


November 1, 2010 - PRE-ELECTION POLL WRAP-UP

President Obama’s Job Approval Rating
(Gallup Daily Tracking):
Approve - 44%
Disapprove - 45%
Net: - 1

(Rasmussen Reports Daily Tracking):
Approve - 43% (Strongly approve - 26%)
Disapprove - 56% (Strongly Disapprove - 43%)
Net: - 16






November 2, 2010 - MIDTERM ELECTION RESULTS (select results from notable races)

Blue = Republican won counties, Red = Democrat won counties

Arkansas:
Blanche Lincoln (D) / John Boozman (R) - 38% / 61%



Indiana:
Dan Coats (R) / Brad Ellsworth (D) - 54% / 45%



Pennsylvania:
Joe Sestack (D) / Pat Toomey (R) - 47% / 52%



Delaware:
Chris Coons (D) / Christine O’Donnell (R) - 50% / 48%



Colorado:
Ken Buck (R) / Michael Bennet (D) - 49% / 48%



Washington:
Patty Murray (D) / Dino Rossi (R) - 50% / 49%



Illinois:
Mark Kirk (R) / Alexi Giannoulias (D) / LeAlan Jones (G) - 48% / 44% / 7%



Nevada:
Sharron Angle (R) / Harry Reid (D) - 49% / 49%



Florida:
Marco Rubio (R) / Kendrick Meeks (D) / Charlie Christ (I) - 41% / 31% / 27%



California:
Carly Fiorina (R) / Barbara Boxer (D) - 50% / 47%



Wisconsin:
Russ Feingold (D) / Ron Johnson (R) - 48% / 49%



New Hampshire:
Kelly Ayotte (R) / Paul Hodes (D) - 53% / 45%



North Carolina:
Richard Burr (R) / Elaine Marshall (D) - 54% / 44%



Ohio:
Rob Portman (R) / Lee Fisher (D) - 54% / 46%



Kentucky:
Rand Paul (R) / Jack Conway (D) - 56% / 43%



West Virginia:
Joe Manchin (D) / John Raese (R) - 51% / 48%



Missouri:
Roy Blunt (R) / Robin Carnahan (D) - 52% / 46%



Connecticut:
Richard Blumenthal (D) / Linda McMahon (R) - 50% / 47%



Alaska:
Joe Miller (R) / Lisa Murkowski (L) / Steve McAdams (D) - 45% / 30% / 23%



New York:
Kirsten Gillibrand (D) / Joe DioGuardi (R) - 54% / 46%



Louisiana:
David Vitter (R) / Charlie Melancon (D) - 57% / 41%



Arizona:
John McCain (R) / Rodney Glassman (D) - 59% / 41%



South Carolina:
Jim Demint (R) / Alvin Greene (D) - 70% / 26%




The Republicans failed to gain a majority in the U.S. Senate, but only barely. They gained 8 seats, and the Democrats lost 8 seats. The breakdown of the 112th Congress is:

Democrats: 49 (-8)
Republicans: 49 (+8)
Independents: 2 (0)



The two independents, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, caucus with the democrats, effectively creating a 51-49 split in favor of the Democrats.

Popular Vote Result:
Republican - 34,204,765 (54.3 %)
Democrat - 28,803, 976 (45.7 %)
63,008,741 total votes cast
Margin of victory : 8.6 pts.




2010 GOVERNOR’S RACES: (select races)

Florida:
Alex Sink (D) / Rick Scott (R) - 51% / 49%



Iowa:
Terry Brandstad (R) / Chet Culver (D) - 57% / 43%



Ohio:
John Kasich (R) / Ted Strickland (D) - 53% / 47%



Pennsylvania:
Tom Corbett (R) / Dan Oronato (D) - 54% / 45%



California:
Meg Whitman (R) / Jerry Brown (D) - 52% / 45%



Texas:
Rick Perry (R) / Bill White (D) - 51% / 45%



South Carolina:
Nikki Haley (R) / Vincent Sheheen (D) - 57% / 42%



Arizona:
Jan Brewer (R) / Terry Goddard (D) - 59% / 40%



Alaska:
Sean Parnell (R) / Ethan Berkowitz (D) - 60% / 39%



The GOP increased their majority of governorships by 10, while the Democrats lost 9 seats. The make up of the states Governorships, post election 2010, looks like this:

Republican: 34 seats (+10 net gain)
Democrast: 16 seats. (-9 net loss)





In the House of Representatives, the Republicans won a majority, picking up 45 seats from the Democrats. They capture the House with a 223 member majority, with the Democrats in a powerful minority position.

U.S. House of Representatives 2010 Election result
Republicans: 223 seats (111th Congress: 178 seats) / Popular vote: 32,074, 883 (53.5 %)
Democrats: 209 seats (111th Congress: 253 seats) / Popular vote: 27,838,627 (46.5 %) [/b]

...to be continued.





January 17, 2011 - - - - In the opening week of the 112th Congress, Republicans and Democrats are voting on President Obama’s Infrastructure Bill, dubbed by the new House Speaker, John Boehner (R-Oh.), as “Stimulus II.” Arguing against the bill, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Mn.) proclaims, "If we've learned anything from the past 18 months, it's that we can't spend our way to prosperity. We cannot afford this $50 billion bill! We don't need more government 'stimulus' spending - we need to end Washington Democrats' out-of-control spending spree, stop their tax hikes, and create jobs by eliminating the job-killing uncertainty that is hampering our small businesses."

Rep. Heath Shuler (D-NC), arguing for the bills passage, said, “ We used to have the best infrastructure in the world and we can have it again. We want to change the way Washington spends your tax dollars; we want to reform the way we fund and maintain our infrastructure to focus less on wasteful earmarks and outdated formulas, and we want competition and innovation that gives us the best bang for the buck.”


On Jan. 17, The 2011 Infrastructure Bill was rejected by the House of Representatives by a 226-205 margin. The following day, the Senate rejected the bill by a 49-51 margin, with Senators Ben Nelson (D-Ne.) and Mary Landrieu (D-La.) voting against the bill.

Prospective 2012 Republican nominee, Fmr. Gov. Mitt Romney praises Speaker Boehner for his legislative victory, but also cautions: “For two years we’ve listened to President Obama say Republicans have no ideas for how to fix the economy. Now he’s finally wanting to adopt some of the job creating incentives for which I and other Republicans have been calling, like the payroll tax holiday, and small businesses capital expenditure write-off. It’s a shame Republicans had to vote down this bill due to the addition of a wasteful, needless, high-spending infrastructure bill, which is nothing more than a ‘Stimulus II.’


Fmr. Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, said: “This is what elections are for. Elections indeed have consequences, and thank goodness America got it right this time around. This is nothing more than a tax increase, because a tax increase will be required to justify the additional $50 billion in new spending. When does the blank check end? It ends now, with the Republican majority in the House.”

Fmr. Gov. Sarah Palin weighs in, fresh off of a book tour for her most recent best-seller, America by Heart (which topped the NY Times Non-fiction Bestsellers List for 5 straight weeks following its release on 11/23/2010), on CNN's "Piers Morgan Live": “What have I been saying over and over since the last election cycle? Common-sense conservatives, and common-sense conservative ideas are what is required to turn this country around. The results from November show that Americans are starting to notice what is going on around them. The new Republican congress is hearing their message, and that’s why they just defeated this massive spending bill. If President Obama can propose a tax holiday without billions in new spending attached, that’s economic change I can support. But until then . . .”




January 19th, 2011 - - - President Obama Job Approval Rating:
(Gallup Daily Tracking Poll)
Approve - 41 %
Disapprove - 53%
Net: -12

(Rasmussen Reports Daily Tracking Poll)
Approave - 40% (Strongly Approve: 23 %)
Disapprove - 59% (Strongly Disapprove: 47%)

Prospective GOP 2012 Candidates
Favorable/Unfavorable:
Mitt Romney: 41 / 39
Sarah Palin: 40 / 49
Newt Gingrich: 38 / 52
Tim Pawlenty: 20 / 30
Mitch Daniels: 23 / 25
Gary Johnson : 18 / 22

Obama Administration, Favorable/Unfavorable:
Joe Biden: 40/50
Hillary Clinton: 61/37
Rahm Emanuel: 24 / 37
Tim Geithner : 21 / 38




January 19, 2011 - - - - Fmr. Speaker of the House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), formally announces on ABC’s “The View” that he will indeed be a candidate for the presidency of the United States. Speaking to Barbara Walters, Gingrich states: “A long, long journey has brought Callista and myself to this place today. I do not hope to change America in my mold. I do not want to make America after my liking. I hope to guide America. To help her understand her potential again. For that, and all of the other reasons I’ve stated here. I WILL be a candidate for the Republican nomination for president in 2012. *Muffled, surprised applause from the studio crowd*




Quinnipiac University poll from December 19, 2010:
Potential 2012 Republican Presidential Candidates
Favorable/Unfavorable:
Newt Gingrich - 31 / 51


January 23, 2011 - - - On Fox News Sunday, when pressured by host Chris Wallace, guest Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) conceded that he had launched an exploratory committee for President back in November, and that he does intend to seek the presidency in 2012. Lambasting who he called “the most radical president in my lifetime,” Santorum said that he would take the same fervor he had in the Senate chamber with him on the campaign trail. “I know I’m an underdog but I do not take this undertaking lightly. I’m putting my all into this. Not to gain recognition, or notoriety. Not to be Vice President. But to win it. To take help take this country back.”


January 25th, 2011 - - - STATE OF THE UNION
In what was considered by many to be a contentious, heated State of the Union speech, President Obama used the bully pulpit to drive his message of Republican obstructionism home to the American people. “Republicans are the party of ‘No we can‘t.’ When it comes to just about everything we've done to strengthen the middle class to rebuild our economy, almost every Republican in Congress says 'no.' Even on things we usually agree on, they say 'no,' If I say the sky is blue, they say 'no.' If I said fish live in the sea, they'd say 'no.'"

In what was criticized by the networks as “the most intensely partisan State of the Union in recent memory", Obama declared. “They (Republicans) treat me like a dog! That's not in my prepared remarks, but it's true.” Republicans hissed from their side of the aisle. "They're betting that between now and Nov, you'll (voters) come down with a case of amnesia. They (Republicans) think you'll forget what their agenda did to this country. They think you'll just believe that they've changed. These are the folks whose policies helped devastate our middle class and drive our economy into a ditch. And now they're asking you for the keys back!” MSNBC host Chris Mathews declared later that night, “What he said was said with anger. You could hear it in his voice. Whether it will help him with voters or not, Obama is fired up. I’ve never heard an angrier State of the Union speech.”

In the Republican rebuttal speech that followed, newly elected Governor Nikki Haley (R-SC) pointed the focus back at the Obama Administration for a lackluster economic performance: “We’re still sitting at 10% unemployment, Mr. President. We’re still losing our jobs. We’re still in need, and we see no end to this. At some point, the adults have to come together and talk seriously. The projected American deficit is sitting at over 10 trillion dollars. This liberal president has added more debt to this nation than presidents George Washington, to Ronald Reagan, combined!” In what many journalists suspected was an ad-lib in reference to Obama’s angry tone earlier in the night, Gov. Haley insisted, “Never has a president so abused the privilege of speaking to millions of Americans from the halls of Congress. This was a venue to discuss the state of the union, Mr. President. And you turned it into nothing more than a partisan stump speech. Again, Americans are suffering, Mr. President. Please talk about the things we can’t sleep about at night. Please stop degrading the office you hold with harsh, partisan rhetoric.”


Many on the left criticized Haley’s remark, including blog Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas: “She displayed the same disrespect she seems to be criticizing Obama for. People in glass houses should not throw stones. Isn’t she battling challenges of marital infidelity?”

A poll of Obama’s approval rating, taken a couple of days after his speech, shows voters did not react positively to his heated SOTU speech.


Gallup Daily Tracking
Approve: 40 %
Disapprove : 53 %
Net: - 13

Rasmussen Reports Daily Tracking
Approve: 39 % (Strongly Approve: 21 %)
Disapprove: 59 % (Strongly Disapprove: 48 %)
Net: - 20

Approve / Disapprove on the issues:
Economy: 33 / 59
Healthcare: 40 / 53
Afghanistan: 46 / 45
Foreign Policy: 51 / 43
Government Spending: 39 / 56
Environment: 45 / 30

continued

January 26, 2011 - - - Sen. John Thune (R-SD) announces at a Values Voters summit in Colorado Springs, Colorado, that he intends to seek the office of President in 2012. Considered a dark-horse candidate by many pundits, Thune is lauded for his fiscally conservative views, principled stance on taxes, good looks, and relative anonymity.



A Public Policy Polling poll (PPP) gives the White House reason for concern. It shows, in most cases, the Republican candidates for President are gaining traction with voters, and Obama remains under 50% even against little-known candidates. The poor economy is expected to be the cause of the presidents sagging numbers:

2012 Match-ups (PPP, January 26-28, 1,001 likely voters, +/-3% margin of error)
Mitt Romney v. Obama: 48 - 43 %
Sarah Palin v. Obama: 44 - 44 %
Jeb Bush v. Obama: 43 - 46 %
Newt Gingrich v. Obama: 42 - 47 % (announced candidate)
Rick Santorum v. Obama: 35 - 49 % (announced candidate)
John Thune v. Obama: 37 - 45 % (announced candidate)
George Pataki v. Obama: 38 - 47 % (announced candidate)


January 29, 2011 - - - Fmr long-time New York Governor George Pataki (R-NY) announces, via youtube video, that he is running for president. The video was received by many in the media as a surprise. Conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer stated: “I’m not so sure I understand his decision, or his timing. I don’t see his niche right now in the Republican party. In a party dominated by Tea Party politics, I’m afraid he suffers from what I’ve said Mitt Romney suffers: Lisa Murkowski syndrome. Annoyance with the unresponsive, elite establishment. I just don’t see George Pataki succeeding in a Republican primary in this environment.”


January 30, 2011 - - - Despite clamoring from party activists, Fmr. Governor Jeb Bush (R-Fl.) insists on NBCs Meet the Press that he will not seek the presidency in 2012. In an exact replica of the “Sherman speech” decades earlier, Bush gives his Shermanesque response: “In 2012, I will not accept if nominated and will not serve if elected.” While decisive for 2012, many bloggers speculate that his statement left wide-open a future bid for the presidency.

February 2, 2011 - - - Former Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota announces in an email to supporters that he will seek the Republican nomination for President in 2012. Playing off of the “underdog” theme that Rick Santorum started, the ex Governor said: “I enter this race under no allusions. I’m unknown, don’t have a lot of money, and have my work cut out for me. But I’m tenacious. And my love for this country is too great to allow it to be spent into a catastrophe.”


February 3, 2011 - - - Rudy Giuliani (R-NY) announces on the Don Imus radio show that he will not be a candidate for the presidency. He vows to actively campaign with whomever wins the nomination, and indicates that he may be willing to endorse in the primaries, depending on the candidates.

February 4, 2011 - - - At a governors conference in Reno, Nevada, both Governor’s Chris Christie (R-NJ), and Bob McDonnell (R-Va.), insist to reporters that they will not seek the presidency in 2012. Both also deny being interested or willing to serve as Vice President.

February 7, 2011 - - - In the House of Representatives, Rep. Ben Quayle (R-Az.) introduces a measure to repeal the Health Care Reform Act of 2010. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D - Ca.) calls the move by the freshman representative a disgrace. “Republicans continue to stymie progress on any and all fronts. Sometimes I’m really confused as to what their ultimate motive is. It is truly baffling to me.” Newly chosen Senate Majority leader Chuck Schumer (R-NY) vows to defeat the bill in the Senate, while Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Mo.) promises to usher it through.

A Rasmussen Reports tracking poll released four days later shows that Americans are divided over repealing the healthcare reform bill:

Do you approve or disapprove of the Healthcare reform bill that was signed into law in 2010? (Rasmussen Reports, February 10-11, 2010. 850 likely voters, +/-3.5)
Approve - 35 %
Disapprove - 50 %
Undecided/No opinion - 15 %

Do you support repealing the health care reform bill passed last year?
Support Repeal - 37 %
Oppose Repeal - 43 %
Undecided/No opinion - 20%

February 11, 2011 - - - At 10:30 AM, Friday morning, cable news channels interrupt their programming to go LIVE to Wasilla, Alaska, as former Gov. and Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin convenes a press conference with her family. Before a crowd of roughly 500 reporters and Wasilla residents, Palin confirms what many had long speculated - she is running for President. In what pundits would later describe as a blatant appeal to the Reagan mantle, Sarah Palin calls for a defeat of the Democrats big-spending, big-government agenda: “In his farewell address to Americans, Ronald Reagan said ‘we've got to do a better job of getting across that America is freedom - freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of enterprise. And freedom is special and rare. It's fragile; it needs protection.’ Reagan was right . . .



More excerpts of her announcement: “It has never been my life’s ambition to aspire to the highest office in the land. Contrary to many in the media, I am not seeking fame or fortune. When I see something that is wrong, just like any other ‘Mamma Grizzly,‘ I want to fix it. That’s how I governed when I was the Governor of this great state, and with heaven’s blessing, that is how I will govern if President of the United State, if you offer me that opportunity. Has President Obama done a good job of protecting freedom? Do you think that he agrees with Reagan when he says that freedom is fragile, and in need of protection? Because I do.”

Pundits argued throughout the day and weekend that Palin revealed small flashes of a potential governing philosophy, as well as what seemed like an appeal to moderate, independent voters.

“ I believe in free enterprise. I don’t believe in wasteful government spending. I believe in cutting taxes. Not in passing tax hikes that are cleverly labeled ‘health care reform,’ or 'Cap and Trade.’ I believe in encouraging small businesses and fostering an entrepreneurial spirit. Not in demonizing and strangling the engines of economic growth. I believe that when you have a bloated budget, you have to make tough decisions, and cut spending. Not in trying to be all things to all people at all times. I believe in tolerance, and moderation, and appealing to American’s common values. Not in an extreme partisan agenda, deaf to the will of American voters. I will be a president for ALL, not just the left.”

It did not go unnoticed by the media that Palin made her candidacy known on what would have been Ronald Reagan's 100th birthday.

The following day, on Saturday, ABC/Washington Post releases a poll of all adults, not likely voters, that shows only 26% of Americans believe Sarah Palin is qualified to be president. 53% of Americans believe she is not qualified, and 21% remain undecided or have no opinion. The same poll asked:

Do you have a very favorable, somewhat favorable, very unfavorable, somewhat unfavorable, or no opinion, of former Gov. Sarah Palin?
Very Fav Somewhat Fav No Opinion Somewhat Unfav VerUnfav
20 % 16% 11 % 11 % 41 %
Total Favorable / Unfavorable / Unsure-No Opinion
36 % / 52 % / 11 %

The ABC/Washington Post poll led pundits to chatter about Palin’s viability as a candidate. Can someone with such high unfavorable numbers be competitive in the primary?




February 16, 2011 - Polling Wrap-up

President Obama’s Job Approval Rating:
Gallup Daily Tracking
Approve - 43 %
Disapprove - 49 %
Net: - 6

Rasmussen Reports Daily Tracking
Approve - 42 % (strongly approve - 25 %)
Disapprove - 56 % (strongly disapprove - 42 %)
Net: - 14

President Obama: Favorable / Unfavorable
50 % / 47 %

2012 Republican hopefuls (Quinnipiac, 2/13 - 2/15, 2,000 likely voters, +/-1.5)
Favorable / Unfavorable
Sarah Palin - 44 / 50 (announced candidate)
Mitt Romney: 39 / 43
Newt Gingrich: 39 / 52 (announced candidate)
Tim Pawlenty: 23 / 34 (announced candidate)
Mitch Daniels: 24 / 28
Rick Santorum: 29 / 44 (announced candidate)
George Pataki: 22 / 31 (announced candidate)
John Thune: 28 / 30 (announced candidate)

Who do you want to be the GOP nominee in 2012? (PPP, 2/12-15, 1100 likely GOP primary voters, +/-3.0)
Sarah Palin - 31 %
Mitt Romney - 22 %
Newt Gingrich - 15
John Thune - 9 %
Rick Santorum - 3%
George Pataki - 1%
Undecided - 19 %

Obama Administration, Favorable/Unfavorable:
Joe Biden: 39 / 50 %
Hillary Clinton: 62 / 32 %
Rahm Emanuel: 24 / 39 %
Tim Geithner : 25 / 38 %

Other; Favorable / Unfavorable
George W. Bush: 44 / 52 %
Dick Cheney: 39/ 52 %
Michelle Obama: 55 / 40 %
Bill Clinton: 61 / 34 %
Al Gore: 51 / 42 %
John Boehner: 35 / 49 %
Nancy Pelosi: 31 / 59
Charles Schumer: 28 / 41 %
Mitch McConnell: 32 / 48 %


March 7, 2011 - - - Throughout the rest of the month of February, Governors Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Rick Perry of Texas, along with Congressman Ron Paul (R-Tx), announce to supporters via email that they will not be candidates for the presidency in 2012. It is rumored by pundits that Jindal is gearing up for a potential run in 2016, in the event Obama wins reelection.

The February 2011 job numbers continued to paint a bleak picture for the Obama administration. The economy shed a total of 48,000 jobs, and unemployment remains high at 9.4%. The debate on healthcare seems revived, as House Republicans have introduced a measure to repeal the healthcare reform bill that passed the previous year.

On March 7, Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi announces on “This Week” with George Stephanopolis that he will be a candidate for the presidency in 2012. In his discussion with Sephanopolis, Barbour states: “Look, George, I’ve been in the business of politics for a long time. There’s no way for me to make the argument that I’m the outsider in this race. There’s no way for me to make the argument that I’m the biggest celebrity or rock star in this race. But the last time I checked, you don’t amass a record of accomplishments on outsider, or rock-star status alone. I may not be the hippest guy on the block, but I know how to balance a budget. I know how to cut taxes and make it work, without causing sky-rocketing deficits. What do my potential opponents offer other than empty promises and a flashy presentation?” Many pundits took note of what seemed to be a subtle jab by Barbour at his opponents Barack Obama and Sarah Palin’s ability to attract media attention. The first mud of the campaign season had been thrown.


March, 15, 2011 - - - The previous night, former Governor Mitt Romney announces to the press that he will be holding a press conference the following morning in Lansing, Michigan. The following morning, Romney emerges with his wife, Ann, and takes to the podium in an outdoor venue. Many pundits took note of Romney’s failure to mention his previous home state, Massachusetts, where Romney served as governor from 2003 - 2007. Most assumed that Romney chose to make Michigan his adopted home for presidential campaign purposes because of higher GOP viability in the state. Massachusetts is known for its staunch Democratic politics, and would be very difficult for Romney to carry. Avoiding the state all together may save Romney some embarrassment down the road.



Perhaps borrowing slightly from Obama’s campaign 3 years earlier, Romney proceeds to make his argument for his presidential run: "I don't believe Washington can get transformed by someone from the inside, by someone who has been part of politics through their entire life, who's made all the deals, who's done all the arrangements that have to be done, who's had all the entanglements. I think you have to have somebody from outside. Having said that, I don’t think this is the time to elect a president who has never run a corner store, let alone the largest enterprise in the world. . . “

". . . If there is one thing that my previous run for the presidency has shown me, it’s shown me that the American spirit is still strong. We’ve been battered over the last several years, but we’re not finished. The economy has humbled us, but it has not extinguished our fire for hard-work, innovation, and prosperity. I hope to get to know you all much better in the weeks and months to come, and I want to hear from you as well.”

May 3, 2011 - - - With both of their campaigns and supporters engaged in an online battle over who would out raise the other, the Romney and Palin campaigns release their much anticipated first quarter fundraising totals. Palin surprised many pundits when it was announced that her campaign had raised $29.8 million. Romney was close behind, raising $27.9 million. Newt Gingrich was in a distant third, reporting having raised $7.1 million. George Pataki trailed the rest of the pack significantly, raising only $950,000 since January.

The media reports that Todd and Sarah Palin have purchased a home outside of Atlanta, Ga, most likely for the purposes of mounting a national presidential campaign.

May 6, 2011 - - - The House of Representatives rejected a measure to repeal the Health Care Reform Act of 2010, by a margin of 241 - 195. A total of 24 House Republicans crossed the aisle to vote against repeal, while 10 Democrats voted in favor of repeal. Almost immediately following the attempt to repeal the bill, Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Mn.) introduced a measure to repeal the tax penalty portion of the health care reform bill. The original bill contains a provision that would penalize any American that does not purchase health care by making them pay a fine. While out-right repeal of the health care bill was viewed by many as politically risky, if not unpopular, the GOP feels that public opinion is behind them on the tax penalty.

The following day, President Obama took to the airwaves in a mid-day press conference to attack House Republicans. When asked by ABC News’ Jake Tapper if the move by House Republicans to eliminate the tax penalty would effectively kill the healthcare bil, Obama demurred: “No, the Republicans already tried that, and their efforts failed. They campaigned on this, Jake, remember? They promised that if they took control of Congress they would repeal a bill that will make healthcare more affordable for Americans. And they tried. But the American people, and the Congress, said NO. And now, they want to demonize me as a tax hiker. The whole basis of reducing the cost of healthcare is to increase the size of the pool - the number of insured, that is. And they know that. They know that the tax penalty is vital to increasing that pool of people, and they are effectively trying to kill it. Republicans, again, are standing in the way of lower costing health care. They want more of the same. They want insurance companies to have unfettered control of what they can charge, and they don’t care if a preexisting condition prevents you from receiving coverage. Their feet dragging has gone beyond obstructionist.” When Tapper pressed further, and asked the president if he had just conceded that the Republicans could kill the healthcare bill through repealing the tax penalty, Obama refused to concede: “No, like I said, they tried to kill the bill already and failed. The bill is on the books to stay, because that’s what the American people have asked for.”


June 1, 2011 - - - The House voted in favor of repealing the tax penalty portion of the Healthcare Reform Act of 2010, by a 230 - 203 margin; No Republicans voted against the repeal of the provision, while 7 Democrats votes for it. Two days later, the U.S. Senate voted in favor of repealing the provision, by a 52-47 margin, with all 49 Republicans voting in favor of the repeal, and 3 Democrats crossing the aisle to vote with the Republicans. The Democrats were Ben Nelson (D-Ne.), Mary Landrieu (D-La.), and Mark Warner (D-Va.). Pundits would begin to question Warner’s vote, given his usual loyalty to the President, and the fact that he is considered a leader of the moderate wing of the party in the Senate.

Obama, the next day, vowed to veto the bill, and did so on June 14, 2011. House Republicans brought a vote to the house floor to override the presidents veto, which failed by a vote of 234 - 195 (2/3 of both chambers, or 290 votes in the House, would have been required to overturn the President’s veto). Once the bill failed in the House, Majority Leader Sen. Schumer (D-NY) was successful at never allowing a vote to reach the Senate floor. Presidential contender Sen. John Thune spoke out after the failed override: “This is simply more evidence of the President’s disconnect with the American public. He’s outside the mainstream, and the fact that he just vetoed a bill supported by the majority of Americans and the majority of Congress, is irrefutable proof. He’s gonna have a hard time explaining this to voters next November.”

Fmr. Gov. Tim Pawlenty released a statement through his campaign manager, where he argued: “This is what happens when you have a President who disregards the will of the people. The elected majority can get nothing done. President Obama just made a huge mistake, and he hasn’t heard the last of it from the voters.”


Potential GOP frontrunner, Fmr. Gov. Mitt Romney releases a statement: “Nothing about this, sadly, is surprising. President Obama has made it very clear to the American people that he intends to spend this country into perpetual recession. We need to make sure we do something about it.”

Summer 2011 - - - Gary Johnson and Mitch Daniels announced during the summer that they would not seek the presidency in 2012.





July 9, 2011 - - - At the CPAC conference in July 2011, a presidential straw poll was conducted, with over 2,000 activist Republicans participating in the poll. Mitt Romney was the winner for the 4th time in the last 5 years, with Ron Paul winning the previous year in 2010. But the biggest news from the conference was the surprising third place finish of Sen. Scott Brown (R-Ma.). Pundits were left scratching their heads when Sen. Brown, a moderate Northeastern Republican from the liberal state of Massachusetts, and someone who has refused to enter the 2012 race, found so much support among grassroots conservative activists. Brown’s senate office could not be reached for coment.

2011 CPAC Straw poll results
Mitt Romney - 23%
John Thune - 18%
Scott Brown - 13 %
Sarah Palin - 13 %
Newt Gingrich - 7 %
Haley Barbour - 6%
Tim Pawlentty - 4 %
Rick Santorum - 3 %
George Pataki - 2 %
Ron Paul - 2 %
Dick Cheney - 1%
Gary Johnson - 1%
Jeb Bush - 1%


September 26, 2011 - - - Just after Congress returns from their summer recess in September, Washington hits gridlock. After days of debate over the Democratic introduced Cap and Trade Energy Bill, the Republicans have staged a government shut-down. When tempers flared after the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released the price-tag for the bill, Republicans vowed to shut down the government for the second time in 25 years if the Democrats would not withdraw the bill from the floor. When Obama and Congressional Democrats ignored the Republicans demands, the Republicans staged a government shut-down. An October 2, 2011 poll, conducted by Pew Research Center, showed that Americans disapproved of the government shut-down by a 56 to 31% margin. The move had backfired, and was being hailed by the media as nothing more than a political stunt.


September 27, 2012 - - - Ever since Mark Warner’s (D-Va.) vote in favor of repealing the healthcare reform tax penalty months prior, the pundits have increased their speculation as to whether or not the popular southern Democrat would challenge the increasingly embattled president. Sen. Mark Warner was one of a small handful of Senate Democrats that supported the Republicans in their government shut-down, due to the Cap and Trade price tag. In an interview with Diane Sawyer on ABC News, Warner attacked his party’s President, and made a surprising announcement. “The President is not only leading the Democratic Party into the political wilderness, he’s leading the American public off of a financial cliff. I’ve supported this President in the past when I thought he was right. But when circumstances on the ground necessitate a change in course, then a change in course it is. This President does not seem to subscribe to that train of thought. The American people, Democrats included, have had enough. Stop the spending Mr. President, and act like you care about the deficit. I cannot sit by and support a bill that will not only push us further towards insolvency, but will increase taxes on the average American by nearly $2,000 per household. Diane, there’s been some recent speculation about whether or not I will challenge President Obama for the Democratic nomination. I’m here today to inform you that I will. And if elected, I promise a progressive government, tolerant of all, but one that understands that government spending must be controlled, and taxes must remain low. I hope to make this case to Americans over the next few months. I’m doing this not to simply save the Democratic Party, but to save the American people from a debt-ridden future.”

Many pundits questioned the wisdom of challenging President Obama at the moment he announced, especially considering the political vulnerability of the Republicans in the wake of an unpopular government shut-down. Recent polling had showed Obama receiving a small bounce in the polls following what appeared to be Republican obstructionism gone awry.


September 28, 2011 - - - The second Republican Presidential debate was held in Los Angeles, California, and was hosted by CNNs Anderson Cooper. All 8 Republican Presidential candidates are in attendance, with the exception of Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, who attended a family members funeral.

At the debate, Palin was repeatedly hammered by questions over why she resigned her governorship. Moderator Anderson Cooper broke the ice when the third question of the night focused on the former Alaska Governor’s decision to resign her post with 18 months left in her first term.

Gov. Palin: “ . . . I can understand the need to ask someone who is asking to be your president that sort of question. But I’ve been clear on this from the start. The situation on the ground, in the summer of 2009, was very volatile. Upon my return from the national campaign trail, I found my office was under siege with frivolous ethics complaints. My state, known for its serenity and tranquility, became a breeding ground for paparazzi, journalists, cameras and lights. I had been effectively rendered ineffective. I was draining state resources. I did not resign my post for myself, or to better myself, or to run for president. I resigned my post because I was no longer able to make things work for Alaska. I resigned so that they would continue to prosper. So you see I‘ve . . . ”

Gov. Pawlenty: (interrupting) “But Ms. Palin, how can you possibly ask the American people to put you in another elected office when you left your prior office when it got too hot in the kitchen? This isn’t Alaskan politics we’re talking about here. We’re talking about the problems of the entire world . . . "(scattered applause from debate crowd)

Gov. Romney: “That’s a great question.”

Gov. Palin: “You’re darn right it’s a great question, Governor. Notice how I actually address you as Governor? Like I just said, it is not a matter of it getting too hot in the kitchen, as Gov. Pawlenty just said. And the last time I checked, Governor, you’re no longer auditioning for a job in Minnesota politics, either. I’m aware of what my responsibilities would be as President. The left-wing media had it out for me from the start, and harmed Alaska’s reputation in the process. I was not going to allow that to continue to happen."

Anderson Cooper: “So Governor Palin, are you telling the American people that if you were in a position as President in which you felt that you were harming America’s reputation, you would resign the presidency?”

Gov. Palin: “If I were ever in a position in which I was harming the American public, or the reputation of America and its people, I would resign. I would only hope that any of the men up here on stage would say the same if they also felt that they were harming America’s reputation in some way. But I’m not running to harm our reputation. I’m running to do quite the opposite. If I thought I couldn’t improve our standing, I wouldn’t be up here right now.”

Pundits seemed to be split down the middle after the debate. Olbermann, Matthews, Chuck Todd, and David Broder thought that Palin was harmed by the dominance of her resignation in the debate. “Anytime the word “resign” is mentioned, Palin loses a few more voters. I don’t see this issue going away soon.” Others, such as Charles Krauthammer, Billy Kristol, and Larry Sabato seemed to think that Palin had finally shed light on the reasons behind her resignation. “I think she handled that question better than I expected her to. The candidates were ripping into her one after another, and it just wasn’t pretty, or flattering, for them,” said Sabato. “For the first time, she was able to defend the over one-year-long accusation that she is simply a quitter.”


The other topic which dominated the debate centered on the very recent, and still ongoing, Republican shut-down of the federal government. Polls had revealed that the move was deeply unpopular amongst the American public, and Republicans were expected to cave on the shut-down in a matter of days due to the backfired plan. The Republican Presidential candidates had been all over the place on whether or not they supported the shut-down.

Anderson Cooper: Do you support the recent Republican government shut-down? Gov. Romney?

Gov. Romney: Normally, I would say no. It’s not a good thing to stop work, and just sit on your hands. But things have gotten so out of hand that I would have to say I can understand why Congressional Republicans did what they did. Another trillion dollar bill, Anderson? Seriously? The President is not listening to reason, and something had to be done.

Cooper: Is that yes or no?

Gov. Romney: It’s a “I know why they’re doing it, and I can’t say I blame them.”

Cooper: Okay. (puzzled look) Fmr. Speaker Gingrich?

Speaker Gingrich: (slight laughter) . . . I’m still not sure if that was a yes or no . . . (laughter from the crowd and all of the candidates on stage) . . . I can tell you that no, I don’t blame them one bit. Things have reached a dire place. You know, I have a distinct familiarity with government shut-downs. And this one is principled, just as the first one. Spending has gotten frightening. If a shut-down stops the spending, then that’s all we need.”

Cooper: Gov. Palin?

Gov. Palin: Oh, I’m gonna have to disagree with you, there, Newt. A government shut-down is not ALL that we need right now. I’m very much opposed to this shut-down, no matter what the circumstances. Stopping work should never be a solution for any problem. That won’t create any jobs, and it’s as unsustainable as the increase in government spending.

Cooper: Gov. Barbour?

Gov. Barbour: I’m gonna agree with Gov. Palin. I’ve been in politics for most of my life as a 2 term Governor from Mississippi, and a former lobbyist. Never have I ever solved a problem, or balanced a budget, or lowered taxes, or cut spending, by going home and sitting on my thumbs. And I have done all of the above. I’ve closed an $85 million government shortfall in my home state budget in Mississippi in my 8 years as governor. In two years, local observers are saying that its likely my state will be one of a small handful in the nation with a budget surplus. That’s quite the turnaround from the last several years. I have a record of responsible, fiscally conservative leadership. Not mean spirited, not ignorant to the ills of the needy, but responsible and rational fiscal governance. I’ve done that for my home state, and I can do that for this country.”

No polls were taken of how debate watchers viewed the debate performances, but pundits called the debate for Haley Barbour. “He came across as an accomplished consensus builder on a stage full of people light in the resume,” said David Gregory of NBC. Jake Tapper blogged: “Two things were clear from this debate - Mitt Romney didn’t do himself any favors by not being exactly clear on the question about the government shut-down. And Sarah Palin is against the shut-down? She continues her overtures to the center and moderates.”

Obama Approval Rating
Gallup Daily Tracking Poll (all adults)
Approve: 50%
Disapprove: 48%
Net: +2

Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll (likely voters)
Approve: 50% (strongly approve - 30 %)
Disapprove: 49% (strongly disapprove - 37 %)

Who do you support in the Democratic primary for President in 2012? (Zogby, 10/1-3, 2000 likely Democratic primary voters, +/-1.5%)
Barack Obama - 51%
Mark Warner - 21 %

Who do you support in the Republican primary for President in 2012? (PPP, 10/1-4, 1001 likely Republican primary voters, with leaners +/-3%)
Sarah Palin: 27%
Mitt Romney: 23%
Newt Gingrich: 11%
Haley Barbour: 10 %
Tim Pawlenty: 5%
John Thune: 5%
Rick Santorum: 3%
George Pataki: 1%
Other/Undecided: 15%

Potential 2012 match-ups (PPP, 1500 likely voters, +/-2.5%)
Sarah Palin v. Obama: 41 - 51 %
Mitt Romney v. Obama: 43 - 50%
Newt Gingrich v. Obama: 36 - 52 %
Haley Barbour v. Obama: 36 - 47 %
John Thune v. Obama: 35 - 46%
Tim Pawlenty v. Obama: 33 - 48 %
Rick Santorum v. Obama: 32 - 49 %
George Pataki v. Obama: 33 - 48 %

2012 Iowa Republican Caucuses (Rasmussen Reports, 600 likely Republican caucus-goers, 10/1-4)
Mitt Romney: 25%
Sarah Palin: 19%
Haley Barbour: 12%
John Thune: 10%
Newt Gingrich: 5%
Tim Pawlenty: 2%
Rick Santorum: 1%
George Pataki: 1%
Undecided/Other: 25%

2012 Democratic Iowa Caucuses (likely Democratic caucus-goers)
Barack Obama: 60%
Mark Warner: 30 %

2012 New Hampshire Republican Primary (likely Republican primary voters)
Mitt Romney: 34%
John Thune: 17%
Newt Gingrich: 10%
Sarah Palin: 9%
Haley Barbour: 8 %
George Pataki: 5%
Tim Pawlenty: 4%
Rick Santorum: 2%
Undecided/Other: 11%

2012 New Hampshire Democratic Primary (likely Democratic primary voters)
Barack Obama - 55%
Mark Warner - 22 %

October 8, 2011 - - - In a speech from his front porch in Wrentham, Massachusetts, Sen. Scott Brown (R-Ma.) announces before reporters that he will seek the office of the presidency in 2012. Pundits called his announcement one of the biggest shocks of the campaign season so far, if not the biggest. Chuck Todd said “What this does is put Republicans in a very interesting set-up heading into the primaries. Do they support the conservative wing of the party, or do they try to steer the party back in a center-right direction. You can never really know, because why is Sarah Palin making appeals to the center right now, if the right is so powerful? Brown might be just what the party wants, and even more desperately needs.” Some conservative pundits disagreed: “I respect Scott Brown as a wonderful family man, and a charismatic soul, but he is simply not a conservative. He voted for the Presidents jobs bill, and he’s indicated a willingness to do it again. I don’t see how conservatives could pull the lever for him with a clear conscious next November, unless he has a radical reawakening,” argued Glenn Beck. Yet some pundits still pointed out Brown’s appeal to tea party members, reminding many of how Brown was elected to the Senate in the first place.


October 10, 2011 - - - Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) announces that will be ending his campaign for the presidency, citing low poll numbers, and lack of fundraising.





October 11, 2011 - - - Just two weeks after it began, the Republicans ended their shut down of the federal government. The Obama camapaign becomes engrossed in a tussle with the Warner campaign over Democratic primary debates. No debates had been scheduled up until Warner announced his campaign in late September. CBS News offered to host a debate in late December in Iowa, just before the ‘first in the nation caucus.’ Both campaigns agreed to the debate, but the Obama campaign refused requests by the Warner campaign for more debates following the Iowa caucuses. Although campaign manager David Plouffe could not be reached for comment, many pundits speculated that Obama does not anticipate Warner remaining a candidate much longer after the Iowa caucuses.

December 3, 2011 - - - Mike Huckabee announces on his Fox News program, that along with a special guest, he would like to make an announcement. “I’d like to tell you all, right here on Huckabee first, that I am endorsing the good Governor, Haley Barbour, for president of the United States in 2012. Barbour is similarly positioned to where I was at this time just 4 years ago in Iowa, and polls are showing him within reach. He can win this, but its going to take your help and support. He is a true conservative, but even more than that, he has a proven track record of results. And if you would please, now, join me in welcoming my special guest, Governor Haley Barbour!”

December 6, 2011 - - - John McCain, making a surprise appearance at a campaign rally being held in New Hampshire, announces his endorsement of Senator Scott Brown. The endorsement shocks the political chattering class, as many had predicted that the former Presidential candidate would endorse his VP nominee and close personal friend, Sarah Palin. When asked to comment on whether or not the endorsement has rattled her faith in John McCain, or whether she regrets her past support for him, she responded on Greta Van Susteren’s show, “Absolutely not. John McCain is an American hero, and a political endorsement cannot change that. I respect his decision to endorse whomever he chooses in a political setting.”


December 12, 2011 - - - Former Vice President Dick Cheney, along with his daughter Mary Cheney, endorses by email Governor Mitt Romney. Romney graciously accepts the endorsement 3 days later at a rally in Lawrenceville, Georgia, appearing side by side with Cheney. Although not very popular amongst the general public (39 / 54 % favorable/unfavorable rating), Cheney maintains significant clout within the GOP (64 / 32 % favorable/unfavorable).

December 19, 2011 - - - Rudy Guiliani endorses Sen. Scott Brown on his brand new radio show, broadcast live on Sirius and XM Radio from New York City, NY.






December 20, 2011 - - - DEMOCRATIC DEBATE - Cedar Rapids, Iowa

The first, and what would eventually become the only Democratic debate between President Obama and Sen. Mark Warner, was not short on its own heated rhetoric and stark disagreements. Hosted by CBS’s Bob Scheiffer, the event was watched by an unexpectedly high 14 million Americans.

Bob Scheiffer: President Obama, if a voter were to walk up to you on the street today and ask you why unemployment has not budged in months, and why economic recovery has been so fleeting, and why employers have not begun to hire more employees, what would you say? How would you defend your record?

Pres. Obama: Bob, let me be clear. I’m fully aware of what is going on out there right now. I know that recovery has been painfully slow. But we have had steady, not constant, but at least consistent, private sector job growth for over the last year. That’s not the end of it, but that’s a positive thing. But I have to also address what got us into this mess. If you’ll remember, it took us 8 years to get into this mess. It’s been less than 3 years, and things have been tough. But they are getting better, albeit very slowly. We are on our way.

I ran for president 3 years ago because for much of the last decade, *a very specific governing philosophy had reigned about how America should work. Cut taxes, especially for millionaires and billionaires. Cut regulations for special interests. Cut trade deals even if they didn't benefit our workers. Cut back on investments in our people and in our future -- in education and clean energy, in research and technology. The idea was that if we just had blind faith in the market, if we let corporations play by their own rules, if we left everyone else to fend for themselves that America would grow and America would prosper. And for a time this idea gave us the illusion of prosperity. We saw financial firms and CEOs take in record profits and record bonuses. We saw a housing boom that led to new homeowners and new jobs in construction. Consumers bought more condos and bigger cars and better TVs.

But while all this was happening, the broader economy was becoming weaker . . The wages and incomes of middle-class families kept falling while the cost of everything from tuition to health care kept on going up. Folks were forced to put more debt on their credit cards and borrow against homes that many couldn’t afford to buy in the first place. And meanwhile, a failure to pay for two wars, and two tax cuts for the wealthy helped turn a record surplus into a record deficit.

I ran for president because I believed that this type of economy was unsustainable. I ran because I had a different idea about how America was built.* Now, don’t misunderstand me. I believe there is plenty of room for healthy debate and disagreement within the Democratic party, but if Sen. Warner subscribes to the philosophy I mentioned above, then why not run in the Republican primary? ( loud applause from debate crowd)

Scheiffer: Your response, Sen. Warner?

Sen. Warner: The president had me, up until he attempted to make the case that I’m a Democratic boogeyman who supports supply-side, trickle down, voodoo economics. The President had me when he spoke of not paying for tax cuts for the wealthy, and two wars. He even had me when he spoke of a failed system that lasted for 8 years in which the government ignored lon-gterm structural economic instability. I know a thing or two about these things, especially from my experience as a broker of mobile phone franchise licenses. And my experience as a founder and investor in a number of technology companies, one of which was Nextel.

It is exactly this sort of background that helped to teach me how to balance a budget, that helped teach me that bloated deficits will spell the end of any successful enterprise. It is exactly this kind of experience that helped me as Governor to save my home state of Virginia’s AAA bond rating, a distinction held by only 5 other states. It’s this kind of experience that allowed me to cut taxes, while allowing for the single largest investment in K-12 education in Virginia history. It is exactly this sort of governing philosophy that’s been followed by some of the most successful and effective Democratic politicans in the last century. Democrats like Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, and Bill Clinton. What I’ve just described is my idea of what the Democratic Party is - a party that stands for responsible economics, balanced budgets, and tax cuts for the middle class. Not a party for endless deficit spending, bloated budgets, and economic stagnation.

It is exactly this sort of background that I’ve described above that President Obama does not seem to possess. I argue that it is you, President Obama, who has lost touch not only with the American people, but with the members of your own party. (applause from the crowd)

Pundits argued, following the debate, that Warner was effective at providing a decent contrast from Obama to Democratic voters. By trying to cast himself as a Clinton-style Democrat, and Obama as too liberal, Warner was risking creating a rift within the party. A Rasmussen Reports poll taken the following day, showed that Democratic debate watchers thought that Warner had won the night.

Who do you think won the debate? (Rasmussen Reports, 400 Democratic Debate Watchers, +/-5.0)
Barack Obama: 29 %
Mark Warner : 43 %
Draw: 28 %


December 30, 2011 - - - In the days immediately following the debate, polling firms closed for the Christmas holidays. But when polling firms released their first numbers on Friday, December 31, the message was mixed. For Democrats, it looked like Warner’s heavily viewed Iowa debate performance had an affect on the race, especially when looking at Obama’s approval rating amongst Democratic voters. For Republicans, the race looked like as much of a toss-up as ever, with a new candidate appearing to surge in the final polls.

Obama Job Approval Rating (Rasmussen Reports, 600 likely Democratic primary voters, +/- 4.0)
Approve: 62 % (at 74% pre-debate)
Disapproval: 33% (at 18% pre debate)

Obama Job Approval Rating (Rasmussen Reports, Daily Tracking Poll, All likely voters)
Approval: 44 % (strongly approve: 21%)
Disapproval: 56 % (strongly disapprove: 40 %)
Net: -12

Mark Warner Favorable/Unfavorable Rating (Rasmussen Reports, 600 likely Democratic primary voters +/-4.0)
Favorable: 58 %
Unfavorable: 19%
Unsure/No Opinion: 21 %

2012 Iowa Democratic Caucus (Survey USA, 750 likely caucus-goers, +/-3.5)
Barack Obama: 49 %
Mark Warner: 34 %
Undecided/Someone else: 17 %

2012 New Hampshire Democratic Primary (Survey USA, 850 likely primary voters, +/-3.0)
Barack Obama: 59 %
Mark Warner: 28 %
Undecided/someone else: 13%

2012 Nevada Democratic Caucus (Survey USA, 600 likely caucus-goers, +/-4.0)
Barack Obama: 50%
Mark Warner: 27%
Undecided/Someone else: 23 %

2012 South Carolina Democratic Primary (SurveyUSA, 850 likely primary voters, +/-3.0)
Barack Obama: 56 %
Mark Warner: 13 %
Undecided/someone else: 31 %

2012 Republican hopefuls, National (Quinnipiac, 12/27 - 12/29, 2,000 likely voters, +/- 1.5
Favorable / Unfavorable
Mitt Romney - 43 / 44
Sarah Palin - 41 / 51
Scott Brown - 42 / 34
Haley Barbour - 39 / 32
John Thune - 29 / 33
Newt Gingrich- 37 / 52
Tim Pawlenty- 25 / 32
George Pataki- 27 / 35

2012 Iowa Republican Caucuses (Rasmussen Reports, 600 likely Republican caucus-goers, w/ leaners, 12/27-29)
Mitt Romney: 25%
Sarah Palin: 20%
Haley Barbour: 18%
Scott Brown: 17 %
John Thune: 5%
Newt Gingrich: 4%
Tim Pawlenty: 2%
George Pataki: 0%
Undecided/Other: 9%

2012 New Hampshire Republican Primary ( 650 likely Republican primary voters, w/ leaners, 12/27-29)
Mitt Romney: 30%
Scott Brown: 19%
Sarah Palin: 10%
Haley Barbour: 9%
John Thune: 8 %
Newt Gingrich: 6%
George Pataki: 3%
Tim Pawlenty: 3%
Undecided/Other: 12%


2012 Nevada Republican Caucus (SurveyUSA, 600 likely caucus-goers, +/-4.0)
Mitt Romney: 36 %
Scott Brown: 14 %
Sarah Palin: 12%
Haley Barbour: 9 %
Newt Gingrich: 4%
John Thune: 3 %
Tim Pawlenty: 3%
George Pataki: 1%
Undecided/someone else: 18 %

2012 South Carolina Republican Primary (SurveyUSA, 850 likely primary voters, +/-3.0)
Mitt Romney: 20 %
Newt Gingrich: 17 %
Sarah Palin: 15 %
Haley Barbour: 10 %
Scott Brown: 8 %
John Thune: 4 %
Tim Pawlenty: 2 %
George Pataki: 1 %
Unsure/Someon else: 23%


January 4, 2012 - - - Mitt Romney Pulls Off a Victory in First Crucial Contest

Des-Moines, Iowa, 1.4.12 - - - Mitt Romney has scored a crucial, albeit close, victory in the country’s first contest between 8 Republican hopefuls for president in 2012. With 94% of caucus locations reporting, Romney leads the rest of the pack with 29.0% of the vote, while Mississippi Governor, and dark-horse candidate Haley Barbour scored the runner-up position. Newcomer to the race, Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts, also finished in a surprising 3rd place, considering his recent entry into the race. Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, and one-time frontrunner, placed fourth, in what her campaign is conceding is a disappointment. “This is definitely not what we wanted,” bemoaned Palin campaign manager, Meghan Stapleton. “But hey, it was a tight race between the top 4 candidates, so this isn’t devastating. We’re turning our eyes southward to South Carolina, and West to Nevada.” When pressed about whether or not they are conceding New Hampshire to the other candidates, Stapleton replied: “No - we’ll be up there too!”

Winner, Mitt Romney, spoke to supporters late in the evening, just after 10:00pm eastern.
“Iowa…..we did it! You did it. I cannot begin to convey to you how thankful I am for all of your hard work. When we started this campaign a year ago, we knew it would be a grueling process getting here, and indeed its been grueling. But it is moments like now that remind you of why you’re fighting. We’re fighting to take our country back, and Iowa just sent a clear message to Barack Obama that we are sick of his brand of “hope and change.” We’ve got a new brand - its called cutting taxes. Its called budget slashing. It’s fiscal sanity. And I am going to take my message of fiscal sanity to the voters of New Hampshire, and we will win.

Haley Barbour gave a raucous speech to his supporters after finishing a close second place behind winner Mitt Romney. “You know, for a campaign that is under-funded by the tune of, oh, just a few million dollars….for a campaign that was dismissed by the national media as ‘dead on arrival,’ I’ll take a close 2nd place in the Iowa caucuses any day!” (Loud applause). I’m gonna take this message to New Hampshire, and that’s where we’ll have our first victory! But tonight, celebrate, and rejoice in knowing that we’re here right now because of you!”

Sen. Scott Brown appeared the following morning on Fox and Friends to spin his surprising 3rd place finish. “You know, I entered this race a little after the rest of the contenders. I’m playing catch up, but if playing catch up gets me 3rd place in the Iowa caucuses, then I know my campaign is capable of anything once we’re caught up. A lot of pundits, you folks included, questioned whether or not there was room for a Scott Brown Republican in this race, whether or not I could be a serious contender, hailing from the state of Mass. I think a lot of people got their answer last night. Mitt, Haley, Sarah, and the rest of you . . . I’ll see you in New Hampshire. And we’re not coming to finish in 3rd place. This time we’ll win.”


Earlier this morning, both George Pataki and Tim Pawlenty announced to supporters that they were suspending their campaigns for the presidency.

Iowa Republican Caucus Results (41 total delegates, winner take all): 1st ballot*
Mitt Romney: 24.7 % (42,199 votes) 41 delegates
Haley Barbour: 20.1 % (34,340 votes) 0
Scott Brown: 18.0 % (30,752 votes) 0
Sarah Palin: 17.2 % (29,385 votes) 0
John Thune: 9.4 % (16,059 votes) 0
Newt Gingrich: 6.4 % (10,934 votes)
Tim Pawlenty: 2.7 % (4,613 votes)
George Pataki: 1.5% (2,563 votes)

Iowa Caucus Results: 2nd ballot
Mitt Romney: 28.8 % (46,655 votes)
Haley Barbour: 26.4 % (42,767 votes)
Scott Brown: 24.0 % (38,879 votes)
Sarah Palin: 20.8 % (33,695 votes)


Blue = Romney, Brown = Barbour, Purple = Brown, Red = Palin

Delegate Count (Total Delegates Available - 2,329, 1,186 for majority)
Mitt Romney: 41
Haley Barbour: 0
Scott Brown: 0
Sarah Palin: 0
John Thune: 0
Newt Gingrich 0:
Tim Pawlenty: 0
George Pataki: 0

*The Iowa Caucuses require that in order for a candidate to make it through the first round of balloting, the candidate must meet a minimum threshold of support of 15%, or they are eliminated from 2nd ballot. The supporters of the eliminated candidate can then select from the candidates that received at least 15% of the vote in the 1st ballot.


January 4, 2012 - - - President Victorious, But Close Results Show Disgruntled Base

Des Moines, Iowa, 1.4.12 - - - President Obama emerged from an uncertain Iowa caucus with the all-important victory, but many are already saying that Warner is the biggest beneficiary of the evenings results. Defeating Warner by only 8 points, the once immensely popular President Obama is showing some real signs of vulnerability amongst his base. Still, Obama was confident in his victory speech: Iowa, you’ve done it again! (loud applause). And you sent a clear message to America tonight! You have done what the state of New Hampshire can do in seven days. You have done what America can do in this new year, 2012. *You said the time has come to move beyond the bitterness and pettiness and anger that's consumed Washington. To end the political strategy that's been all about division, and instead make it about addition. To build a coalition for change that stretches through red states and blue states. Because that's how we'll win in November, and that's how we'll finally meet the challenges that we face as a nation. We are choosing hope over fear, again. We're choosing unity over division, and sending a powerful message that change is still coming to America.* We‘re not there, but we‘re on our way.”

“On our way” had become the defacto slogan of the Obama/Biden campaign, and was making more frequent appearances in Obama’s stump speeches.

Mark Warner, with his campaign in full spin mode, gave a joyful speech to a large crowd inside of a hotel ballroom outside of Des Moines. “Iowa, I owe you, because before tonight, I don’t think anyone thought this was possible. But now, because of you, others will hear our message, and we can make a great campaign out of this. I may not have won, but I came back from being down by a 4 to 1 margin. We proved that we’re a serious campaign, about serious issues. I talked about the country we love; the many challenges we face together; and the great promise that is ours to achieve; the work that awaits us in this hour, on our watch: to defend our country from its enemies; to advance the ideals that are our greatest strength; to increase the prosperity and opportunities of all Americans and to make in our time, as each preceding American generation has, another, better world than the one we inherited. President Obama, I’ll see you in New Hampshire!”


Iowa Democratic Caucus Results (1st and only ballot, proportional delegates)
Barack Obama: 53.6 % (79,328 votes) 25 delegates
Mark Warner: 45.9 % (67,932 votes) 20 delegates


Blue = Obama, Red = Warner

Delegate Count: (Total delegates available: 4,291; 3,791 non-super delegates, 2419 needed for majority)
Barack Obama : 25
Mark Warner : 20


Jan 4, 2011 (cont.) - - - With just one week until the NH primaries, and a week and a half until the next national debate, the Republican candidates scramble across the country, with their stops and visits revealing where they feel their best chances lie. Mitt Romney flew to New Hampshire where he stumped at the state capitol for 3 straight days following the Iowa caucuses. He also purchased two statewide adds, one featuring his private sector experience, and another attacking Scott Brown on his conservative credentials. Haley Barbour, staying true to his word in his Iowa speech, flew to N.H. where he barnstormed on the other side of the state, less than 2 hours from a Romney rally. He would spend the bulk of the rest of his time in South Carolina. Scott Brown and John Thune followed suit with the two front-runners for the nomination, Romney and Barbour, hinging their bets on a best-scenario finish in N.H. Brown also purchased a NH statewide ad buy, defending his conservative record, and reminding voters of his fresh, bipartisan approach. Meanwhile, Palin and Gingrich headed South, with Palin splitting her time between campaigning in South Carolina and Nevada, while making a massive ad purchase in S.C, featuring 2 “Mama-grizzly-esque” ads, and 2 ads attacking Mitt Romney for past flip-flops, and Haley Barbour for his career lobbyist/politician persona. Palin’s add buy in the state was the largest in South Carolina history.

In New Hampshire, Warner was devising a strategy for victory in the Granite State. Obama was expected to make an appearance in New Hampshire on January 9, and would rely on his financial advantage by running television adds. This would allow him to focus on South Carolina, a state which polling had showed Warner would be competitive in (while the large African American base of the South Carolina Democratic primary is expected to lean heavily to Obama, Warner ‘s southern moderate politics make him very appealing to SC whites, who were likely to also vote heavily in Warner’s favor. With Obama focusing on SC, Warner had a free reign over New Hampshire for 5 days. He would engage in heavy retail politics, press the flesh, shaking as many voters hands as possible. He also would run only one very effective television ad featuring a husband and wife, sitting down at the kitchen table, worrying over their children’s future. The woman asks her husband, after placing down a newspaper article, “How can we afford this spending. President Obama is driving us over a cliff, and he’s mortgaging away our children’s future. The only thing I can do, as a lifelong Democrat, is vote for Mark Warner. He’s the Clinton-Democrat in this race. He'll get us back on track."

New polling showed the upcoming races to be close, and gives us our first look at the primary races in Michigan, Florida, and Maine . . .


*Obama speech - http://www.pinemagazine.com/site/art...ry-speech-1102

January 5, 2012 - - - Polling update

Obama Job Approval Rating (Rasmussen Reports, 600 likely Democratic primary voters, +/- 4.0)
Approve: 59%
Disapproval: 34%

Obama Job Approval Rating (Rasmussen Reports, Daily Tracking Poll, All likely voters)
Approval: 38 % (strongly approve: 21%)
Disapproval: 59 % (strongly disapprove: 47 %)
Net: -21

Mark Warner Favorable/Unfavorable Rating (Rasmussen Reports, 600 likely Democratic primary voters +/-4.0)
Favorable: 59 %
Unfavorable: 28%
Unsure/No Opinion: 13 %

2012 New Hampshire Democratic Primary (Survey USA, 850 likely primary voters, +/-3.0)
Barack Obama: 52 %
Mark Warner: 39 %
Undecided/someone else: 9%

2012 Nevada Democratic Caucus (Survey USA, 600 likely caucus-goers, +/-4.0)
Barack Obama: 51%
Mark Warner: 35%
Undecided/Someone else: 14 %

2012 South Carolina Democratic Primary (SurveyUSA, 850 likely primary voters, +/-3.0)
Barack Obama: 53 %
Mark Warner: 40 %
Undecided/someone else: 7 %

2012 Michigan Democratic Primary (Survey USA, 850 likely primary voters, +/-3.0)
Barack Obama : 61 %
Mark Warner : 22 %
Undecided/someone else: 17 %

2012 Florida Democratic Primary (Survey USA, 850 likely primary voters, +/- 3.0)
Barack Obama: 48 %
Mark Warner: 37 %
Undecided/Someone else: 15 %

2012 Maine Democratic Caucus (Survey USA, 600 likely caucus-goers, +/-4.0)
Barack Obama: 56 %
Mark Warner: 19 %
Undecided/someone else: 25 %

2012 New Hampshire Republican Primary ( Survey USA, 650 likely Republican primary voters, w/ leaners, 12/27-29)
Mitt Romney: 31%
Scott Brown: 23%
Sarah Palin: 10%
Haley Barbour: 10%
John Thune: 9%
Newt Gingrich: 5%
Undecided/Other: 12 %


2012 Nevada Republican Caucus (SurveyUSA, 600 likely caucus-goers, +/-4.0)
Mitt Romney: 35 %
Scott Brown: 19 %
Sarah Palin: 13%
Haley Barbour: 10 %
Newt Gingrich: 4%
John Thune: 4 %
Undecided/someone else: 15 %

2012 South Carolina Republican Primary (SurveyUSA, 850 likely primary voters, +/-3.0)
Mitt Romney: 22 %
Sarah Palin: 18 %
Haley Barbour: 17 %
Newt Gingrich: 10 %
Scott Brown: 8 %
John Thune: 6%
Undecided/someone else: 19 %

2012 Michigan Republican Primary (850 likely primary voters, +/-3.0)
Mitt Romney: 39 %
Scott Brown: 19%
Sarah Palin: 14%
Haley Barbour: 8%
John Thune: 7%
Newt Gingrich: 4%
Undecided/someone else: 9 %

2012 Florida Republican Primary (850 likely primary voters, +/-3.0)
Mitt Romney: 27 %
Scott Brown: 19 %
Sarah Palin: 18 %
Haley Barbour: 11 %
John Thune: 8 %
Newt Gingrich: 6%
Undecided/someone else: 11 %

2012 Maine Republican Caucuses (850 likely primary voters, +/-3.0)
Mitt Romney: 26 %
Scott Brown: 22 %
John Thune: 9 %
Sarah Palin: 9 %
Newt Gingrich: 6 %
Haley Barbour: 5 %
Undecided/Someone else: 23 %


January 11, 2012 - - - He Did It! Brown Scores Surprise NH Victory

Concord, N.H., 1.11.12 - In what many are calling a surprise turn of events, Sen. Scott Brown (R-Ma.) won the important New Hampshire primary last night. With 98% of precints reporting at this hour, Brown had carried the day with 32.9 %, followed closely by Gov. Mitt Romney, with Palin and the rest of the pack finishing far behind. The New Hampshire Brown campaign headquarters erupted with cheers when the Associated Press called the race for Brown at 11:00pm.

“Thank you! New Hampshire is known as the state of comebacks. It’s known as a state where some in the past found their voice, found their stride. And tonight, you’re the reason that the Republicans are going to take back the White House this November! (loud applause). You know, I seem to remember that just a couple of short months ago, when I entered the race, I was told it would be a futile effort on my part. I didn’t have enough money to compete with the big names, with Gov. Romney or Gov. Palin. I did not have the base of support that they had. I was not a true conservative (crowd boos). Boy are we showing them? We’re showing them that being a conservative doesn’t mean that you can’t work together for the greater good. We’re showing them how to put real conservative principles back into effect again, by attracting independents to the cause, and open-minded Democrats. I’m the only candidate that can accomplish that in this race. And I showed it tonight, here in New Hampshire. I’ll do it again in Nevada, and in Michigan, and South Carolina. Our success has only just begun!”

Pundits over the next two days mulled the state of the Republican race. “I can’t believe he did it,” commented Bill O’Reilly on Brown’s victory in New Hampshire. “I mean, I can definitely see HOW he did it, but still, I can’t believe a guy that voted for the jobs bill, has entertained Cap and Trade, and may vote AGAINST extending the Bush tax cuts for ALL Americans this week in the Senate - I don’t see how he wins in the Republican primary. But this is HOW he did it. He did it because New Hampshire has an open primary, meaning the independent voters can vote in the primary. That’s the only explanation for me on how he did it. He’s not going to fair as well in the closed primaries.”

Keith Olbermann also weighed in: “Mitt Romney’s still in pretty good shape in my opinion. He’s going to win Nevada due to the Mormon vote, he’s going to take Michigan because it’s his home state, and Sarah Palin is as good as done. This all helps Romney. Palin’s toast. One 4th, and one 3rd place finish is not impressive for the GOP’s princess. I think her terrible performance in NH has sealed her fate. She can’t make it in a state with an open primary, because she hasn’t changed independents minds about her. She’s finished.”


Appearing on CNN’s State of the Union with Wolf Blitzer, GOP consultant Mary Matalin disagreed with Olbermann’s take on Palin: “Look, Palin has a lot of money. She’s raised a lot of money from the grass roots. She’s had a couple of bad performances, but NH was never going to be kind to her. Look, Wolf, this race isn’t over yet. And it’s always been the case with Sarah that what doesn’t kill her makes her stronger. And the most important piece to all of this: I think she’s about to receive an endorsement from the popular governor of SC. This race isn’t over yet.”

On his Fox Talk radio program, Spencer Hughes made the case that despite his poor showing in NH, Barbour could fill a void: “Palin’s performance is leaving it wide open for Barbour to step in and be the social conservative’s conservative. Watch for him to perhaps make a play in Nevada, but definitely in S.C.”

After a sting of poor performances, both the Gingrich and Thune campaigns announced that they would be ending their campaigns for the GOP nomination in 2012. The Republican race had, shockingly fast, been reduced to four.

New Hampshire Republican Primary Results (Open primary)
Scott Brown: 33.1 % (98,741 votes) (24 delegates)
Mitt Romney: 29.7 % (88,599 votes) (0 delegates)
Sarah Palin: 17.4 % (51,906 votes)
John Thune: 12.3 % (36,692 votes)
Haley Barbour: 4. 7% (14,021 votes)
Newt Gingrich: 2.2 % (6,563 votes)


Purple = Brown, Blue = Romney

Delegate Count to date (Total Delegates Available - 2,329; 1,186 for majority)
Mitt Romney - 41
Scott Brown - 24
Sarah Palin - 0
Haley Barbour - 0
John Thune - 0
Newt Gingrih - 0

January 11th (cont.) - - - New Hampshire Shocks the Nation: Warner likely winner in Close Vote!

Concord, N.H., 1.11.12 - In what will likely become a very narrow victory for Virginia Senator Mark Warner, New Hampshire has shocked pundits and the nation as a whole. Pundits are calling the close election a sign of a repudiation of Barack Obama’s economic policies by Democratic voters. With just over 95% of precints reporting, Warner clings to a 1.2 point lead. Most observers now feel that lead is insurmountable, and the Obama campaign is expected to concede this morning, shortly. Warner addressed his very ecstatic reporters late in the night.

“What did I tell you, New Hampshire! We are going to reverse the economic policies of this president, and set this party, and this nation straight again! You ignored the talking heads. You ignored the elite establishment. You ignored the pundits, and you proved all of them wrong. Yes, it is possible to do better. And yes, I think that only a Democrat can do it. But we’ve got to get a better Democratic candidate. And New Hampshire, you, tonight, told the country that Democrats want a better nominee. You, New Hampshire, just took the most important step to ensuring they get one!”

Obama/Biden campaign manager David Plouffe told ABC’s Jake Tapper that the narrow loss in NH is not a repudiation of Obama, and promised that the President would rebound: “The President was aware that NH might be a challenge, but you cannot say by any stretch of the word that this was a definitive message. I mean, the networks still haven’t called it. But I can guarantee you that he’s not out of this. Sen. Warner is going to have a tough time explaining to Democrats in Nevada and Michigan why he wants to extend some old Bush tax cuts to rich Americans. He and the Republicans are running around here screaming about the budget deficit, but they want to cut taxes for millionaires. How is that smart, responsible, conservative fiscal policy? Sen. Warner shares the same views as Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin on this, and has even taken a more GOP-friendly position on the Bush tax cuts than their parties winner tonight in N.H.! I continue to wonder why Sen. Warner is not running in the Republican primaries, and he’s going to have to explain that to voters in the upcoming primary states.”

2012 New Hampshire Democratic Primary Results (Open Primary) 252,077
Mark Warner - 50.5 % (124,022 votes) (12 delegates)
Barack Obama - 49.2 % (127,298 votes) (10 delegates)


Red = Warner, Blue = Obama

Delegate Count to Date: (Total delegates available: 4,291; 3,791 non-super delegates; 2,419 needed for majority)
Barack Obama: 35; w/ super delegates - 66
Mark Warner: 32 w/ superdeleages - 39

Upcoming primaries/caucuses:
New Hampshire and Michigan - 1/14/12
South Carolina - 1/19/12
Florida - 1/24/12
Maine - 2/2/12


January 11, 2012 (continued) - - - Fresh off of their primary wins, both Senators Scott Brown (R-Ma), and Mark Warner (D-Va) race back to D.C. for the crucial House and Senate vote on extending the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000 (the House and Senate would both vote overwhelmingly to extend the Bush tax cuts for those making less than $250,000, with only nominal Democratic opposition). Second to only coverage of the Republican and Democratic primaries themselves, the networks and cable news outlets were heavily covering the various candidates positions on the contentious issue. An ABC/Washington Post poll showed that while extension of the Bush tax cuts was a popular political issue for the Republicans, Americans were divided over whether or not to extend those cuts to wealthier Americans:

Should the Congress vote in favor to extend President Bush’s tax cuts for people making less than $250,000 a year?
Yes - 71 %
No - 21 %
Unsure/No opinion - 8 %

Should the Congress vote in favor to extend President Bush’s tax cuts for people making more than $250,000?
Yes - 39 %
No - 46 %
Unsure/No opinion - 15 %

Democrats, led by President Obama, had rallied around a more moderate position in opposition to extending the cuts for “wealthy Americans.” That view was opposed, interestingly, by his primary campaign opponent, Sen. Mark Warner. Warner had made a name for himself as a fiscal hawk in the mold of Bill Clinton, but shocked many Democratic pundits when he announced he would support extending the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000. Bill Clinton, who had remained quiet throughout the entire primary season thus far (and whose silence was perceived by many as quiet support for Warner, due to his wife’s position in the Obama Administration), was prompted to say, when asked at a Clinton Foundation event about Warner’s position, “I can’t say that I understand it, and I don’t agree with it. These people have been slashing taxes like crazy for their country club buddies since before I took office, and you can’t look me in the face and tell me you’re for responsible, budget-balancing economic policy, and then turn around and cut taxes for the wealthiest of Americans in the same breath. Not in these dire economic times.”


The entire Republican presidential field supported extension of the Bush tax cuts for all Americans, with the exception of New Hampshire victor Sen. Scott Brown, who was being hammered by his Republican opponents on the issue. Fmr. President George W. Bush, who like Fmr. President Clinton swore to remain neutral throughout the primary season, spoke out when asked in an interview by Barbara Walters for a 20/20 special: “I know Scott Brown well. I like ‘em a whole lot. But he’s making a mistake with the class warfare issues. I’ve always believed, and represented in my Administration, a belief that you don’t just cut one groups taxes, you cut everybody’s taxes. The whole argument there is that you can’t put additional burdens on the primary sources of jobs and economic growth in our country. It worked under my Administration, and Scott Brown’s position doesn’t acknowledge that, so I don’t agree with him there.”


A new Gallup poll showed that while President Bush was not as popular as some ex-Presidents, his numbers had certainly recovered from their record breaking lows in 2007 and 2008.

Do you a favorable or unfavorable opinion of former President George W. Bush?
Favorable - 45 %
Unfavorable - 46 %
. . . And his numbers were even higher amongst Republicans (60 / 33 %)


Late in the afternoon of January 11, 2012, 3 days until the Nevada caucuses and Michigan primaries, the House of Representatives voted 240-195 in favor of extending the tax cuts of 2003 for those making more than $250,000 a year. A total of 19 House Democrats, largely members of the Southern, Blue Dog Caucus, voted in favor of the extension, while 5 House Republicans voted against it. Later that evening, the United States Senate, in another close vote, approved the extension by a 52 - 48 margin, with four Democratic senators (presidential hopeful Mark Warner included), voting in favor of the extension, while Sen. Scott Brown was the sole Republican vote against the extension in the Senate. Just before the vote, newly elected governor Brian Sandoval, Republican from Nevada, announced at a campaign stop that he is endorsing Sen. Scott Brown in the Republican caucuses.

PPP takes a national poll of likely Republican voters about their 2012 preferences, and for the first time, the Romney/Palin dominance appears to be shaken:
Mitt Romney: 31 %
Scott Brown: 28 %
Sarah Palin: 22 %
Haley Barbour: 11 %
Undecided/Someone else: 8%

And President Obama continued to lag in the daily tracking polls, with a sour economy becoming an anchor on his approval ratings:

Obama Approval Rating
Gallup Daily Tracking Poll (all adults)
Approve: 40%
Disapprove: 56%
Net: -16

Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll (likely voters)
Approve: 37% (strongly approve - 20 %)
Disapprove: 60% (strongly disapprove - 48 %)
Net: -23

. . . And making matters more difficult for the incumbent administration, a new national poll of likely Democratic voters shows that Warner is gaining some traction with voters, despite a double-digit lead:

Who do you support in the Democratic primary for President in 2012? (Zogby, 1/11-13, 2000 likely Democratic primary voters, +/-1.5%)
Barack Obama - 52%
Mark Warner - 38 %



January 13, 2010 - - - At a last minute campaign stop, newly-elected Michigan governor Rick Snyder (who won his governor’s race by double digits), made a late endorsement of favorite son, Mitt Romney. Polling and pundits had long anticipated that Romney would win the state by a large margin, given Romney’s close ties to the region, and the fact that his father was a former long-time Governor. As a result, campaigning in the state was minimal for all of the candidates in the few days preceding the contest. And after an initial play in Nevada by all of the candidates, polling soon revealed what appeared to be another likely Romney victory (due to its Mormon population and proximity to Utah, a hotbed of Romney support). However, Romney did make make late appearances in both states, while not passing up an opportunity to slam his opponents absence: “One has to wonder how someone can be serious about running this nation without spending any time in a state the size of Michigan.”

Obama, stumping in Michigan, tore into his primary opponent, while also tying Warner to Republican candidates on the recent vote in favor of extending the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000: “Again, my fellow Democrats, I have to ask you: Why is Senator Warner voting with the Republicans, lock, stock, and barrel, and running in the Democratic Primary? Why is he cutting taxes for wealthy Americans, and increasing the tax burden for all of you? You have the chance to make it very clear how the Democrats in Michigan feel about Sen. Warner’s betrayal on Saturday!”

January 15, 2012 - - - Romney sweeps first multi-contest night, Haley Barbour suspends campaign.

Kalamazoo, Michigan - 1.15.12 Mitt Romney is two states closer to capturing a majority of the delegates needed for the Republican nomination for President in 2012. In a night with very few surprises, the chatter and speculation was largely centered around who finished 2nd in the races, as polling had shown that Romney would be the likely victor in both states, and the fact that Barbour will suspend his campaign. With a commanding 53% victory in Michigan in a crowded field, Romney easily carried his birth state, with Scott Brown finishing a distant second. In Nevada, Romney won another decisive, albeit slightly less large, contest against second place finisher, Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin performed her best to date in terms of the rankings, but still finished well beneath Romney. Palin’s slightly surprising appearance was attributed to an active tea party organization in the state that backed her candidacy.

Haley Barbour was the other talk of the night. After a strong 2nd place finish in the Iowa caucuses, the media-professed “dark horse candidate” suspended his campaign, and thanked supporters, while interestingly making no mention of a possible future endorsement. Citing that his campaign was unable to compete financially (the media had reported the day before that his campaigned was rumored to be out of money), Barbour bid his supporters farewell. The media would speculate for days about who would receive his stamp of approval, if anyone. “I just don’t see how the benefit of Barbour bowing out helps anyone but Palin at this point,” commented CNN contributor Paul Begala. “I mean, her opponents are now Romney and Brown. And with the exception of last night in what was essentially Romney's back yard, he hasn’t convinced the conservative wing of his party, or at least not the socially conservative wing, that he’s one of them. I know Palin’s performance has been lackluster, but this may leave her a small, small opening.” New contributor, and former Governor of NY, Eliot Spitzer, disagreed: Begala responds: “Not if they can’t inspire the base, Governor. Tonight’s debate should be interesting . . .”

Michigan Republican Primary Results (Open primary)
Mitt Romney: 52.7 % (475,419 votes) (30 delegates *)
Scott Brown: 26.5 % (239,063 votes) (0 delegates)
Sarah Palin: 18.0 % (162,382 votes)
Haley Barbour: 2.7% (24,357 votes)


Purple = Brown, Green = Romney

Nevada Republican Caucus Results
Mitt Romney: 42.3 % (20,581 votes) (34 delegates)
Sarah Palin: 28.4 % (13,818 votes) (0 delegates)
Scott Brown: 21. 4 % (10,412 votes)
Haley Barbour: 8.6 % (4,181 votes)[/b]


Green = Romney, Purple = Brown

Delegate Count to date (Total Delegates Available - 2,329; 1,186 for majority)
Mitt Romney - 105
Scott Brown - 24
Sarah Palin - 0
Haley Barbour - 0
John Thune - 0
Newt Gingrih - 0[/b]

*The Republican National Committed has indicated that Michigan is sanctioned for holding their primary prior to February 5, 2008. This results in a loss of half the original 60 delegates.

January 15, 2012 (Continued) - - - Split Decision! Obama Soars to victory in Michigan, but Warner nabs second surprise.

Lansing, MI. 1.15.12 - Democratic primary voters have rendered another split decision in the first duel contest night of the primary season. After rampant buzz that the President was in deep political peril, the President bounced back with a resounding victory in the Industrial Northwest, Michigan, the country’s 11th largest state. The state was heavily contested with outside groups such as Moveon.org and Democratsforthebudget supporting both Obama and Warner, respectively. Despite a pre-election poll from PPP which showed Warner behind Obama by 10 points, the President pulled off a landslide defeat. But the celebration was slightly muffled when several hours later, the AP called the Nevada caucuses for Sen. Warner, in another close contest between the two opponents. Pre-election polling showed Warner within striking distance, but most had settled on a small Obama victory. The opposite proved true, and with 91% of caucus precints reporting, Warner carried 51 % of caucus-goers, with Obama at 48%. Obama proclaimed victory with supporters at a hotel in Lansing, Michigan, while Warner did likewise in Carson City, Nv. The night’s split decision left the political punditry salivating:

“I’m having trouble seeing how any pro-Warner surprises are good news for the President, lopsided victories aside,” contends Bill Kristol on Fox’s Greta Van Susteren.
“He was supposed to win in Nevada. Heck, he was supposed to win in N.H.? Are none of you beginning to detect a pattern? Warner is picking up steam, and NH was a game-changer. You have Republicans screaming ’Palin or Brown better drop out, and fast’ out of fear that we’re damaging our brand heading into November. Well if that’s the case, we all need to settle down, because the Democrats are doing it too, and I think to a more disastrous affect, because they were in trouble without a contested primary. But one thing is for sure - the Republicans need to turn their attention to Warner. Stop ignoring him. You don’t want to face him in November, because he takes away some of your biggest differences with the big-government Obama agenda.”

Alan Colmes retorted: “You know what? I’ll give credit where credits due, but Warner has not produced to the extent that you, and many of his supporters are claiming. Okay, so they’ve split the primaries, but we’re only 4 in, Bill! And both of his victories were by miniscule margins. Obama’s had two fairly significant victories, one of which, Michigan, was very damaging to one of Mark Warner’s central arguments to Democrats: that he is more electable in November against whomever the Republicans nominate. So far, his results are not making compelling enough of a case to kick Obama out. And his disappointing performance in Michigan, a crucial Democratic state in 2012, is worrying to say the least. Lots of polls indicate he is a regional contender, and Michigan confirmed that for me. I think he’s going to lose steam and lose it quick. His base just isn’t diverse enough.”

2012 Michigan Democratic Primary (Open Primary)
Barack Obama - 61.4 % (436,704 votes) (88 delegates)
Mark Warner - 37.5 % (266,715 votes) (40 delegates)[/b]

Red = Warner, Blue = Obama

2012 Nevada Democratic Caucuses 10082
Mark Warner - 50.5 % (5,091 votes) (14 delegates)
Barack Obama - 48.4 % (4,880 votes) (11 delegates)



Delegate Count to Date: (Total delegates available: 4,291; 3,791 non-super delegates; 2,419 needed for majority)
Barack Obama: 137; w/ super delegates - 161
Mark Warner: 73 w/ superdeleages - 79


January 15, 2012 (continued) - - - Final GOP Debate from the University of South Carolina in Columbia, SC.


The final Republican Primary debate was arguably the most contentious, with Palin attempting to turn voters ire and anger towards the front-runners, Mitt Romney and Scott Brown. Hosted by Fox New’s Chris Wallace, the just passed tax cut extension for all Americans, and President Obama’s vow to veto it, consumed a large portion of the debate, as well as the possibility of completely defunding The Healthcare Reform Act of 2012.

Chris Wallace: Sen. Brown, you stated 11 months ago that you would oppose an effort, if successfully launched in the Senate, to repeal what has come to be known by the chattering class as Obamacare. The Senate never voted on that. Now, Minority Leader McConnell is insinuating that he may stage an attempt to bring a vote to defund Obamacare to the floor. Would you support such an effort, in light of your recent statement regarding repeal?

Sen. Brown: George, I made that comment 11 months ago, at the start of 2011, just a few weeks before updated CBO estimates revealed how devastating it could be if we fully fund Obamacare. Now a lot has happened since . . .

Gov. Romney: (interrupting) Wait, wait, with all due respect Senator, NEW CBO numbers revealed how devastating Obamacare would be? New numbers? Where have you been for the last two years since Obamacare passed? Projected numbers from over two years ago showed that Obamacare would be the biggest contributor to the $14 trillion projected budget deficit. I just don’t see . .

Gov. Brown: Now with all due respect Governor in return, I haven’t interrupted you all night, and I take great issue with being lectured on the costs of Obamacare from a man that has a “care-title"of his own attached to his name. You don’t have to remind Gov. Palin or myself of what kinds of terrible effects Romney-care has had on the people of Massachusetts, but as their Senator, you sure as hell don’t have to ask me! Why do we all have to remind Gov. Romney? And the audacity of you, Senator, to attack me on Obamacare. Well, that’s just rich.

Wallace: . . . Gentlemen, back to the . . .

Gov. Romney (interrupting): Now hold on one second Chris, Sen. Brown has leveled a falsehood at me and I would like the chance to respond. Massachusetts had a crisis of coverage on their hands, and its disingenuous for Sen. Brown to suggest otherwise. It’s also . . .

Wallace and Brown speaking at the same time: Inaudible

Gov. Palin: Gentlemen, the American people deserve more than this. They deserve . . .
(Loud, extended applause)
Gov. Palin: They deserve more than this, and frankly, this is what the American people are talkin’ about, guys. Enough with the bickering, enough with the needless finger pointing. We have one goal and one goal only in mind - and that is defeating Barack Obama in November.
(loud extended applause)
This is what they are talking about. It’s time to get to work folks, and it’s time to stick to our conservative values. You both seem content to do the exact opposite. Gov. Romney, shame on you for lecturing anyone on votes for big spending - you authored, didn’t just sign into law, but authored Massachussett’s own state version of Obamacare. And Sen. Brown, you just cast one of the most anti-free market, anti-common sense conservative votes I’ve ever seen just a couple of days ago! So neither of you can throw rocks at the other’s glass house, cause they’ll both shatter. (applause) This party needs someone with principles, and someone that can walk the walk. Not a couple of good ole boys from Massachussetts.

Pundits on both sides of the aisle agreed prior to the debate that in order to remain in the race, and in order remain viable, Palin would need a solid performance. After the debate, they also seemed to agree that the debate was one of Palin’s best performances in the campaign to date. Said Hannity: “Did you see the Governor tonight, folks, she was great . . . Talk about a contrast? Never has she made the point better than she did tonight that elections matter, and that Republicans have differences. Honestly, the best thing she could have possibly done for her faltering campaign was convince Republican primary voters that Romney and Brown are closet liberals. And whether she convinced them all, she sure convinced me. Do I smell a comeback?”



James Carville even remarked, “Last night was not pretty for the boys from Massachussetts. It’s hard to deny that this wasn’t a memorable moment for Sarah Palin in the voter‘s minds. You know, this wasn‘t completely spontaneous on her part. She made a similar remark in her debate up in Alaska when she was running the Murkowski‘s out of office. It went over really well there, and I think it just did the same here tonight. But hey, they provided the bait. She just used it to her advantage. I really think the “American people deserve better” line is one of the most compelling lines I’ve heard in a debate in a while, and I’m not going to be surprised if this gives her campaign a little boost. It has that ‘are you better off than you were 4 years’ ago kind of feel to it, doesn‘t it?”

Before the sun had risen the morning following the debate, the Palin campaign’s PR director had written the script to Palin’s new main primary ad - “America Deserves Better.”


January 16, 2012 - - - In the days immediately leading up to what many called the “make or break” state, the candidates were all but living in the Palmetto state. On the Democratic side, polling had shown that despite the large African American segment of South Carolina Democrats, Warner was closing on Obama. Poll watchers also noted that with the exception of Michigan, Warner had over performed the pollsters predictions. Both campaigns were spending lots of time in the state, and given his financial advantage, Obama was up and on the air in nearly every market, including the expensive Charlotte, NC market. Warner’s t.v. air presence was noticed, but on a much smaller scale. And even more surprising, a new Survey USA poll, released today, shows that South Carolina’s Democratic Primary voters are not going to be as kind to Obama as they were 4 years earlier, in a crowded 3-way race.
Who do you support in the Democratic primary for president in 2012? (SurveyUSA, 900 likely SC Democratic primary voters, 1/14-15, +/-3.0)
Barack Obama: 41 %
Mark Warner: 44 %
. . . When asked only of white Democratic primary voters:
Obama: 17 %
Warner: 65 %
. . . When asked only of black Democratic primary voters:
Obama: 76 %
Warner: 16 %

Weary of what appeared to be a primary shaping up to be sharply divided on race, campaign manager David Plouffe dispatched Obama to deliver a powerful and compelling speech on race. But uplifting rhetoric aside, Obama continued to hammer Warner on his vote to extend the Bush tax cuts for wealthier Americans. New polling from Rasmussen showed that the President had the winning message, and certainly when considering only Democrats:
Do you agree, or disagree, with the United States Congress’s recent vote to extend the Bush tax cuts for those families making over $250,000? (RasmussenReports, 1,000 national likely voters, +/-3.5)
Agree: 40 %
Disagree: 51 %
Undecided/no opinion: 9 %
… when asked amongst Democratic likely voters
Agree: 15 %
Disagree: 70 %

The day before the SC primary, former life-long politician and Senator from South Carolina, Ernest “Fritz” Hollings, endorsed Sen. Warner at a campaign appearance at Myrtle Beach, SC. While a former big name in SC Democratic politics, Sen. Hollings had laid low since retiring from the upper chamber in 2005. His endorsement was viewed with surprise by many SC politicos, and the clout of such an endorsement was unknown. A flash poll, taken by Zogby, showed that a plurality of SC Democrats were unsure of, or had no opinion, of Fmr. Sen. Hollings (40% favorable, 19 % unfavorable, 41 % unsure, never heard of).


January 16, 2012 (cont.) - - - On the Republican side, South Carolina was looking increasingly like a free-for-all. Starting the day early, Mitt Romney appeared with Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) in Charleston for some barnstorming through the regions southernmost counties. Graham had been a long time supporter of the Governor from Massachussetts, and had spent a considerable amount of time strategizing and coordinating with Romney campaign manager Ed Gillespie. While not necessarily the most popular Republican in the state (Graham’s favorable/unfavorable amongst SC Republicans is 57 / 39, Sen. Demint’s is 70/ 21, and Gov Haley’s is 66/ 26) he has orchestrated several victories in the state, and may just prove to be what puts Mitt Romney over the top.


On the morning of the 16th, just after the riveting GOP debate watched by millions the night before, two big-names in SC politics had yet to make an endorsement. Sen. Jim Demint, and newly elected Gov. Nikki Haley were the two most powerful and popular Republicans in SC. The fact that neither had endorsed a GOP presidential contender so close to the primary left pundits surprised . . . That is, until both SC Republicans were seen exiting a heavily-tinted black Chevy Tahoe at a campaign rally in Spartanburg, SC . . .


Gov. Haley, Jim Demint step out of Shadows, Make Joint Endorsement of Sarah Palin!

Spartanburg, SC, 1.16.12. In front of a crowd of about 2,000 in an outdoor venue in Spartanburg SC, Governor Haley and Senator Demint lent their backing to the former Governor of Alaska, and former Vice Presidential candidate, Sarah Palin. “I want to thank you personally, Nikki and Jim. Thank you so much. Folks, Nikki and I became close pals back in 2010 when, she was in a spot that both of us are all too familiar with. The position of fighting from behind. The position of sticking it to the establishment. The position of, going a little rogue, and demanding the entrenched good-ole boys remember that they answer only to us. Nikki knew that when I endorsed her run for Governor. That’s why I endorsed her, and that is why I so humbly accept her endorsement now. With the Governor, and the good Senator’s help, we can shake these good-ole boys up one more time! South Carolina, get out there and vote on Thursday! It’s too important to stay home. Let your voice be heard. Stand with Gov. Haley, Sen. Demint, and myself and say ‘President Obama, enough is enough. It’s time for you to keep the change. It’s time for us to restore our country!’”

Pundits had speculated briefly the night before, after Palin’s strong debate performance, and Barbour’s suspending his campaign, that perhaps one of the two popular SC Republican politicians would emerge and endorse Palin. However, the joint appearance with the floundering Palin campaign was sure to provide a boost. The large rally received lots of air time on local network news. Also, The Tea Party Express had begun running attack ads in the state against both Mitt Romney and Scott Brown as ‘Republicans in Name Only’, or RINOs. Meanwhile, pundits remained skeptical of Palin’s chances of pulling off the upset. Rachel Maddow: “Look, I suppose there could be some late movement in her favor as a result of the VERY last minute endorsements she just received. But she’s done so poorly up until now. I don’t think a victory in South Carolina will be enough to convince the base of the party that she is electable in November against Barack Obama. I think Warner will lose. Mitt Romney has run up a fairly impressive run of victories, and you can’t just sweep those under a rug because of some endorsement.”

A poll taken by SurveyUSA of South Carolina Republican Primary voters provided little evidence of anything surprising taking place. The poll was completed, however, before both the final GOP debate in SC, and the Haley/Demint endorsements.
Who do you support for the Republican nomination for President in 2012? (Survey USA, 1/11-13; 700 likely SC Republican primary voters, +/-3.0)
Mitt Romney: 35 %
Sarah Palin: 27 %
Scott Brown: 24 %
Undecided/someone else: 14 %



January 20, 2012 - - - Palin Roars Back! Fmr. Alaska Governor declares comeback with landslide S.C. victory!

Charlotte, NC - 1.20.12 -- “We just had an excellent night, a truly, truly remarkable night,” exclaimed Palin campaign manager Meg Stapleton. Indeed it was a remarkable night, at least according to the political talking heads. Sarah Palin, a one time front-runner for the GOP nomination, but who had been all but counted out as of late due to a string of stinging primary losses, has won the South Carolina primary, and she has won it in a big way. With 96 % of precints reporting at this hour, Palin carried 49% of the vote, an impressive feat considering her past defeats, and the nature of competing in a crowded field. Palin thanked her opponents for a gracious defeat, and vowed to continue pushing ahead.

“I’ve just heard from Senator Brown and Gov. Romney, and I would like to thank both of them for their gracious concession here tonight. South Carolina, thank you doesn’t quite convey what I want to tell you right now!” (Loud applause) Gov. Haley, and Sen. Demint, your warmth and support has been so endearing, and I can certainly understand now why you offer yourself up in public service to these great SC voters. They are truly wonderful citizens of this great country. To all those who said my campaign was finished. To all of those that have been asking me to step aside. I have two words for ya: I’m back!”(Loud applause). “And we’re taking our country back!”

The media became abuzz with the idea of a possible Palin v. Obama, or perhaps even Warner, battle. Ever since her 4th place finish in Iowa, Palin was quickly dismissed as a GOP superstar who can attract attention, but isn’t trusted by voters to lead. Now, with a resounding victory in the all important state of SC, and her first victory at that, could Palin pull off what seemed so impossible just the day before? Pundits from across the spectrum discussed the state of the GOP race. “I think what we’ve just seen is a Republican Party base that just raised it’s eyebrows and said ‘wait a minute…. Mitt Romney and Scott Brown….leading our party? I don’t think so.’” said Rush Limbaugh. Arianna Huffington: “Sarah Palin has just made Barack Obama and the Democrats a whole lot happier. Even Mark Warner. She’s officially back in this race, and her supporters are more rabid than ever. I don’t see how the two guys who are soft on conservative principles can compete now. She need one win to prove she could be viable to the conservatives. She has that now, and I think it’s all uphill for her from here on out. Downhill for Republican general election prospects, but uphill for Sarah Palin.” David Broder argued, “I hate to be the ‘Bill Clinton’ here, but this is JUST the SC primary. Winning the SC primary in and of itself does not make you the nominee. Sarah Palin still has to prove that she can win a Republican primary outside her ideological base, conservative South Carolina. Until yesterday, she hadn’t even won a primary. I think Romney is still the front runner, and Scott Brown’s fate may have been sealed by his disappointing performance there. I think it’s a Romney-Palin world right now.” Chris Matthews opined: “I think a resurgent Sarah Palin is a scary thing for the Democrats. Look, the president is bogged down in his own primary battle with an insurgent moderate from Virginia. It looks like the President will pull it off, but is it guaranteed? Absolutely not. Now, you have 9+ % unemployment, coupled with general economic malaise, and this is a serious recipe for a Sarah Palin presidency. I’m not saying it's going to happen. I’m not even saying she’s going to be the nominee. I think Romney still has the upper hand, certainly in terms of delegate and establishment support. But we have a real race on our hands now, I think.”

One day following the South Carolina Primary, the Palin campaign announced that they had raised $7.2 million in one day, setting a record for the largest one-day haul in history.

2012 South Carolina Republican Primary Results (open primary)
Sarah Palin - 48.4 % (296,328 votes) (47 delegates)
Mitt Romney - 30 .1 % (184,287 votes) (0 delegates)
Scott Brown - 19.8 % (121,255 votes) (0 delegates)


Red = Palin, Green = Romney, Purple = Brown

Delegate Count to date (Total Delegates Available - 2,329; 1,186 for majority)
Mitt Romney - 105
Sarah Palin - 47
Scott Brown - 24

States won to date:

Green = Romney, Red = Palin, Purple = Brown

ABC/Washington Post had conducted a series of several polls since Palin announced her intention to run for president, testing the former Alaska’s governor’s favorability rating. Eager to see what impression, if any, Palin’s SC victory and debate performance had on all adults, nationwide, the Post took a poll:
Do you have a very favorable, somewhat favorable, very unfavorable, somewhat unfavorable, or no opinion, of former Gov. Sarah Palin? Number in parantheses = poll result from Feb, 2011.
Very Fav Somewhat Fav No Opinion Somewhat Unfav Very Unfav
27 % (20) 18 % (16) 4 % (12) 11 % (11) 40 % (41)
Total Favorable / Unfavorable
45 % / 51 % / 4 %

. . Analyzed pollster Tom Jensen, of PPP: “Obviously Palin’s favorability rating is at a better place than it was a year ago at this time. But she isn’t changing many minds. The good news for her is that most of the undecides from a year ago have decided they like Palin. The bad news: the people that disliked her before, dislike her now. And they dislike her a lot. So she hasn’t changed any minds. She’s going to need to change a few hearts and minds to be elected.”


January 20, 2012 - - - Big Night for the President - Obama takes South Carolina!

Charlotte, NC, 1.20.12 - President Obama scored what he called a “decisive and game-changing” victory last night in South Carolina. Echoing a growing argument being made by his campaign, Barack Obama insisted that his primary win in South Carolina, as well as victories in Iowa, and Michigan, should indicate to Sen. Warner that now is the time to bow out of the race. With 94% of precints reporting, Obama appears to have carried the evening with 54 % of the vote. In his victory speech, Obama laid out his argument for Warner’s withdrawal, and continued to pound the Republicans for their proposals to cut spending on middle class Americans: “I’ve said this before, and I believe it to be true today - competitive primaries are a good, and positive thing for Americans. I openly support Democratic primaries, and as you all know, I am VERY familiar with how long they can go on. (crowd laughs). But the difference between the Democratic primary 4 years ago, and the one taking place today, is that 4 years ago, two Democrats were competing in the Democratic primary! (loud applause). Sen. Warner is voting for bills that myself, and virtually every other Democrat in the US Congress wants me to veto. I’ve won 3 contests thus far, and in some cases, by large margins. I ask Sen. Warner, that for the sake of unity, for the sake of the Democratic Party, and for the sake of the future of our country, to do what is right.”

Senator Mark Warner spoke to supporters in Aiken, SC. While disappointed in the result (a handful of polls had shown Warner ahead in the SC primary by anywhere between 1-8 points), he remained defiant in the face of the president’s request: “President Obama, the last time I checked, hundreds of thousands of Democrats have voted for me in the five Democratic contests we’ve held so far. For you to claim I’m not a Democrat, or to insist that I must step aside, is an affront to the sizeable portion of Democrats that have voted for me thus far, and does nothing to further Democratic unity. President Obama, this contest has only just begun, and just like 4 years ago, I strongly suggest you get use to it!”


While the rhetoric between the two Democratic camps continued to heat up, many pundits seemed to agree that Warner’s initial strong performances in early primary states was fading, and that he would need to score more victories soon in order to seriously challenge the incumbent President in the delegate count. Said James Carville: “Look, Warner was making a lot of hay back at the end of last year, what with the budget deficit and spending and taxes. I think that he was attacking a president when he was down, because it was cool. If you ask me, the new job less numbers, the fact that we’re down to 9.2% unemployment, all of these things are going to make Democrats come home to Obama. I think Warner is playing on borrowed time, and at this point, I have to seriously question his motives. At what point can we ask, are you simply trying to sabotage the Democratic party? Other than that, I don’t see how or why he stays in this race.” Bill Bennett responds to Carville’s assertion: (laughter) “Ha ha, James you have got to be joking, right? A new senator from Virginia comes out of nowhere, and has your guy, ‘the One,’ on the ropes, and you sound angry about it? Go figure. Look, Warner’s won 2 contests to Obama’s 3. This is the same mess that they did to Hillary 4 years ago, screaming for her to drop out of the race and stop “sabotaging” her party. And they were saying that to her, despite the fact that she was winning the popular vote! My reason for bringing this up, James, is that there is a habit of the Obama campaign to take to screaming about Democratic disunity when things don’t look good for them. He’s trying to muscle Warner out of the race, like he did with Hillary, and the race has only just begun!”


2012 South Carolina Democratic Primary (Open Primary)
Barack Obama - 52. 6 % (280,207 votes) (26 delegates)
Mark Warner - 47.1 % ( 250,908 votes) (19 delegates)


Red = Warner, Blue = Obama

Delegate Count to Date: (Total delegates available: 4,291; 3,791 non-super delegates; 2,419 needed for majority)
Barack Obama: 163; w/ super delegates - 199
Mark Warner: 92 w/ superdeleages - 99

States won to date:

Blue = Obama, Red = Warner



January 23, 2012

With the Florida primary just 3 days away, the candidates all tracked down to the Sunshine state to compete for the most delegate-rich state in the process so far. For the Democrats, there was immense pressure on Mark Warner to perform strongly. After a string of good news for President Obama (victory in SC, unemployment down from 9.6 to 9.2%, and a fresh endorsement from Florida Governor Alex Sink), Warner was feeling some heat from the Democratic establishment to stand down. Polling was also looking less optimistic. Democrats were breaking, but apparently, they were breaking for the president:

Who do you support in the Democratic primary for President in 2012? (Zogby, 1/20-22, 2000 likely Democratic primary voters, nationally; +/-1.5%)
Barack Obama - 58% (+6)
Mark Warner - 37 % (-1)

. . . And while Democratic Primary voters were getting to know Warner better, they did not all necessarily like what they saw . . .
Mark Warner Favorable/Unfavorable Rating (Rasmussen Reports, 1/20-22, 600 likely Democratic primary voters, +/-4.0)
Favorable: 57 % (-2)
Unfavorable: 34 % (+6)
Unsure/No Opinion: 9 % (-4)

. . . Despite consistently low approval ratings since late 2010, the recent spate of economic news, as well as Obama’s continued promises to veto the extension of the Bush tax cuts for wealthier Americans, had pulled him out of his all-time lows seen shortly after the Iowa Caucuses. . .

Obama Job Approval Rating
Gallup Daily Tracking Poll (all adults)
Approve: 42%
Disapprove: 51%
Net: - 9

Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll (likely voters)
Approve: 40% (strongly approve - 23 %)
Disapprove: 58% (strongly disapprove - 45%)
Net: -18

. . . And amongst Democrats, he was fairing even better . . .
Obama Job Approval Rating (Rasmussen Reports, 1/20-22; 600 likely Democratic primary voters, +/- 4.0)
Approve: 63 % (+4)
Disapproval: 29 % (-5)
Unsure/No opinion: 8 %

And freshly released polling on some of the more important primaries coming up painted a picture of a race that was tilting towards Obama . . ,

2012 Florida Democratic Primary (Survey USA, 850 likely primary voters, +/- 3.0)
Barack Obama: 53 %
Mark Warner: 43 %
Undecided/Someone else: 4 %

2012 Maine Democratic Caucus (Survey USA, 600 likely caucus-goers, +/-4.0)
Barack Obama: 65 %
Mark Warner: 28%
Undecided/someone else: 9 %

2012 California Democratic Primary (SurveyUSA, 900 likely primary voters; +/-3.0)
Barack Obama - 56 %
Mark Warner - 32 %
Undecided/someone else - 12 %

2012 New York Democratic Primary (SurveyUSA, 900 likely primary voters; +/-3.0)
Barack Obama - 59 %
Mark Warner - 26 %
Undecided/someone else - 15 %

2012 Georgia Democratic Primary (SurveyUSA, 800 likely primary voters; +/-3.0)
Barack Obama - 40 %
Mark Warner - 42 %
Undecided/someone else - 18 %

2012 Missouri Democratic Primary (SurveyUSA, 700 likely primary voters; +/-3.5)
Barack Obama - 40 %
Mark Warner - 38 %
Undecided/someone else - 22 %

2012 New Jersey Democratic Primary (SurveyUSA, 850 likely primary voters; +/-3.0)
Barack Obama - 53 %
Mark Warner - 36 %
Undecided/someone else - 11 %

2012 Colorado Democratic Caucus (SurveyUSA, 600 likely caucus-goers; +/- 4.5)
Barack Obama - 50 %
Mark Warner - 39 %
Unsure/someone else - 11 %

On the Republican side, pundits were now wondering whether or not Romney, with his built-up momentum from past wins, and large campaign war-chest, would be the favorite to win in the sunshine state. After all, he performed well in the state against John McCain in 2008, and the states GOP base, 65 yrs old and up, had supported Romney by the largest numbers up to this point. However, Sen. Marco Rubio, a popular (72 / 16 % favorability rating amongst Florida Republicans) and newly elected Senator from Florida with tea party backing, had endorsed Sarah Palin in the days immediately following her South Carolina victory. Scott Brown, whose financial resources were known to be smaller than either Romneys or Palins, bypassed heavy ad spending in the state, and spent lots of time on local media outlets. The primary in Florida is a closed primary, so the Brown campaign is expecting a difficult finish, as his largest base of support, independents, will not be allowed to participate in the primary.

On January 24, two days before the primary, popular former Governor Jeb Bush endorses Gov. Mitt Romney. (Bush’s favorability rating amongst Republicans in Florida is 63 / 25 %.)


The polling landscape for Super-Duper Tuesday appears close, but provided generally positive news for the Romney camp. He was performing well in the delegate rich states, and maintained his strong presence in the mountain West. Palin’s best polling performances reinforced the notion that she is a regional force with some exceptions. Polling showed that Scott Brown is not-competitive outside of the North East. For Scott Brown, his primary hope was to rack up as many delegates in the Northeast as possible to remain in the race, and wait for either Palin or Romney to implode or make the other candidate unacceptable to Republicans.

PPP takes a national poll of likely Republican primary voters about their 2012 preferences (PPP, 1/20-22; 1,200 likely Republican primary voters; +/-3.0)
Mitt Romney: 40 %
Sarah Palin: 35 %
Scot Brown: 18 %
Undecided/Someone else: 7 %

2012 Republican Candidates, National (Quinnipiac, 1/20-22, 2,000 likely voters, +/- 2.0)
Favorable / Unfavorable. Numbers in brackets = favorability ratings amongst Republicans
Mitt Romney - 43 / 47 [ 57 / 33 ]
Sarah Palin - 45 / 48 [ 66 / 23 ]
Scott Brown - 41 / 37 [ 50 / 35 ]

Potential 2012 match-ups (PPP, 1/20-22; 1,500 likely voters, national; +/-2.5%)
Mitt Romney v. Obama: 49 - 45 % Romney v. Warner: 41 - 41 %
Sarah Palin v. Obama: 47 - 47 % Palin v. Warner: 42 - 44 %
Scott Brown v. Obama: 46 - 40 % Brown v. Warner: 39 - 39 %
Below is a sample of polling for some of the bigger races coming up between now and Super-Duper Tuesday.

2012 Florida Republican Primary (SurveyUSA, 1/20-22; 850 likely primary voters, +/-3.0)
Mitt Romney - 40 %
Sarah Palin - 33 %
Scott Brown: 23 %
Undecided/someone else: 4 %

2012 Maine Republican Caucuses (SurveyUSA, 1/20-22; 500 likely caucus-goers, +/-3.0)
Mitt Romney - 39 %
Scott Brown - 37 %
Sarah Palin - 21 %
Undecided/Someone else: 3 %

2012 California Republican Primary (SurveyUSA, 1/20-22; 900 likely primary voters, +/-3.0)
Mitt Romney - 35 %
Sarah Palin - 23 %
Scott Brown - 21 %
Undecided/someone else - 21 %

2012 New York Republican Primary (SurveyUSA, 1/20-22; 900 likely primary voters, +/-3.0)
Mitt Romney - 37 %
Scott Brown - 25 %
Sarah Palin - 23 %
Undecided/someone else - 15 %

2012 Georgia Republican Primary (SurveyUSA, 1/20-22; 700 likely primary voters, +/-4.0)
Sarah Palin - 37 %
Mitt Romney - 36 %
Scott Brown - 15 %
Undecided/someone else - 12 %

2012 Missouri Republican Primary (SurveyUSA, 1/20-22; 650 likely primary voters, +/-4.0)
Mitt Romney - 38 %
Sarah Palin - 34 %
Scott Brown - 18 %
Undecided/someone else - 10 %

2012 New Jersey Republican Primary (SurveyUSA, 1/20-1/22; 700 likely primary voters, +/-3.5)
Mitt Romney - 38 %
Sarah Palin - 21 %
Scott Brown - 20 %
Undecided/someone else - 21 %

2012 Colorado Republican Caucuses (SurveyUSA, 1/20-22; 600 likely caucus-goers, +/-4.0)
Mitt Romney - 40 %
Sarah Palin - 29 %
Scott Brown - 19 %
Undecided/someone else - 12 %


January 25, 2012 - - - Just one day before the biggest primary up to this point, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Anthony Kennedy was pronounced dead at John Hopkins Medical Center after suffering from a massive heart attack. As the news of his sudden death hit the media, the President’s Administration quickly released a statement. “Our hearts and prayers go out to the members of Justice Kennedy’s family, especially his wife, Mary. This comes as a great shock to myself and members of Justice Kennedy’s family. His years of service on the court will be remembered with distinction. Please honor his family’s request for privacy and respect during this difficult period. My Administration will discuss a replacement in the days and weeks to come.”



While all of the presidential candidates offered their sincere condolences to the Kennedy family, none of them engaged in the usual partisan muckraking that follows a Supreme Court death or resignation, at least not before the Florida primaries the following day. However, pundits wasted little time in noting the deep, profound significance of Justice Kennedy’s death. Opined Fox‘s Glenn Beck: “Make no question about it. This is the most important thing to happen in Obama’s Administration to date. The unofficial “swing vote” on the Court has unexpectedly died, and Obama is about to make his 3rd appointment in 3 years. This is simply incredible. And it’s significant because, unlike his prior appointments, this appointment will change the balance of the court! Sotomayor replaced a liberal, David Souter. So the balance of the court was preserved. A liberal replaced a liberal. Justice Kagan was replacing Justice John Paul Stevens, so again, one liberal in exchange for another - the balance of the court is preserved. But now, Justice Kennedy, he is THE swing vote. And a liberal president has the opportunity to name his replacement. We are about to see a Supreme Court battle of epic proportions.”

MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann agreed: “Everyone understood that due to her failing health, Justice Ginsburg would be the next justice to step down, or god-forbid, perhaps die on the bench. But with Obama as President, her replacement would almost certainly have preserved Ginsburg’s judicial philosophy, if you will. But President Obama has a once-in-a-presidency opportunity to appoint a 3rd justice to the Court, and to appoint a justice in his political mold, a progressive mold. He would dramatically shift the court in a way that no president has in a very long time. So yes, Glenn Beck, there will be a Supreme Court battle of “epic proportions,” as you so boarishly put it. And there SHOULD be! President Obama, this is why we’re supporting you! Because a President Warner appointee to the court scares me, almost as much as a Romney or Palin appointee. Don’t let us down.”

The Administration refuses, in the time before the Florida primary and the Kennedy funeral, to discuss an official short list of potential nominees. But the blogosphere was abuzz with big names like Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Janet Napolitano, and even whispers of Mark Warner (in exchange for leaving the race).

Meanwhile, down in Florida, as word spread of Kennedy’s death, the Republican and Democratic hopefuls were making their final appeals. Romney appeared to have a more natural base of support in the state (which was reflected in polling), but their was a slight sense that the momentum was behind Palin for the moment. The Brown campaign all but conceded that they were having trouble competing financially with the Romney and Palin financial juggernauts. “When you’re competing against someone with that sort of financial advantage, you notice it. When you’re only on the air in the Miami market, and your opponents are on the air in Miami, Orlando, Tampa, and Talahasse markets, you notice it in the polling. We’re hoping for a miracle,”said Brown campaign manager Ken Mehlman. A daily Zogby tracking poll in the state, taken the day before the vote, showed a close race: 42 % supported Romney, 35 % supported Palin, and 19 % supported Brown, 4 % were undecided.


Mark Warner, continuing to campaign on the strength of his performances in the primaries thus far, and the strength of his message of fiscal responsibility, continued to attack Obama for trying to bully him from the race. At a stop in Jacksonville, Warner lamented: “Obama doesn’t want you to think about the budget deficit. He doesn’t want you to ask him about the healthcare package. He doesn’t want you to remind him of our surprising second place finish in Iowa and SC, or our shocking victories in NH and Nevada. He forgets that the Democratic party is a big tent party, and he ignores my supporters to his detriment! Florida, lets show President Obama what true fiscal leadership looks like!”

January 27, 2012 - - - FLORIDA PRIMARY TOO CLOSE TO CALL; PALIN MAINTAINS SMALL LEAD!

St. Petersburg, Fla., 1.27.10 --- At the time we went to press, the Florida Republican Primary appears to be too close to call for both the Florida State Board of Elections, and most news and network organizations. As of 5:55 AM this morning, Fmr. Gov. Sarah Palin clings to a narrow lead of 42.23 %, compared to Fmr. Gov. Mitt Romney’s 41.88%, with 98.2% of precints reporting. Sen. Scott Brown was in a distant third with 16% of the vote. Fox News has called the race for Sarah Palin, while the AP, CNN, and most of the networks have yet to call the race. Palin announced via facebook this morning. “My campaign is being told by hired hands that the vote margin in Florida is too great for Gov. Romney to overcome. I’m hearing that the Associated Press is prepared to call the race for me in the next half hour. As far as I’m concerned, we’ve won! I’ll be speaking in the morning here in beautiful Miami, and we’ll be off to Maine! Talk about a whirlwind!" Gov. Romney’s campaign has not conceded, and Romney urged patience with his supporters late last night at his campaign headquarters in Tampa. “Folks, we’ve got a painfully close vote on our hands, and we will be conceding NOTHING. Not when we’re behind a couple thousand votes with a record turn out. Not before absentees are counted. We’re in this to win it!”

With certain victory still in the balance, it would appear that this is a win for the Palin campaign in Florida, as she would also take the delegate lead from Romney for the first time. “Just a little over a week ago, her campaign was dead in the water,” commented Anderson Cooper on his CNN show. “The fact that she is competitive now in Florida, and leading Mitt Romney, is amazing to me. This state was tailor made for Romney. A strong base of older voters who supported him by big margins. Well, exclusive CNN exit polls showed tonight that Palin cut into that lead amongst the elderly significantly. While 65 and up voters comprised 38% of the Republican Primary electorate, Romney won their vote over Palin and Brown, 49-38-12. Polls prior to the election showed Romney getting easily over 50% of their vote, and in some cases 60%. Palin is definitely making a play.”

Update: The Associated Press, along with the majority of networks, call the race for Sarah Palin, with 99.8% of precints reporting, at 8 AM. The Romney campaign concedes at 9AM.

Romney campaign manager, Ed Gillepsie, conceded in a morning interview show with Don Imus that “this hurts our campaign. I’m not going to mislead you there. We had the institutional advantage in Florida, but again, she has a built-in advantage in closed primary states. She still hasn’t proven that she can turn independents. So we’re not out of this by a long shot. This is essentially a tied race, as far as we’re concerned. And Ms. Palin, with all due respect, is relatively new to it, if you ask me. She’s got the momentum right now, she’s got the enthusiasm for now. We’re confident that when some of the dust settles after Super Tuesday, Gov. Romney will be in fine, fine shape.”

2012 Florida Republican Primary Results (closed primary)
Sarah Palin - 42.31 % (977,478 votes) (114 delegates)
Mitt Romney - 41 .85 % (966,850 votes) (0 delegates)
Scott Brown - 15.5 % (358,093 votes) (0 delegates)


Red = Palin, Green = Romney

Delegate Count to date (Total Delegates Available - 2,329; 1,186 for majority)
Sarah Palin - 161
Mitt Romney - 105
Scott Brown - 24



January 27, 2012 (continued) - - - PRESIDENT SCORES 2ND DECISIVE SOUTHERN WIN; REPEATS CALLS ON WARNER TO QUIT.

Orlando, Fla. 1.27.12 - - - President Obama declared that the “Democratic Party has spoken loud and clear, and that message is unmistakable. Sen. Warner, heed their call.” The President was victorious in the largest primary to date, and in a state that, what conventional wisdom said, would be favorable to his opponent. “The Florida Democratic electorate was one that Warner was aiming his campaign at attracting; older, more conservative Democrats who think Obama is spending too much money,” stated University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato. “This may not bode as well for Warner in less friendly territory.” With 97% of precints reporting, Obama had carried 57% of the vote.

Warner campaign manager David “Mudcat” Saunders, who had run Warner’s successful campaign for Governor and Senate, disagreed with Sabato: “Look, it’s like people have forgotten that we’re the underdogs here. We’re the ones challenging a sitting President, and one that isn’t all that unpopular. But we’re doing it cause he’s wrong on the economy. We are happy with where we’re at in this right now. We’ve won two crucial contests, and come very close in a few others, and Obama is demanding we step aside? He’s trying to play kingmaker, when it’s not clear he has the mandate to rule. We’re in this until Feb 7th, and after that day, if what I expect will happen happens, we’ll be in it beyond that.”

2012 Florida Democratic Primary (Closed)
Barack Obama - 57. 6 % (1,061,624 votes) (133 delegates)
Mark Warner - 41.9 % ( 772,257 votes) (71 delegates)


Blue = Obama, Red = Warner

Delegate Count to Date: (Total delegates available: 4,291; 3,791 non-super delegates; 2,419 needed for majority)
Barack Obama: 296; w/ super delegates - 401
Mark Warner: 163 w/ superdeleages - 176

On January 28, the day following the Florida primaries, Fmr. President Bill Clinton appeared with Caroline Kennedy, Robert Kennedy Jr., and Fmr. Vice President Al Gore at a rally with President Barack Obama and VP Joe Biden in Atlanta, Georgia. The pack of Democratic superstars were announcing, in unison before a crowd of 26,000, their endorsement of President Barack Obama for reelection. Clinton and the group had remained neutral in the race due to fear of overexposure, and of trying to overly influence the will of voters. However, pundits speculated that the crew agreed to a joint endorsement in order to send a powerful statement to Warner; they felt the Democratic Primary was close to over, and that Warner’s decision to stay in the race until Feb 7 or beyond was damaging the party’s general election chances. Clinton, as pastoral as ever, focused on Obama’s positives, and appealed to voters: [“He has a remarkable ability to inspire people, to raise our hopes and rally us to high purpose. He has the intelligence and curiosity every successful President needs. His policies on the economy, taxes, health care and energy are far superior to the Republican alternatives. He has shown a clear grasp of our foreign policy and national security challenges, and a firm commitment to repair our badly strained military. His family heritage and life experiences have given him a unique capacity to lead our increasingly diverse nation and to restore our leadership in an ever more interdependent world.]* The long, hard last few years have hardened him. We‘re on our way America! Let the President finish the job!” A Rasmussen Reports Poll released the following day showed that Americans view the former president in an overwhelmingly favorable light.

Do you have a favorable or unfavorable view of Fmr. Pres. Bill Clinton? (RasmussenReports, 1/28-29; 600 likely voters; national; +/-4.5)
Favorable - 58 % (29% very favorable)
Unfavorable - 40 % (19 % very unfavorable)
. . . And among Democrats, Favorable - 80%
Unfavorable - 17%


Later that same day, 68 super delegates came forward to endorse President Obama. Only 7 endorsed Sen. Warner. This was significant because, until this point, only 42 super delegates total had announced who they were supporting for president. Now, a total of 117 super delegates had announced their intentions, with Obama winning roughly 90% of those delegates. Pundits suggested that the wave of endorsements was a concerted effort by Democratic Congressional Leaders to shove Warner from the race.


*Clinton 2008 DNC speech: http://www.azcentral.com/news/electi...lintontxt.html



January 30, 2012 - - - Pressure Mounts on Scott Brown
In the immediate aftermath of the Florida Primaries, pundits began looking to Super-Duper Tuesday, set to occur on February 7, 2012. Twenty-three states would be holding contests, by far the largest amount of the entire primary system. The respective Democratic and Republican campaigns would face two different approaches heading into the big day - for the Democrats, President Obama was looking to deliver a knockout punch for the Warner campaign, much as his former nemesis, Hillary Clinton, had attempted to do to him one year earlier. For the Republicans, the Palin and Romney campaigns were gearing up for a grueling contest, both hoping, though not expecting, for a knockout blow in a stroke of luck. In the meantime, the Romney campaign had launched an all out war to drive Sen. Scott Brown (R-Ma.) from the race.

Once considered a serious, though longshot to win the Republican nomination, the Brown campaign had faultered in recent primary contests. Although he shocked the establishment with a surprising victory in New Hampshire, later efforts to peal conservative voters from Romney and Palin failed. Speaking on The Today Show earlier in the morning, Brown remained defiant following his disappointing showing in Fla. “Look guys, I’m in this race for a reason. I didn’t start this battle to slump across the finish line. I’m in this race because the GOP needs a true choice. The GOP needs the option to have someone who stands up for conservative values, but who acknowledges that it takes persuasion, and occasional moderation, to keep this country moving forward. I’ve been so moved by my supporters, and I know that we can accomplish more. I’m looking at February 7th, and I’m moving forward full-steam-ahead”


The Romney campaign and its surrogates had begun placing increasing pressure on the Brown campaign to bow out of the race. Though never mentioning her by name, their central argument centered on the fact that Brown was setting up a Palin primary victory (based on the premise that Romney and and Brown shared a base of support, with Palin appealing to a different sect of the party). Appearing on the same show on the same morning with Sen. Brown, Fmr. Gov. Jeb Bush (R-Fla.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) pleaded with Brown: “The Senator from Massachussetts has a real opportunity here to advance our party,” argued Sen. Graham. “He also has a real chance to divide the party. Remaining in this race through Feb. 7th is hurting our chances in November. He’s simply standing in the way, and he’s hurting our electability chances in November by taking votes from Gov. Romney, which makes a difference in this race.” The following day, Matt Drudge, author of popular online site, Drudge Report, reported that Sen. Brown was seen visiting Fmr. President’s George H.W. and George W. Bush at the Bush family compound in Kennebuckport, Maine. It was assumed that the former Presidents were urging Brown to make way for Romney, although neither had yet publicly endorsed Gov. Romney. However, as the days ticked by, Brown remained in the race, and campaigned actively in Maine.


Pundits noticed how silent the Palin campaign had been on Romney’s television ad wars in super-duper-Tuesday states with Scott Brown. When asked during a campaign stop in Arizona her thoughts on Sen. Brown’s remaining in the race, Palin briefly replied: “It certainly is his prerogative to remain in the race, so he can do whatever he pleases. We’re focused on getting our message of commonsense conservatism out their to the voters.” Pundits speculated that Gov. Palin was staying mum based on the theory that Brown's presence on the ballot on Feb 7th would benefit her, and likely hurt her main opponent, Gov. Romney.

Fundraising numbers for the month of January were announced earlier than normal by the Romney and Palin camps (perhaps in an effort to signal their strength to the other prior to February 7th). The Romney campaign had raked in a near-record breaking $44.2 million . The Palin campaign was close behind, with $43.1 million. President Obama had raised $33 million the same month.

A flash poll taken by Harris Interactive in Maine showed that likely Caucus-goers were still supporting Mitt Romney by a large margin, despite Palin’s recent success, and Brown’s rampant campaigning in the state (44 / 27 / 25% respectively). Quinnipiac University also released a few polls of upcoming super-duper-Tuesday contests. Pundits viewed the data as indicating mixed results on election day.

In New York: Who do you support for GOP nomination for president in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 1/28-30, 650 likely primary voters; +/-5/0)
Romney - 52 %
Palin - 22 %
Brown - 19 %
In California: Who do you support for GOP nomination for president in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 1/28-30, 650 likely primary voters; +/-5.0)
Romney - 48 %
Palin - 32 %
Brown - 16 %
In Arizona: Who do you support for GOP nomination for president in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 1/28-30, 550 likely primary voters; +/-5.5)
Palin - 38 %
Romney - 36 %
Brown - 14 %
In Illinois: Who do you support for GOP nomination for president in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 1/28-30, 650 likely primary voters; +/-5.0)
Romney - 49 %
Palin - 30 %
Brown - 16 %

On the Democratic side, Sen. Warner stood by his pledge made immediately following the Florida primaries to remain in the race, despite the flood of super delegates to Obama’s corner, as well as President Bill Clinton’s heavily covered endorsement. Senator Warner had performed surprisingly well in several of the early primary states. Having finished close (losing by 8 points) to the incumbent President in Iowa, Warner rode a wave of support and enthusiasm to victory in New Hampshire. That was followed by another primary victory in Nevada. However, the final two and a half weeks of January were not as favorable for the Blue Dog Democrat, a self-described moderate and fiscal hawk. After a string of stinging losses, as well as some super-star endorsements for his opponent, Warner looked weakened. Most pundits argued that Obama was on his way to winning reelection for the Democratic nomination, however, Lou Dobbs played devil’s advocate. “ I would only stress that you’ve got to remember - 49 % of Americans say that they are ANGRY, not just disappointed in, but angry with the track that America is on. That’s a high proportion. That’s why Warner got in the race to begin with. That’s why he has come so close to victory in 2 of the 6 states that have held contests thus far. That’s why he actually won in 2 of the 6 contests thus far. That’s why he’s in this race. People are angry, and not happy with the direction Obama’s taking this country. But like Obama says, they’re also not ready to ’give the keys back’ to the Republicans. Warner appeals to those types of people. I can see why he’s staying in this race for now.”


David Plouffe (Obama Campaign Manager) took to Fox and Friends to make the Obama campaign's point regarding Warner's decision to remain in the race: "This is getting pretty feeble, I think, on Warner’s part. I mean, to use the man’s own language, he’s been the one out their insisting that he was running as a ’Clinton Democrat.’ That directly implies that somehow the President is not. That’s not truthful, and unrepresentative of the President’s record, and he knows it. And then just the other day, President Clinton announces his full throttled endorsement of our campaign. I think Sen. Warner, if he’s going to remain in this race, needs to acknowledge the hypocrisy of what he has said in light of the former President’s endorsement. He hasn’t said a word about it yet." A Flash poll by Harris Interactive in Maine showed that likely Democratic Caucus-goers were supporting Obama, despite Warner’s campaigning (54 / 41 %, respectively). Also, a slate of new February 7 polling revealed an uphill battle for Mark Warner, while showing that the President remains in the vulnerable position of polling below 50% in most states:
In California: Who do you support for the Democratic nomination for president in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 1/28-30, 650 likely primary voters; +/-5.0)
Obama - 49 %
Warner - 36 %
In New York: Who do you support for the Democratic nomination for president in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 1/28-30, 650 likely primary voters; +/-5.0)
Obama - 54 %
Warner - 32 %
In Arizona: Who do you support for the Democratic nomination for president in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 1/28-30, 550 likely primary voters; +/-5.5)
Obama - 43 %
Warner - 43 %
In Illinois: Who do you support for the Democratic nomination for president in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 1/28-30, 650 likely primary voters; +/-5.0)
Obama - 56 %
Warner - 40 %



February 5, 2012 - - - OBAMA, ROMNEY VICTORIOUS IN MAINE’S SLEEPY WEEKEND CAUCUS.

Portland, M.E. 2.5. 12 - President Obama and Governor Romney were both winners last night in the Maine Caucuses. Pundits note that both men were expected to win last night, and with 94% of precincts reporting for the Democrats, and 92 % for the Republicans, Obama has won with 61% of the vote, and Romney with 44 %. Although both Republican and Democratic races remain relatively close, few doubted the results from tonight. However, this did not prevent the two winners from milking their victories in the hopes of claiming the momentum heading into super-duper Tuesday.

“Nice to finally say I know what a comeback feels like!” exclaimed Romney. "Maine, what you’ve just done is critical. You’ve given us the ever important boost of energy we need going into Tuesday. It’s just 3 days away! And thanks to all of you, I can now say, I’ve got the momentum!” It is reported by CBS News that Sen. Scott Brown has met with Gov. Romney in an apparent discussion surrounding his continued candidacy for the GOP nomination.

President Obama also bragged: “Maine, you’ve just sent yet another resounding message to my opponent. Joint the team! Fight with us, instead of against us. They’re throwing everything they’ve got at me, and you would be an effective defensive voice. Sen. Warner, again, for the sake of the country, step aside,” Warner's campaign manger snickered “The irony of being told by our primary opponent that we must ‘step-aside’ is getting frustrating for Sen. Warner, to say the least. We say, “No, Mr. President. We’ll let the voters decide on February 7th."

2012 Maine Democratic Caucuses (Closed Caucus)
Barack Obama - 60. 3 % (1,982 votes) (21 delegates)
Mark Warner - 38.5 % ( 1,265 votes) (12 delegates)


Blue = Obama, Red = Warner

Delegate Count to Date: (Total delegates available: 4,291; 3,791 non-super delegates; 2,419 needed for majority)
Barack Obama: 317; w/ super delegates - 431
Mark Warner: 175 w/ superdeleages - 190


2012 Maine Republican Caucuses (Closed Caucus) 4,113
Mitt Romney - 42.4 % (1,744 votes) (21 delegates)
Sarah Palin - 32. 9 % (1,353 votes) (0 delegates)
Scott Brown - 23. 5 % (967 votes) (0 dlegates)

Green = Romney, Red = Palin, Purple = Brown

Delegate Count to date (Total Delegates Available - 2,329; 1,186 for majority)
Sarah Palin - 161
Mitt Romney - 126
Scott Brown - 24

Despite repeated pleas from the Party to exit the race, Brown signaled to supporters through an email following the Maine results that he would be staying in. Feeling buoyed by one of his best primary performances since his victory in New Hampshire, Brown cited what he called a strong third place finish in Maine, and a continued insistence from Republican voters that they be given real choices in choosing a candidate. Mark Warner continued course as well, staying true to his pledge to take his moderate economic message to Feb 7th Democratic Primary voters.

Monday, February 6, 2012 - - - On the day before super-duper-Tuesday, and just less than 2 weeks following Justice Kennedy’s death, White House officials had leaked to the press a short-list of Supreme Court presidential prospects. The list was ripe with Federal Appeals Court Judges. However, 2 scholars in particular caught Republican’s ire, and led the Presidential candidates to comment: Cass Sunstein and Diane Wood.

Both were former law professor’s at Obama’s alma mater, The University of Chicago Law School, and both were decidedly liberal, at least according to conservative pundits and scholars. Diane Wood, a Federal Appeals Court Judge for the 7th Circuit drew attention from pro-life activists as a pro-choice judge. And as expected, presidential candidate Sarah Palin was quick to comment on her inclusion in the Obama Administration’s short-list. “Are we surprised? Absolutely not. It’s been noted before, this is the most undeniably pro-abortion Administration this country has ever seen, and it sounds like Obama’s third pick for the Supreme Court will be no different than her 2 predecessors on this issue. It’s unfortunate, and frankly more than angersome. These aren’t the sort of judges I would like to see nominated to the bench.”

Cass Sunstein, the head of Obama’s Office of Information and Regulatory affairs, had been a target of conservative activists for years due to his liberal and occasionally controversial views while a University of Harvard Law professor. Gov. Romney accused Obama of overly-politicizing the Supreme Court nominating process by considering such a polarizing figure: “Isn’t this the same guy that proposed giving animals legal standing in courts of law? Look, I’m all for putting qualified, intelligent people on the Supreme Court. But I draw the line at appointing a radical. This legal scholar is a radical, and his past writings prove it. It’s not really up for debate. I would welcome fighting Obama on this nominee.” Sen. Brown agreed too: “I agree that the process of nominating judges to high courts has been hijacked by partisan interests that care less about whether a person is qualified than they do about that person’s position on their pet issues. But then again, when you drop hints that you’re considering someone like Cass Sunstein, you also make it clear that you’re itching for a fight. I’d welcome this fight in the Senate.”

In the final two days on the stump, the GOP field had begun rallying the Republican base with vows to defeat any Obama nominee deemed as too liberal. Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin both campaigned into the wee morning hours of February 7, with both interestingly finishing with rallies in California. Scott Brown stumped in his home state of Massachusetts. On the Democratic side, President Obama held last minute rallies in Missouri, while Sen. Warner barnstormed in Georgia. Later that night, the country awaited the results in the hopes of bringing some certainty to who would be competing for the nation’s top job in November . . .

continued

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 - SUPER-DUPER TUESDAY REPUBLICAN PRIMARY ELECTION RESULTS, Mitt Romney v. Sarah Palin v. Scott Brown.
Blue = Romney, Red = Palin, Purple = Brown

Alabama: (primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 61.1 % / 31.4 % / 7.7 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 360,270 / 45
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 187,915 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 46,081 / 0


Alaska: (caucus)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 73.2 % / 21.8 % / 5.1 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 16,848 / 26
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 5,017 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 1,174 / 0

Arizona: (primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 46.5 % / 41.7 % / 11.0 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 279,637 / 50
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 250,771 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 66,151 / 0


Arkansas: (primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 59.5 % / 33.7 % / 4.8 % 313,247
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 186,382 / 31
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 105,564 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 15,036 / 0


California: (primary)
Mitt Romney / Sarah Palin / Scott Brown - 43.9 % / 37.2 % / 18.1 %
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 1,549,434 / 190
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 1,311,839 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 638,582 / 0


Colorado: (caucus)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 42.3 % / 33.0 % / 24.6 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 59,673 / 43
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 46,554 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 34,704 / 0


Connecticut: (primary)
Mitt Romney / Scott Brown / Sarah Palin - 38.5 % / 33.6 % / 27.1 %
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 77,998 / 27
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 68,071 / 0
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 54,902 / 0


Delaware: (primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 46.9 % / 44.5 % / 7.9 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 34,587 / 18
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 32,817 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 5,826 / 0


Georgia: (primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 56.9 % / 37.0 % / 5.3 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 1,079,850 / 72
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 702,187 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 100,584 / 0


Idaho: (primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 62.6 % / 33.5 % / 3.2 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 108,433 / 26
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 58,027 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 5,543 / 0


Illinois: (primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 45.2 % / 43.5 % / 10.4 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 536,413 / 57
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 516,238 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 123,422 / 0


Kansas: (caucus)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 64.2 % / 30.5 % / 5.1 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 24,799 / 36
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 11,782 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 1,970 / 0


Massachusetts: (primary)
Scott Brown / Mitt Romney / Sarah Palin - 43.2 % / 37.5 % / 18.8 %
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 295,362 / 40
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 256,391 / 0
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 128,537 / 0


Minnesota: (caucus)
Mitt Romney / Sarah Palin / Scott Brown - 49.2 % / 42.1 % / 6.9 %
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 98,888 / 41
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 84,617 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 13,868 / 0


Missouri: (primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 52.8 % / 44.0 % / 3.2 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 484,936 / 58
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 404,114 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 29,390 / 0


New Jersey: (primary)
Mitt Romney / Sarah Palin / Scott Brown - 44.6 % / 40.9 % / 13.6 %
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 363,057 / 52
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 332,938 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 110,708 / 0


New Mexico: (primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 48.3 % / 46.9 % / 3.7 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 78,919 / 29
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 76,632 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 6,046 / 0


New York: (primary)
Mitt Romney / Sarah Palin / Scott Brown - 53.0 % / 37.5 % / 9.1 %
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 534,309 / 97
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 378,816 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 91,817 / 0


North Dakota: (caucus)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 58.2 % / 37.7 % / 3.7 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 12,468 / 26
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 8,076 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 793 / 0


Oklahoma: (primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 68.5 % / 28.6 % / 2.4 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 324,368 / 38
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 135,430 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 11,365 / 0


Tennessee: (primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 65.3 % / 30.2 % / 3.9 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 470,178 / 47
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 217,448 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 36,001 / 0


Utah: (primary)
Mitt Romney / Sarah Palin / Scott Brown - 59.0 % / 35.3 % / 4.8 %
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 189,438 / 47
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 113,342 / 0
Brown popular vote/delegates won: 15,412 / 0


States won to date:

Red = Palin, Green = Romney, Purple = Brown

Delegate Count to date (Total Delegates Available - 2,329; 1,186 for majority)
Sarah Palin - 691
Mitt Romney - 580
Scott Brown - 64




Tuesday, February 7, 2012 (continued) - SUPER-DUPER TUESDAY DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY ELECTION RESULTS, Barack Obama v. Mark Warner
Blue = Obama, Red = Warner

Alabama: (primary)
Mark Warner / Barack Obama - 50.5 % / 49.2 %
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 257,880 / 26
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 251,242 / 26


Alaska: (caucus)
Mark Warner / Barack Obama - 58.6 % / 40.2 %
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 4,883 / 8
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 3,349 / 5


Arizona: (primary)
Barack Obama / Mark Warner - 57.0 % / 41.8 %
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 234,834 / 34
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 172,211 / 22


Arkansas: (primary)
Mark Warner / Barack Obama - 60.0 % / 38.6 %
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 184,871 / 24
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 118,934 / 11


California: (primary)
Barack Obama / Mark Warner - 64.8 % / 32.7 %
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 2,754,043 / 250
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 1,389,772 / 120


Colorado: (caucus)
Barack Obama / Mark Warner - 69.2 % / 28.7 %
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 76,468 / 49
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 31,714 / 21


Connecticut: (primary)
Barack Obama / Mark Warner - 75.2 % / 23.7 %
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 209,931 / 38
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 66,162 / 10


Delaware: (primary)
Barack Obama / Mark Warner - 60.1 % / 39.2 %
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 51,289 / 10
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 33,453 / 5


Georgia: (primary)
Barack Obama / Mark Warner - 54.1 % / 45.7 %
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 547,701 / 49
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 462,660 / 38


Idaho: (caucus)
Barack Obama / Mark Warner - 58.5 % / 39.3 %
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 22,967 / 10
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 15,429 / 8


Illinois: (primary)
Barack Obama / Mark Warner - 75.7 % / 23.0 %
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 1,232,949 / 114
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 374,608 / 39


Kansas: (caucus)
Barack Obama / Mark Warner - 58.2 % / 40.4 %
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 18,445 / 20
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 12,804 / 12


Massachusetts: (primary)
Barack Obama / Mark Warner - 78.1 % / 20.3 %
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 706,432 / 78
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 183,618 / 15


Minnesota: (caucus)
Barack Obama / Mark Warner - 68.8 % / 30.3 %
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 133,136 / 49
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 58,634 / 23


Missouri: (primary)
Barack Obama / Mark Warner - 51.9 % / 47.8 %
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 387,725 / 37
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 357,096 / 35


New Jersey: (primary)
Barack Obama / Mark Warner - 62.4 % / 36.1 %
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 561,585 / 71
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 324,891 / 36


New Mexico: (primary)
Barack Obama / Mark Warner - 61.1 % / 37.4 %
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 82,962 / 17
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 50,782 / 9


New York: (primary)
Barack Obama / Mark Warner - 69.1 % / 30.0 %
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 956,441 / 159
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 415,242 / 73


North Dakota: (caucus)
Mark Warner / Barack Obama - 51.3 % / 47.6 %
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 8,619 / 7
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 7,998 / 6


Oklahoma: (primary)
Mark Warner / Barack Obama - 59.0 % / 40.4 %
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 228,163 / 24
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 156,234 / 14


Tennessee: (primary)
Mark Warner / Barack Obama - 54.4 % / 45.2 %
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 309,796 / 37
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 257,404 / 31


Utah: (primary)
Mark Warner / Barack Obama - 56.7 % / 39.6 %
Warner popular vote/delegates won: 67,103 / 14
Obama popular vote/delegates won: 46,866 / 9


States won to date:

Blue = Obama, Red = Warner

Delegate Count to Date: (Total delegates available: 4,291; 3,791 non-super delegates; 2,419 needed for majority)
Barack Obama: 1404; w/ super delegates - 1617
Mark Warner: 781 w/ superdeleages - 813




Wednesday, February 8, 2012 - - - SUPER TUESDAY SETTLES DEMOCRATIC RACE, RAISES THE STAKES IN GOP RACE. BROWN BOWS OUT, WARNER WON’T SAY.

Washington, D.C., 2.8.12 - In a dramatic marathon of voting yesterday, it appears as if Super Tuesday has sealed Obama’s chances at renomination, while confirming what had been approaching for weeks for the GOP: an epic show down between charismatic tea-party darling Sarah Palin, and savvy GOP businessman Mitt Romney.

President Obama, as was largely anticipated, delivered a near-knockout blow to the Warner campaign on Tuesday, winning 15 of the 22 total contests. Estimated delegate counts give Obama twice the number of delegates as Sen. Warner, and he received well over 60% of the popular vote for the night (Warner was held to well under 40% of the popular vote for the night). Mathematically speaking, it appears highly unlikely that Sen. Warner would be able to capture the nomination. However, Sen. Warner remained cryptic, and vague about his plans for the coming days, while speaking to supporters in Peach Tree City, Georgia: “Folks tonight we showed the talking heads what a real insurgent campaign looks like! (applause) David Plouffe, the President’s campaign manager, as you all know, was caught on a hot mike on Meet the Press stating that I would be lucky to win a single contest tonight. Well folks, we’ve won six, and it looks like we could even win 7. I won’t be making any decisions about my plans tonight, and certainly not at the Presidents urging. I’ll be speaking with all of you very, very soon.“


Speaking to a crowd of supporters at a late night victory rally in Chicago (an estimated 29,000 were in attendance), Obama professed: “We’ve just had a passionate debate within our party of direction, and ideals. I think the Democrats in America have spoken, and Sen. Warner, I thank you for a spirited race. But I must now implore you to do what is right, and to do what the Democrats have asked you to do tonight. Please do not stand in the way of victory in November! But back to what we have to do starting tonight, folks! I need you to channel the passion, the inspiration you feel from our victories tonight. [I need you fired up . . . Because there’s an election this November that’s going to say a lot about the future. Your furture, and the future of our country. Because 3 years ago, you defied the conventional wisdom in Washington. The message out there was “no you can’t! No you can’t overcome the cynicism of our politics. . . No you can’t make real progress on the challenges of our time.]* Well we’re showing them. Unemployment is coming down. We’re not there yet, but we’re getting there. Unemployment has come down for the 3rd straight month folks. We’re getting there. You’ve shown America tonight that there is still a lot more to be accomplished, but WE’RE accomplishing it! Together! Take this fire you’re feeling, and carry it with you all the way to November!” (raucous applause)


The Republican race was harder for pundits to call, even before super-Tuesday, and the results of last night reinforce that notion. Sarah Palin won an impressive 15 out of the 22 contests, with Mitt Romney winning 6, and Scott Brown with 1. In terms of the popular vote for the night, Palin had carried 45% to Romney’s 41 %, although votes are still coming in. And in terms of the delegate count, it looks like Palin has taken her largest lead of the race yet, leading by over 100 delegates. However, Palin was shut-out in many of the nation’s most populous states, including California and New York. Speaking to crowd of around 20,000 in Phoenix Arizona, the night of super-Tuesday, Palin declared victory: “Well, the polls have closed in 19 of the 22 states that voted tonight, and I feel comfortable saying: WE WON! (raucous applause). You know whatcha’ gotta love about all of this? Do you remember a few months ago, after the early caucuses and primaries? Do you remember the blaring headlines from the New York Times and the Washington Post? ‘Palin’s finished,’ “Palin Campaign Implodes,” etc, etc. It’s almost funny now? (laughter and applause). But in all seriousness guys, you helped me win an amazing victory tonight. We won in places as different as Georgia and Illinois, Florida and Delaware, Idaho and New Mexico. But over the coming days, you’re going to hear yet another tired media narrative about how I can’t win in the states that I have to win in. Well, I won tonight, so that‘s one big hole in their argument that they‘re sure to never point out! (loud applause) The other big hole in their argument is that they are continuing to fail to acknowledge the level of voter dissatisfaction with the establishment's leadership. People are sick and tired of career politicians cozying up to Washington, while spending their money, and raising their taxes. But in the midst of all of that, they’d rather spend their time talking about who bought my last outfit. People have had enough, and tonight, the voters said that they want someone in the oval office who will not forget them. I will not forget you! America deserves better! (loud applause)“

Mitt Romney’s campaign, while putting on a victorious face in public, was privately concerned with mounting evidence that they had lost their grip on this race. Governor Romney performed well in the Super Tuesday contests, but his once “unstoppable” campaign machine, consisting of strong establishment backing and lots of cash, seemed to be falling short. In a foreshadowing of his upcoming campaign strategy, he spoke with supporters in Anaheim, California about the risk of a Palin nomination: “Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise - we did an incredible job here tonight, and we’re not done yet! (loud appluase). I want to congratulate Governor Palin on her victories tonight, and look forward to a continued debate with her. But let me be clear. There is only one of us in this race that can make a convincing case to the American public in November. The next President of this country is going to have to deliver more than one-liners, more than hyper-ideological driven red-meat. Those tactics work, and appropriately so, in a primary, but they do not pay any consideration to a long-term general election strategy. I’m a conservative. But I’m the ONLY conservative in this race that can win moderates, that can win Obama voters, that can win amongst conservatives. The voters of most of the nation's most populous American states, like California, New York, New Jersey, Michigan, etc, etc, have shown us what kind of Republican they think can defeat the President in 2012. That person is me. This is going to be a battle, but it’s one I can, and will, win! (loud appluase).

Scott Brown, meeting with supporters, indicated that he would be holding a press conference the following day at noon. He noted that he would be likely suspending his campaign, but would address this in more detail tomorrow . . .


*Obama speech: http://bluewavenews.com/blog/2010/09...eo-transcript/





February 8, 2012 - - - BROWN ANNOUNCES EXIT; PROMISES A SURPRISE
In the immediate aftermath of Super-Tuesday, it had become clear to the candidates and pundits that Sen. Brown had not obtained the results necessary to continue his dark horse campaign. In a speech with supporters on the night of the results, Brown informed them that he would be holding a press conference the following evening. Puzzling to observers, however, was the fact that several insiders within the Brown campaign were reporting that supporters and crowds were being asked to attend the 6:00pm news conference. Instantly, speculation had turned to Mitt Romney, whom many had long suspected Brown would endorse if put in the position to choose between a certain number of candidates. Suspicions were confirmed a few minutes into the conference: “What I tried to instill in my campaign was the belief that yes, you can be a principled conservative who knows how to work with Washington to get things done. That’s what Ronald Reagan was. I feel that’s what I would have been as well. And now I must look to the remaining candidates for who I think can best carry-on that torch - the torch of conservative values, with the ability to attract those that don’t agree with you or your world philosophy. That is why I think there is very little doubt, and almost no question, that that person is Governor Mitt Romney. Today, Governor, I would like to proudly announce that I am endorsing you for the President of the United States! Please join us Governor. (Romney walks onto the stage).

“Thank you Senator Brown. I graciously accept, and would like to speak directly to your supporters in this campaign. Scott Brown and I are not the same person, but we’re cut from the same mold. We have similar backgrounds and life stories, and I respect his views, and happen to think he’s right on a large majority of them. I will carry his torch, our torch, to each and every primary state coming up. This election is about clear differences. There could not be a clearer difference between President Obama and myself or Gov. Palin. But the question you have to ask yourself is ‘who can win this November?’ Governor Palin will have a more difficult time than myself appealing to those independents and cross-over voters that you must win in order to win a presidential election . . . (Romney’s speech continues)

[Upcoming Primary Schedule,
2/14/12 - - - Washington, Nebraska, Louisianna, Virginia, Maryland, Washington D.C.
2/21/12 - - - Wisconsin, Hawaii]

Wednesday, February 9, 2012 - - - Pundits reacted to Super-Tuesday, Scott Brown’s exit and endorsement, and Warner’s refusal to exit the race in the days following the contests. On the Republican side, the Palin campaign was hammering their argument that they have come from behind and now have the momentum. They also argued that only Palin, and not Mitt Romney, can inspire a large enough Republican turnout in 2012 to overtake Obama. Palin campaign surrogate Gov. Nikki Haley argued on NBC’s Today Show “Look, people have been saying this since she emerged on the scene in 2008 - the woman attracts a crowd. And when you’re talking about an election, and when you’re talking about trying to enthuse base turnout to their 2004 levels or better, you can’t look me in the face and tell me that Mitt Romney is the man to do that. Sarah Palin is the one to do it, and she’s probably the only person in elected office or not in this country that could do that. The GOP is going to win in 2012 by appealing to independents, sure. Absolutely. But we’re going to win BIG by getting our base out. By getting every single possible Republican voter to the polls. Sarah can do that. She’s winning conservatives hands down. I deeply respect, and know personally, the good Governor from Massachusetts. I just happen to think he’s running on borrowed time."

Romney surrogate Governor Rick Syder (R-MI) argued that Romney was in a great position heading into the Potomac primaries. “I think the case that the Palin campaign is making about a depressed base is overstated. Are you telling me that it was a depressed GOP base that gave us 8 senate seats in the midterms? Are you telling me that it was a depressed GOP base that gave us control of the House, and swept you and I into the Governor's mansion? The base is enthusiastic, and nothing about a Romney nomination would change that. The critical thing to be looking at is whether or not we can maintain our built-in advantage with independents. Sarah Palin, god-bless her, is a polarizing figure. She’s come a long way from the 2008 election, but she’s still got independent voters that are weary of her. We risk giving those voters to Obama, and we risk losing, with her at the helm.” Responded Haley: "I don't think that's accurate. Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't think Gov. Romney is doing as well with Independents as you seem to think. Like I said, I consider Mitt Romney a friend, but we cannot afford to risk any of our base sitting at home in November." Polling from Yougov showed that amongst Republican adults, Palin was more well liked than Romney (69 / 19 % favorability rating, compared to Romney’s 59 / 24 %). A new Public Policy Polling poll on the 2012 GOP nomination showed a continuing close contest, but noticeable movement in Palin’s direction.
(PPP, 2/8-10; 1,200 likely Republican primary voters; +/-3.0)
Sarah Palin - 48 %
Mitt Romney - 42 %
Scot Brown - 4 %
Undecided/Someone else - 6 %

PPP, in light of the arguments being made by both the Palin and Romney campaigns, took a national poll of self-identified independent voters about their views on the 3 White House aspirants:
Do you have a very favorable, somewhat favorable, very unfavorable, somewhat unfavorable, or no opinion of the following people: Fmr. Gov. Sarah Palin? (asked of self-identified Independents).
Very Fav Somewhat Fav Unsure/No Opinion Somewhat Unfav Very Unfav
22 % 16 % 13 % 20 % 29 %
Favorable/Unfavorable
38 / 49

Do you have a very favorable, somewhat favorable, very unfavorable, somewhat unfavorable, or no opinion of the following people: Fmr. Gov. Mitt Romney? (asked of self-identified independents).
Very Fav Somewhat Fav Unsure/No Opinion Somewhat Unfav Very Unfav
14 % 25 % 18 % 22 % 21 %
Favorable/Unfavorable
39 / 43

The same poll organization showed a close race for either Republican candidate in November.
Potential 2012 match-ups (PPP, 2/8-10; 1,500 likely voters, national; +/-3%)
Mitt Romney v. Obama: 47 - 47 % Romney v. Warner: 49 - 39 %
Sarah Palin v. Obama: 46 - 49 % Palin v. Warner: 48 - 40 %

Wednesday, February 9, 2012 (cont.) - - - On the Democratic side, another wave of super delegates endorsed President Obama. Fifty-eight total endorsed the President (including Virginia’s Senior Senator, Jim Webb (D), with Warner receiving 6. Talking to Meet the Press, the President’s campaign manager made the case for Warner to leave the race, as he had done time and time before, “I don’t know what other smoke signals the Senator needs to see. He was washed out on Super-Tuesday. He won less than 35% of the popular vote. He won less than half of the contests, and the contests that he won represent less than 15% of this country’s total population. What more would have to happen for him to take it on himself to leave this race? I’m starting to think that the answer is ‘nothing.’”

Host David Gregory replied, “well, in light of David Saunders absence (Obama camp. manager), I’ll make their point. Warner is arguing that despite the lopsided results, they beat expectations…expectations set by you, on this very show, just a few days ago, on an unexpected hot mike. It sounds like you were saying that, quote, He‘ll (Warner) be lucky to win a single contest, end quote. You gotta admit, 7 states is considerably better than one. Does he not have any sort of mandate to continue in this race as a result?” Plouffe: “No, David, because it is virtually mathematically impossible for him to win. This political game of who did slightly better than expected is tired, and truthfully meaningless. He is in a worse position than he was prior to Tuesday in terms of the delegate count, and he’s in a worse position than he was prior to Tuesday in terms of the popular vote. So no, despite what was picked up by me on the mic, he did not defeat expectations. He’s in a worse position, and I think we’re going to defeat him in the upcoming contests this Tuesday.”



Thursday, February 9, 2012 (cont.) - - - NON-ELECTION NEWS/UPDATE:

In non-election news, speculation continued in the media over who was being considered for the United States Supreme Court vacancy caused by Anthony Kennedy’s sudden death. When cornered by the media at a U.N. meeting at the headquarters in N.Y., Sec. of State Clinton was asked about whether she was being considered for the job: “Well can’t you tell, I already have a job? (laughing) But no, I have not been told I am under consideration..” The reporter pressed: “Would you be interested if considered?” Clinton turned around, and replied tersely: “No.” Janet Napolitano, Sec. for the Dept of Homeland Security, was slightly less pointed when answering Diane Sawyer’s question on ABC World News: “No I do not believe I’m under consideration Diane. But even if I were, I’m focused on accomplishing good things for the Department, so that’s where my attention is focused.” “But would you do it if asked?” said Diane. “ . . . it’s very, very difficult to tell the leader of the free world no when he asks for your service somewhere.”


Just 5 days before the Potomac primaries, the President vetoed the Republican-passed effort to extend the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000. Polls from weeks earlier, at the time Congress voted to extend the cuts, showed that Americans disagreed with the cuts for the wealthy by over 50%. In other domestic news, the President noted in a press conference, a few days before Super-Tuesday, that he would consider signing a Republican backed $110 billion Small Businesses tax break that was working its way through Congress. The President’s approval ratings, while under 50%, had seen worse days:

Obama Job Approval Rating
Gallup Daily Tracking Poll, 2/9/2012 (all adults)
Approve: 43%
Disapprove: 49%
Net: - 6

Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll (likely voters) 2/9/2012
Approve: 43% (strongly approve - 26 %)
Disapprove: 56% (strongly disapprove - 42%)
Net: -13


Polling also confirmed what pundits had speculated over in the few days following Super-Tuesday: Sen. Mark Warner had very little chance of overtaking the President, and was even potentially harming himself amongst voters in his own party. His support was in free-fall. When faced with these numbers on The O’Reilly factor, Warner responded: “Look, I’m in this until Virginia votes. Period. I’ll make a decision immediately following.”

Who do you support in the Democratic primary for President in 2012? (Zogby, 2/7-10, 2000 likely Democratic primary voters, nationally; +/-2.0%)
Barack Obama - 63 % (+5)
Mark Warner - 29 % (-8)

Mark Warner Favorable/Unfavorable Rating (Rasmussen Reports, 2/8-10, 600 likely Democratic primary voters, +/-4.0)
Favorable: 54 % (- 3)
Unfavorable: 41 % (+ 7)
Unsure/No Opinion: 5 % (-4)

February 10, 2012 - - - Gov. McDonnell Endorses Mitt Romney; shakes up Virginia Primary.

Just 4 days before their primary, popular Gov. Bob McDonnell (59 / 33 % job approval rating) endorses Gov. Mitt Romney for the presidency. Virginia was being heavily campaigned in by both the Romney and Palin camps as the most delegate-rich state holding a contest on Feb. 14th, and it was rumored that the Governor’s endorsement was highly sought. Previous polls in Virginia had shown Sarah Palin taking a lead with strong support from the state’s more conservative Republican base, on the heels of momentum built on Super-Duper Tuesday (SurveyUSA polled the race prior to McDonnell‘s endorsement, and Palin led, 51 - 41 %). While she was thought to have a built-in advantage in the state, Romney was relying on Governor McDonnell’s strong influence amongst independent voters to inspire them to the polls on his behalf (Virginia has an open Republican Primary). On a general level, the state had received recognition for it’s notably purple trends in recent years, even voting for President Obama over Sen. John McCain in 2008. An internet interactive poll taken by Zogby the day following the endorsement caused some excitement in the Romney camp:

Who will you support in the upcoming Republican Presidential Primary: Sarah Palin or Mitt Romney? (Zogby Interactive, 2/11/12, 800 likely Republican Primary voters; +/-3.5)
Sarah Palin - 48 %
Mitt Romney - 45 %



Sunday, February 12, 2012 - - - In a show of strength, the Romney campaign announced that they had raised $5.1 million dollars on Friday through a 24-hour, email-based “money-bomb.” Feeling the need to blunt any potential impact or momentum in Romney’s favor due to high fundraising totals, Palin campaign manager, Meg Stapelton, announced today that the Palin campaign’s total haul since Super Tuesday is $18.4 million. Unofficial Obama campaign numbers point to $19 million having been raised since the start of the month.

Monday, February 13, 2012 - - - At a campaign stop on Monday morning in Hillsville, Virginia, Sarah Palin had a special guest: “I’d like for everyone to welcome to the stage, the Governor from Mississippi, Haley Barbour!” (applause) Barbour spoke: “Thank you Governor. Well, let me be blunt to kick this rally off: My name is Haley Barbour, and I’m proud to endorse Governor Palin for President of the United States!” (loud applause) (Barbour remarks continue) . . .


In Zogby’s final Daily tracking poll in Virginia, the race appears to be a dead-heat, with Palin holding steady at 48 %, and with Romney gaining 3 points in the final day to match Palin at 48%. Political Scientist and Virginia native Larry Sabato spoke to Diane Sawyer on Monday night: “Look, the latest tracking poll shows a dead heat, but more than that, it shows some movement in Romney’s direction. Zogby had Romney down by over 10 points just one week ago, and now they‘re tied back up. It’s hard not to think that Governor McDonnell’s endorsement hasn’t spurred on this late movement towards Romney. Virginia’s demographics are perfect for this to be a knock-down, drag-out affair. You have the southwestern Appalachian region, where Republicans tend to be more conservative, and where Palin will need to turn out high winning margins. Romney is expected to be stronger in the Northern part of the state, where the DC suburbanites reside. This is where the highest proportion of “moderate” Republicans live and Romney will be doing everything he can to drive them to the polls. And to top it all off, we have the Barbour endorsement with Palin down in Hillsville today. Hillsville is a small town, not more than 5,000 people, and crowd estimates were between 5-7,000. Today’s tracking poll wrapped up last night, so obviously, any Barbour bounce would not be measured. My call: the movement is in Romney’s favor, and he’s got the Republican machine of Bob McDonnell out there for him. Absent a massive turnout in Southwestern Va. coupled with huge winning margins for Palin, I think Romney takes this.”

When pressed on the Democratic race: “As a long-time observer of Virginia politics, and as someone that’s voted for Gov. and Sen. Warner, I must say his tactics of late have been baffling. His premise that he wants to stay in this race to hear from Virginia voters doesn’t make sense. So what if he wins? Does the fact that Virginia voters MIGHT want him to be the Democratic nominee give him the right to ignore the majority of other states who have disagreed up to this point? And if he is doing this due to hubris, or ego, or just to have a showdown with Obama in Virginia, I have to ask - is this the best way to shape your legacy? Warner is going to likely lose on Tuesday, and where will that leave him, but embarrassed and politically weakened? It just doesn’t make any sense.”

In a sign that the Obama campaign was prepared to play offense in Virginia (and perhaps out of a belief that the one-time popular home-town native could upset the President), Obama spent the day campaigning with Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) in Alexandria, Arlington, and Fredericksburg. A. Univ. of Virgina field poll showed a close race (Warner - 46 % Obama - 44 %).




Tuesday, February 14, 2012 - - - HIGH TURNOUT BOOSTS PALIN IN ANOTHER DRAW; WARNER SUSPENDS CAMPAIGN , WON’T ENDORSE OBAMA . . . YET?

Charlottesville, Virginia, 2.15.12 - The Potomac/Multi-state Primaries last night seemed all but certain to prolong the GOP contest further, while finally handing the Democratic nomination to President Barack Obama. On the Republican side, high-turn out in SW Virginia led to a close Palin victory, despite polling showing a late surge for Romney. The two candidates split the evenings 6 contests down the middle, although the pundits are noting that Romney is underperforming against Palin in conservative states. The fmr VP nominee also expanded her lead in the delegate race. On the Democratic side, President Obama swept the evenings contests, even besting Sen. Warner in his home state of Virginia. Sen. Warner addressed his supporters late in the evening, announcing he would be suspending his campaign for the presidency immediately. As of this morning, he has not commented on if or when an endorsement could be expected.

Speaking to supporters in Alexandria, just 15 miles away from where the Romney campaign was addressing their supporters, President Obama struck an optimistic tone, and made a noteable play for Sen. Warner’s endorsement. "Senator Mark Warner is a leader who inspires millions of Americans with his strength, his courage, and his commitment to the causes that brought us here tonight. [Our party and our country are better off because of h(im), and I am a better candidate for having had the honor to compete with h(im).]* Having said this, the reality is, we’ve just finished what was, at times, a contentious battle for the nomination. Give Mark time, and I’m certain he’ll come around. Because he knows that both mine and his ideas are better than anything coming out of Sarah Palin or Mitt Romney!” (loud applause)


Pundits discussed the state of the Democratic race. Said Rachel Maddow: “Look, Obama’s had a recent spate of good news, and this just tops it all off. For all that was made by the media, for all that was blown out of proportion by Fox and the Wall Street Journal editorial boards, Warner just never ended up being the powerful insurgent candidate that he was being given credit for being earlier in the campaign. And now it looks like he’s withholding his endorsement, almost like he’s threatening Obama to give him something. I say, “who needs him!?” This guy won barely a handful of contests, and won less than 30% of the popular vote. Does his endorsement even matter?” Chris Matthews argued back: “Oh c’mon Rachel! Of course his endorsement matters. Look, you have to consider WHERE Warner was winning. Because in a lot of those states, a lot of which were southern, heavy black population states, Warner pulled off upsets or came shockingly close to winning. That’s a lot of Democratic voters that either didn’t turn out, or changed their vote from Obama. He has to get them to the polls, or even harder, change their minds back to voting for him. I’m not saying that these voters will turn to Palin or Romney, but I am saying there's a great chance they will stay at home come November. So does Warner’s endorsement or lack thereof matter as much as Hillary Clinton’s did in 2008? Absolutely not. But to say it does not matter period, I have to disagree.”

2012 Democratic Potomac/Multi-state Primary Results
Blue = Obama, Red = Warner

2012 Virginia Democratic Primary (Open Primary)
Barack Obama - 52. 4 % (450,165 votes) (48 delegates)
Mark Warner - 46.4 % ( 398,620 votes) (35 delegates)



2012 District of Columbia Democratic Primary (Closed Primary)
Barack Obama - 87.3 % (79,790 votes) (15 delegates)
Mark Warner - 12.6 % (11,516 votes) (0 delegates)

2012 Maryland Democratic Primary (Closed Primary)
Barack Obama - 69.6 % (499,773 votes) (51 delegates)
Mark Warner - 28.5 % (204,649 votes) (19 delegates)


2012 Louisiana Democratic Primary (Closed Primary)
Barack Obama - 59.7 % (178,489 votes) (33 delegates)
Mark Warner - 39.6 % (118,394) (23 delegates)



2012 Nebraska Democratic Caucus and Primary (Open Caucus and Primary) (primary results displayed in italics)
Barack Obama - 62.8 % (15,928 votes) (10 delegates)
Mark Warner - 36.3 % (9,207 votes) (6 delegates)
Barack Obama - 57.0 % (43,921 votes) (9 delegates)
Mark Warner - 42.3 % (32,594 votes) (6 delegates)


*county-level map reflects caucus results only

2012 Washington Democratic Caucus and Primary (Open Caucus and Primary) (primary resuls displayed in italics)
Barack Obama - 78.5 % (19,750 votes) (69 delegates)
Mark Warner - 20.1 % (5,057 votes) (9 delegates)
Barack Obama - 72.2 % (429,176 votes) (0 delegates awarded)
Mark Warner - 25.1 % (149,201 votes) (0 delegates awarded)


*county-level map reflects caucus results only

Delegate Count to Date: (Total delegates available: 4,291; 3,791 non-super delegates; 2,419 needed for majority)
Barack Obama: 1,639; w/ super delegates - 1,941
Mark Warner: 879 w/ superdeleages - 919


States won to date:

Blue = Obama, Red = Warner


TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2012 (cont.) - - - Just across town from where President Obama was addressing supporters in Alexandria, Va., Mitt Romney rallied a large, though noticeably less enthused crowd. “I want to thank you all so much for making it so close here tonight! (applause) And I really want to thank the wonderful Republicans of Maryland and D.C. for my victories tonight! (applause) And I hear that we‘re on our way to a victory in the great state of Washington, so thank you! (applause) [“I want to talk to you all about the choice you have in this election, and why that choice matters. It is about picking a president who relies not just on words but on work - on hard work to get America back to work. That’s our goal.]* But on a separate level, you have another choice to make. You have the choice to nominate a candidate that can stand toe to toe against Obama for the long haul, and who can compete with him on a serious level in the general election, versus a candidate that risks polarizing the more moderate and independent voters that we need to win. Both Gov. Palin and I represent conservative change, [but only one of us is ready on day one to be commander-in-chief, ready to manage our economy, and ready to defeat the (Democrats)!]* So I’m in this race. I want to hear from the people of Wisconsin and Hawaii, and I definitely want to hear from the people in Ohio and Texas! And when all is said and done, we’re gonna put the White House back in Republican hands this November!

Several hundred miles away, at a rally in Baton Rouge, La., Palin slammed Romney and Obama in front of a noticeably more enthusiastic crowd than Romney's. “They want you to believe that I can’t win. (loud boos) You know, I’ve always heard that when your opponent runs out of ammunition, the first thing they throw at you is the “she’s unelectable” card. Well, you know who else they said was unelectable ? . . . (screams of ’Reagan’ from the crowd) That’s right, the good ’ole Gipper! So please ignore Mitt Romney’s claims that I can’t win, uttered in the same hour that he lost THIS state's Republican primary by more than 30 points! (loud applause). We need to turn our eyes to our true political opponent, President Obama, before he keeps the nation on a path towards bankruptcy for four more years! I don‘t think we can take four more years of Obama‘s kind of change! America deserves better!” (loud cheers)

Although Romney was convincing, pundits seemed less assured that he could overtake Palin in the delegate count, absent a drastic shift in momentum. “What I don’t quite understand is how he still sees himself as able to capture that magic number of delegates,“ argued CNN’s Candy Crowley. She continued: “Sarah’s close to that number, or at least a lot closer than he is. Is he turning into the ‘Hillary Clinton’ of 2012?” Fox News commentator Glenn Beck was even more harsh: “You know, this is a lot like the Obama/Clinton feud of 2008, except there are a few key differences. Mitt Romney is not leading by ANY metric whatsoever! If you can recall, Hillary was getting a lot of flack after Super Tuesday for not getting out of Obama’s way. But to be fair to her, she had a few arguments for remaining in the race. Hillary was winning virtually ALL of the top 10 biggest states. What’s Romney’s argument? That he won NY and California? So what?! Also, Hillary arguably won the popular vote against Obama in 2008 - and popular vote doesn’t rule the day, but at least there was some impetus for her remaining in the race until the end. Romney is definitely not winning in the popular vote. And not only that, he’s attacking the person that appears increasingly likely to be our nominee. At what point is he going to stop and realize that he very well may be harming the Republican's candidate to the benefit of the man he claims they both want to defeat?”


2012 Republican Potomac/Multi-state Primary Results
Red = Palin, Green = Romney

2012 Virginia Republican Primary (Open Primary)
Sarah Palin - 50.6 % (491,324 votes) (63 delegates)
Mitt Romney - 48.4 % ( 469,963 votes) (0 delegates)



2012 District of Columbia Republican Primary (Closed Primary)
Mitt Romney - 64.3 % (6,444 votes) (16 delegates)
Sarah Palin - 34.0 % (3,407 votes) (0 delegates)

2012 Maryland Republican Primary (Closed Primary)
Mitt Romney - 53.3 % (373,654 votes) (37 delegates)
Sarah Palin - 46.5 % (325,983 votes) (0 delegates)



2012 Louisiana Republican Primary (Closed Primary)
Sarah Palin - 69.8 % (380,649 votes) (40 delegates)
Mitt Romney - 28.6 % (155,968 votes) (0 delegates)



2012 Nebraska Republican Primary (Open Primary)
Sarah Palin - 65.7 % (129,294 votes) (33 delegates)
Mitt Romney - 33.3 % (65,532 votes) (0 delegates)



2012 Washington Republican Caucus and Primary (Closed Caucus and Primary) (primary results displayed in italics)
Mitt Romney- 54.9 % (9,875 votes) (20 delegates)
Sarah Palin - 44.2 % (7,950 votes) (0 delegates)
Mitt Romney - 49.2 % (289,902 votes) (20 delegates awarded)
Sarah Palin - 48.6 % (286,367 votes) (0 delegates awarded)


*county-level map reflects caucus results only

Delegate Count to date (Total Delegates Available - 2,329; 1,186 for majority)
Sarah Palin - 839 (including 12 fmr. Scott Brown delegates)
Mitt Romney - 725 (including 52 fmr. Scott Brown delegates)

States won to date:

Red = Palin, Green = Romney


Thursday, February 16, 2012 - - - Survey USA released polling on the GOP races in the upcoming contests of Hawaii and Wisconsin. Both states will vote on Tuesday, February 14.

Who do you support for the Republican nomination for President in 2012? (Survey USA, 400 likely Hawaii Republican caucus-goers, +/-4.5)
Mitt Romney - 52 %
Sarah Palin - 36 % %
Undecided/someone else: 12 %

Who do you support for the Republican nomination for President in 2012? (Survey USA, 700 likely Wisconsin Republican primary voters, +/-3.0)
Sarah Palin - 45 %
Mitt Romney - 41 %
Undecided/someone else: 14 %

No survey was taken of the Democratic races due to Mark Warner’s campaign suspension. However, both Hawaii and Wisconsin have reported that because the contests have been paid for, they will go on as scheduled. Obama is expected to sweep both states (although some Republican strategists have begun spinning that if Obama does not reach at least the 80-90% range with voters in both states, it could point to continued weakness on his part.) Primary 'spinning' season was indeed in full swing.

*Hillary Clinton speech: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=19188844






Thursday, February 16, 2012 - - - The Romney campaign has begun an all-out assault on the Republican National Committees (RNC) decision to push up the primary season by consolidating a number of the final states primaries into a single day on Tuesday, April 10th.

In late January, shortly following Sarah Palin’s surprise victory in South Carolina, the Republican Rules and Bylaws Committee of the RNC had voted in support of a plan to push up all of the primaries taking place following the Ohio/Tx primaries to April 10th. The 30 member committee approved the controversial plan 17-12. The basis behind the decision centered on the premise that in the event of a close contest between then-front-runner Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin, it would be better for the primary season to end sooner rather than later. Members of the RNC feared that if Romney and Palin were to engage in a protracted battle, it would be damaging for the party’s general election hopes in November. RNC Rules and Bylaws Committee member Mary Matalin argued at the meeting: “So while Mitt and Sarah are slugging it out, destroying each other in the trenches, Obama is going to be running on his campaign themes. It’s like we’re going to give him a free head-start. Changing the date of the final primaries would at least allow for the primaries to end well before the convention, and give us time to unite behind whomever the nominee will be.” Both the Palin and Romney campaigns endorsed the proposal (Romney’s camp believed they would perform much stronger on Super Tuesday than they did, and the Palin camp was said to support the proposal in the belief that she had the momentum, and the sooner the primaries ended, the better for her).

However, yesterday, Romney campaign manger (and ironically, the former head of the RNC), Ed Gillespie, sent an email requesting a vote and hearing on changing the primary dates back to their original dates (with the final primaries, SD and Montana, voting on June 5th). Said Gillespie: “We will not deny nor conceal that our campaign had originally endorsed the new rule, but events on the ground have changed. And what was sadly forgotten a few weeks ago during the vote was the success that the close primary battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton had for the Democratic party. It allowed them to build up the Democratic machinery in all 50 states, and I don’t have to remind you what that meant in terms of the general election vote. Obama performed better than any Democrat in years in a lot of red states, and even came within 10 points in Montana! This primary race is close, very close. And the decision to rush this process provides both sides with less time to make their case to voters, and potentially stymies beefed up Republican machines in the 50 states. It’s damaging to the democratic process, and in the interest of a fair election, we respectfully request that the original primary schedule be resotred.” Palin surrogate and Governor of Texas (an upcoming primary state), Rick Perry (R) said “Call me dense, but isn’t this a little too ironic? What was Ed’s problem with the new calendar when he was endorsing it just 3 weeks ago? This is just hard to stomach.” Not surprisingly, the Palin campaign vehemently lobbied against the proposal to revert to the old primary schedule.


In an impromptu hearing and vote, the Rules and Bylaws Committee voted 17-10 to keep the new, condensed primary schedule as it was set on January 23rd. The remaining primary schedule is:
Feb. 21 - Wisconsin and Hawaii
March 6 - Texas, Ohio, Vermont, Rhode Island, and the Virgin Islands
March 13 - Mississippi and Wyoming
April 10 - Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Indiana, Oregon, Kentucky, West Virginia, Montana, South Dakota, Puerto Rico, Guam

A new Public Policy Polling poll on the 2012 GOP nomination race shows Palin with her largest lead of the contest yet,
(PPP, 2/15-17; 1,000 likely Republican voters; +/-4.0)
Sarah Palin - 52 %
Mitt Romney: 44 %
Undecided/Someone else: 4 %

Friday, February 17, 2012 - - - At 10:45 AM, President Obama appeared in the White House Press room alongside Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, and Diane Wood, a 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals judge. The President took to the podium: “My fellow Americans, I am pleased to announce today that I have nominated the Honorable Judge Diane Wood, of the U.S. Court of Appeals, to the United States Supreme Court. Though Justice Kennedy’s unexpected death was heart wrenching, and tragic, I trust that he would have been more than pleased to have a legal scholar, the caliber of Ms. Wood, take his place. Ms. Wood was appointed to the Court of Appeals in 1995 by President Clinton, and has taught at a number of this nation’s prominent law schools. But more important than her background or legal education, is her view that judges are to interpret the law through the lense of the constitution. Her numerous opinions with the 7th Circuit reveal an uncanny ability to understand, on a personal level, the trials and tribulations of people that aren’t like her, or aren’t nearly as privileged. She will be an excellent addition to the court, and a worthy replacement for the late Justice Kennedy. Judge Wood, a few words, please?” (Judge Diane Woods takes to the podium . . .)


Judge Diane Wood, a frequent name on the Supreme Court short-lists, received cautious approval by the mainstream media. In some quarters, President Obama was praised for nominating such a seemingly uncontroversial, competent judicial scholar. A flash poll taken by Gallup the following day showed that the American public had no major qualms with her nomination.
Generally speaking, how would you rate Obama’s choice of Diane Wood as a nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court - as excellent, good, only fair, or poor? (Gallup, 2/18-19, 900 adults nationwide, +/-3.5%)
% Excellent / Good % Only Fair % Poor % No opinion
38% 17% 15% 30%
Total Excellent/Good / Only fair/poor / No opinion
38 % / 32 % / 30 %

At the advice of advisers, Palin had steered clear of the abortion debate for most of the primary season. In an attempt to improve her numbers with independents, advisors had decided that any debate on abortion could only serve to harden opinions about the Governor, at a time when they were trying to soften opinion. But the nomination of Judge Diane Wood provided too much bait on one of her more passionate issues. It also provided her with red meat for the overwhelmingly pro-life Republican base at a time that her campaign was trying to put the final nail in Romney’s coffin. At a campaign event in Allentown, Pa., Palin lambasted the president’s nominee: “Well, the most pro-abortion president in modern history has selected one of the most pro-abortion judges on the Court of Appeals. Go figure? (crowd roars) Judge Diane Wood, over her career, has issued opinions opposing bans on late-term abortions (boos). She’s also issued opinions opposing a waiting period for women who wanted abortions (boos). She’s issued opinions favoring laws that would silence our 1st Amendment right of free speech in protecting the unborn (boos)! Folks, she’s not replacing a Souter, or a Stevens. She’s replacing Kennedy, bless his soul, a true moderate, a true swing-vote. So instead of that moderate voice, we will now have a far-left, radically pro-abortion voice on our Supreme Court if the President has his way. This can NOT happen. Congress, you must prevent this!” And with that, the first shots were fired in the debate between the Republicans and Democrats on the nomination of Diane Wood to the Supreme Court.

Boarding a jet in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Mitt Romney was asked by a reporter for his views on Diane Wood. “Well, I’ll be looking more closely at some of her opinions now, but form what I’ve heard, I’m not terribly thrilled at the prospects of having such an ardently pro-abortion judge on the court. And certainly not when that judge is replacing a moderate voice. All in all, I think Obama owed it to the American people to pick a moderate in the mold of Kennedy, but he didn’t do it. He picked someone that sounds pretty left. It’s a real shame.” When pressed as to whether or not he agreed with his primary opponent’s assertion that the Congress should fight her nomination, Romney was slightly less assertive: “Well, I’ve always been one for supporting an up or down vote on judges, but I’m gonna wait to hear about this woman a little more. I’m really, really disappointed that President Obama is trying to insert a leftist on the court in place of Kennedy. He knows he will be shifting the direction of the court in a more leftward tilt for generations to come. That’s a big freaking deal!”


Another Gallup poll reveals American’s ever-shifting opinions on the topic of abortion.
With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice, or pro-life? (Gallup, 2/18-2/20, 1,001 adults nationally, +/-3.5%)
Pro-Life - 47 %
Pro-Choice - 45 %



Wednesday, February 22, 2012 - - - PRESIDENT OBAMA SECURES THE NOMINATION; PALIN WIDENS LEAD WITH VICTORY IN WISCONSIN

Madison, Wisconsin, 2.22.12 - In another split decision, Sarah Palin emerged victorious in the more delegate rich state of Wisconsin last night, increasing her delegate lead over Gov. Romney, and confirming her current front-runner status. A national poll earlier in the week showed her opening a nearly double-digit lead over her opponent. President Obama also swept his home state and the Badger state in what were considered by pundits mere formalities. However, in an unexpected move, Obama secured the required delegates to clinch the nomination when 261 Warner delegates endorsed the president. Sen. Warner suspended his campaign one week ago. The president currently has 2,443 delegates, 24 more than would be required to clinch the nomination.

The A.P. has called the caucuses in Hawaii for Mitt Romney, although votes are still coming in. Pundits had predicted, leading into tonight’s contests, that the pressure would be on Governor Romney to pull off an upset in order to blunt Sarah Palin’s growing momentum. Though polling had shown Palin with a slight edge in Wisconsin, a Univ. of Wisconsin daily tracking poll had shown Romney down 5%, with 10% undecided. With 97% of precincts reporting, Palin leads with 57% of the vote in Romney’s back yard. Said Gov. Huckabee on his Fox News show: “I think that at at some point, Romney’s going to have to realize that he’s not doing the party any good. He’s winning small nominal victories, usually by less than 8 points. Beyond that, the momentum is clearly behind Palin. I have to wonder, at what point will he realize that his attacks on her serve as perfect ammunition for Obama in the general election?”


MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough disagreed: “Look, this is getting eerily similar to the Obama/Clinton race of 2008. And like Clinton then, the Palin camp is acting prematurely, as if they have this wrapped up. There is a magic number of delegates out there you must obtain, and Palin doesn’t have it. Look the primaries are going to end early, why not lets see what Romney can do? Are the odds against him? Absolutely. But his argument is a compelling one - can Palin, as polarizing as she is, win over the independents required to win a general election? The upcoming primaries will tell us whether or not that message is sinking in. But in the meantime, I say, let them run!”

2012 Wisconsin Republican Primary Results (Open primary)
Sarah Palin - 56.0 % (461,364 votes) (40 delegates)
Mitt Romney - 43.5 % (358,381 votes) (0 delegates)


Red = Palin, Green = Romney

2012 Hawaii Republican Caucuses (Closed caucuses)
Mitt Romney: 53.2 % (15,666 votes) (20 delegates)
Sarah Palin: 46.1 % (13,576 votes) (0 delegates)


Green = Romney, Red = Palin

Delegate Count to date (Total Delegates Available - 2,329; 1,186 for majority)
Sarah Palin - 879
Mitt Romney - 745

States won to date:

Red = Palin, Green = Romney


Wednesday, February 22, 2012 (cont.) - - - Barack Obama won two resounding victories in what many pundits considered to be mere formalities (the Hawaii and Wisconsin Democratic contests were paid for and ready to go, and thus, went on as scheduled). Having suspended his campaign earlier in the week, Warner had not campaigned in Wisconsin since mid-January, and was never on the air with TV ads in either state. Due to a surprise move on the part of 261 Warner delegates, the President was able to clinch the nomination a bit earlier than expected. Warner is not on record as having officially released any of his delegates to Obama, so many in the media interpreted the move as an act of defiance on the part of some former Warner loyalists who felt it was now time to rally around the President. However, others felt it was an obvious move, and would allow the Democrats to put the primary season behind them, as the Republicans continued to battle it out. Obama spoke to a crowd of 14,000 at a fairly last minute victory rally thrown together as soon as they learned of the Warner delegation’s endorsement. “Here we are again! (raucous applause) I told you we’d be back here, and we are! And we’ve got some work to do, but we’re on our way America! We’re back on track, and we’re on our way!” (loud applause)

2012 Wisconsin Democratic Primary (Open Primary)
Barack Obama - 79.7 % (345,275 votes) (74 delegates)
Mark Warner - 16.5 % (71,481 votes) (0 delegates)


Blue = Obama

2012 Hawaii Democratic Caucuses (closed caucuses)
Barack Obama - 90.1 % (17,642 votes) (20 delegates)
Mark Warner - 7.7 % (1,508 votes)


Blue = Obama

Delegate Count to Date: (Total delegates available: 4,291; 3,791 non-super delegates; 2,419 needed for majority)
Barack Obama: 2,443
Mark Warner: 658

States won to date:

Blue = Obama, Red = Warner
Final Popular Vote Tally:
Obama pop vote total: 12,414,494 (62.39 %)
Warner pop vote total: 7,322,289 (36.80 %)
Total votes cast: 19,898,786

The daily tracking polls keeping up with President Obama’s job approval rating, just four days following his recapturing of the Democratic nomination, are reflecting a notable post-nomination bounce.
Obama Job Approval Rating
Gallup Daily Tracking Poll, 2/25/2012 (all adults)
Approve: 48%
Disapprove: 46%
Net: + 2

Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll (likely voters) 2/25/2012
Approve: 47% (strongly approve - 30 %)
Disapprove: 51% (strongly disapprove - 39 %)



United States Democratic Primary And Caucus Results, County-Level, 2012


Blue = Obama, Red = Warner, White = No Primary/Caucus held


Obama pop vote total: 12,414,494 (62.39 %)
Warner pop vote total: 7,322,289 (36.80 %)
Total votes cast: 19,898,786



Friday, February 24, 2012 - - - At 10:15 AM, the Huffington Posts’ front page broke with the headline: “ALASKA COURT DOCS. OBTAINED; PALINS TO DIVORCE!” Nearly half an hour later, the Associated Press broke with the official story on the Palin marriage rumors. According to documents that were leaked by an anonymous court official in Wasilla, Alaska, Sarah Palin has filed for a separation from her husband, Todd Palin, citing irreconcilable differences. All of a sudden, the GOP darling’s ever-present ’family drama’ threatened to upend her chances at securing the Republican nomination for the presidency, just when it looked as if she had it wrapped up.

At 11:35 AM, just over one hour after the story first broke on the Huffington Post, Sarah Palin delivered a press conference at a campaign stop in Columbus, Ohio. The media chattered about the possibility that the GOP frontrunner may be suspending her presidential campaign, and so for five minutes, the entire political world was focused on her remarks: “I’ve convened this press conference today, with a heavy heart, to confirm what was leaked to the press earlier this morning, that myself and Todd are separating. (murmurs from the press) As we’ve learned time and again, in public life, you live in the public view. While we had hoped to make this announcement under different circumstances, we can not deny what is taking place in our private lives. During this time of difficulty, we would like to ask that, as it pertains to our children, you please respect their privacy. They did not cause this, are not responsible for this, and should not be punished for it. Please, as a mother, respect their privacy. As for me, I want to be unequivocally clear: I remain a candidate for the Republican nomination for president, and I remain the frontrunner for that position as well! (some scattered applause in the press room) But I wasn’t born yesterday, and I know that there are many out there that would benefit greatly to have this 2012 campaign revolve around my marriage. I will speak candidly soon about why some decisions in my marriage have been made. But it will be at a time and a place of my choosing. And I will only discuss it, because this election is too important to allow it to be devoured by a tabloid scandal, and sadly, one that revolves around a very gut-wrenching private matter. Thank you.”





Monday, February 27, 2012 - - - After having worked its way through Congress since mid-January, the Small Business Recovery Act of 2012 had finally passed both Houses, and was being signed into law by President Obama. The bill had been held up by Senate Republicans due to disagreements over the size and amount of the package. The Democrats used the bill initially to criticize Republicans for being hypocrites. Fmr. Speaker and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca.) stated two weeks ago: “I really hope that the country is paying attention to what the GOP is asking for here. One second, they’re on their soapboxes about deficits, and massive government spending, and then the next second, they’re holding up a bill the American people want and need because it isn’t big enough? Where’s the logic there? The Democrats support an agenda that puts the country ahead of rigid philosophical views. The Republicans don’t. We’ll be talking about this again between now and November.” Democrats had argued for a $60 billion bill, with $45 billion being set aside to provide loans to small businesses, and the remaining $15 billion going to tax cuts. Republicans wanted a bigger bill with a higher proportion of tax cuts: $125 billion total, with $25 billion going towards loans, and the remaining $100 billion going to tax cuts. Freshman Congressman Harold Johnson (R-NC) retorted at the time: “Democrats are trying to confuse the voters. We are the party of fiscal responsibility. We do want to reduce government spending. But as a government we know there are some free market principles that we can use to prime our economy - it’s called ’tax cuts.’ When you cut taxes for anyone, it helps their economic situation. When you cut taxes for the primary job generators in this country, you start moving the economy again. I don’t know what it is about a ’tax cut’ that Representative Pelosi hates so much.” The final price tag was $110 billion, with $80 billion going towards tax cuts for small businesses, and the remaining $30 billion going into a fund to provide for loans. The House passed the bill 247 - 175, while the Senate approved the measure 53 - 45.


Speaking at the signing ceremony, Obama commented: “I am more than pleased to say that the fact that I’m sitting here today is a wonderful sign in the ongoing attempts between the Congress and myself to accomplish bipartisan change. [. . .It was critical that we cut taxes and make more loans available to entrepreneurs. . . This is important because small businesses produce most of the new jobs in this country. They are the anchors of our Main Streets. They are part of the promise of America - the idea that if you’ve got a dream and you’re willing to work hard, you can succeed. That’s what leads a worker to leave a job to become her own boss. That’s what propels a basement inventor to sell a new product, or an amateur chef to open a restaurant. Its this promise that has drawn millions to our shores and made our economy the envy of the world.]* We may be weakened, but we are the strongest for a reason, and we’ll remain so. Because we value free, independent, entrepreneurial competitiveness. And giving revenue back to the people that take advantage of this spirit is the best way to get our economy back on track.”

Fmr. Vice President Dick Cheney remarked on Meet the Press: “You’ll be hard pressed to get me to disagree with the sentiment the President just expressed in the clip you played. But where has this man been for the last 3 years? Who is this new found, free-market, pro-tax cut capitalist-savior? The small businesses bill was a good bill, but it doesn’t make up for all that he’s done to kick this economy into a deeper recession than it had to be. The American people’s memories aren’t this short. He‘s a johnny-come-lately to the proven fact that people spend money more wisely than the government.”


*Obama remarks: http://theuptake.org/2010/09/27/obam...ess-jobs-bill/


Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - - - With the Palin separation dominating the T.V. news cycle since Friday, rumors settled on the theory that Todd Palin had been involved in an affair with an Alaskan native. Popular liberal Alaskan blog, ‘Mudflats,‘ claimed to have access to someone inside the Palin inner-circle who had confirmed the affair. After releasing photos of Todd Palin and his alleged mistress together, answers started coming in. The young lady’s name is Stephanie Johansen, a married 15-year native of Alaska, and long-time friend of the Palin family. Stephanie’s husband, Shane, is a commercial fisherman and longtime friend of Todd Palin’s. The couple has two children, aged 9 and 3. Since her press conference on Monday, Governor Palin has not spoken to anyone publicly about the separation, despite a promise to “speak candidly” about the mystery surrounding her and her husband’s split, and a promise to do so “soon.”


Although the networks had been trying, both President Obama and Governor Romney had remained mum on the Palin separation saga. That silence was broken on Tuesday. “I refuse to speculate on something so personal, and think it would be cheap to do otherwise,” commented Mitt Romney, Palin’s primary opponent, and potential benefactor of any fallout from the scandal. “I’m not going to comment on the speculation of infidelity. This is a deeply personal matter, and one that hasn’t been confirmed. It’s speculation, and until proven otherwise, it’s cruel speculation.” ABC News Reporter Jake Tapper attempted to steer the President towards the subject the following day during a press conference on Supreme Court nominee Diane Wood: “Jake, I know what you’re doing, and I’m not going to go there. This is not a matter involving me, and it’s certainly not a matter involving government interest, so I won’t waste any more time on it. Now please tell me you have another question.”

Cable pundits anticipated a ratings bonanza as the Palin-adultery scandal rippled through the country. Ron Reagan, Jr., occasional political pundit, argued on MSNBC: “These Republican Conservative family values are really something to behold, aren‘t they?” (chuckling) “The hypocrisy of their demands on the public versus the lives they live in private is too much to bare. Surely I’m not the only one seeing the irony.” “No, Ron, but you could do a better job of not acting like you’re reveling in it,” fired back Joe Scarborough. “You know, she isn’t my pick, and I’ve been clear that I think Mitt Romney is more electable, but you can’t drag a woman through the mud because her husband cheats on her. It’s the definition of sexist, and hard to believe coming from some of you feminists, or feminist thinkers on the left.” Maddow argued back: “Look, that’s not Ron’s point, and that’s not my point. It’s not about reveling in it. It’s about pointing out the hypocrisy of it. This lady held herself out there to the media as the perfect Christian woman running the perfect Christian household, and come to find out, things weren’t as perfect as she wanted us all to believe. Now, do I care how wonderful things are in the Palin household? No! But it does matter, because she’s made her household such an integral part of who she is as a person. And because she’s basically running a “character” campaign, that’s relevant.” Chris Matthews chimes in: “Well either way, I’m definitely of the mind that the longer she waits to squash this, the worse it will be for her. I’m not saying for the primary. I think she’s got the primaries wrapped up against Romney. I’m talking long term. If she doesn’t get out there soon, like, now, and explain some of this and put some of this to rest, then she is doing irreparable damage to her image.” Pundit Kirsten Powers adds: “I can’t believe we’re sitting here talking about this as if this isn’t the most sexist thing we’ve ever heard of. Bill Clinton actually did the cheating, and he was fine and dandy to continue to hold his office! This is no different than the Mark and Jenny Sanford story. A woman that’s been cheated-on is not the culprit. She’s the victim. And Rachel, no, she did not hold herself out as the perfect Christian woman. That was a complete caricature created by none other than, well, you and the media. What in the world does whether or not Todd Palin can keep it in his pants have to do with Sarah’s ability to balance a budget, or defend our country? The sexism in politics is rampant, especially when it comes to Governor Palin.”


Several polls taken in the days following the scandal showed signs of a disgruntled Republican base, and a potentially newly-invigorated battle for the Republican nomination. Pundits wonder, is this a coincidental polling blip, or a real reaction to the Palin separation story?
2012 Republican Candidates, National (Quinnipiac, 2/25-27, 2,000 All likely voters, +/- 2.5)
Favorable / Unfavorable. Numbers in brackets = favorability ratings amongst Republicans.
Mitt Romney - 44 / 48 [ 57 / 34 ]
Sarah Palin - 44 / 51 [ 60 / 29 ]

Who do you want to be the GOP nominee for President in 2012? (PPP, 2/26-28; 1,200 likely Republican primary voters; +/-3.5)
Sarah Palin - 50 %
Mitt Romney: 46 %
Undecided/Someone else: 4 %

Potential 2012 match-ups (PPP, 2/26-28; 1,500 likely voters, national; +/-3%)
Mitt Romney v. Barack Obama: 43 - 46 %
Sarah Palin v. Obama: 42 - 49 %

Wednesday, February 29, 2012

In Supreme Court News, Congressional Republicans have begun to hammer nominee Judge Diane Wood over perceived ‘liberal’ views and controversial opinions she had authored involving abortion as a U.S. Court of Appeals Judge. The cases in question involved state bans on partial-birth abortions. At the time, Judge Wood had voted to prevent Indiana and Wisconsin from enforcing a state ban on partial-birth abortions. Democrats and pro-choice advocates argued that Republicans were distorting Ms. Wood’s record, and ignoring the facts of the cases she heard. Liberal advocates also argued that Republicans were inflating the abortion issue because of the President‘s prerogative to appoint someone to the left of Anthony Kennedy to the swing vote seat. “Get over it, you bunch of babies!” shouted Bill Maher on his show, ’Real Time.’ “Jesus, you would think that the President had taken over in a military coup! He was elected! Not only that, he was elected with the clearest mandate any president in this country has had in 20 years. You see, there’s this annoying little article called Article III that says the President gets to appoint Supreme Court Justices. Alright then, strict constructionists . . . Construe that! So what if Obama gets to replace the whole court?! He’s the president, it’s his job! And thank god the ever important decision of picking a justice to tilt the balance of the court came down to Obama, and not a Palin or a Romney.”

Anti-abortion advocates claimed that Ms.Wood’s opinions reveal that she is too outside of mainstream American thought to be confirmed to the court. Sen. Orin Hatch (R) of Utah contended “No one is denying that she is smart. The question is, ‘is she too radical to act within the confines of the constitution?’ And the answer there is, ‘probably.’ The Supreme Court has already ruled on partial-birth abortions, and they’ve ruled that bans on such horrific procedures are not unduly burdensome on a woman’s right to an abortion as provided for under Casey v. Planned Parenthood, and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. So yes, it is fair to ask if she is too outside of the mainstream to be trusted to keep her ideological views out of the cases she might hear. In my opinion, and in most American voter’s opinion, her views on abortion are extreme, and most Americans will be outraged to have such an extreme voice replace Kennedy’s voice of moderation. It cannot be repeated enough. This isn’t the president’s standard, run-of-the-mill Supreme Court appointment. This appointment will determine the balance of our Supreme Court for at least the next decade, and probably longer. The President went too far left with this pick, and he did it with too much at stake.”



Wednesday, February 29, 2012 (cont) - - - Quinnipiac University releases a few polls of upcoming contests. Until the unfolding Palin story, polling and pundits had pegged Palin as the heavy favorite in both Ohio and Texas, given the conservative Republican primary electorate in both states, coupled with her growing momentum. However, fresh new polling, coupled with an all-open primary night, gave growing credence to the conventional wisdom that Governor Mitt Romney may have another chance to mount an upset.
In Ohio: Who do you support for the GOP nomination for president in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 2/27-3/1, 650 likely Republican voters; +/-5.0)
Palin - 44 %
Romney - 44 %
Undecided/Someone else - 12 %
In Texas: Who do you support for GOP nomination for president in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 2/27-3/1, 650 likely Republican voters; +/-5.0)
Palin - 51 %
Romney - 41 %
Undecided/Someone else - 8 %
In Pennsylvania: Who do you support for the GOP nomination for president in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 2/27-3/1, 650 likely primary voters; +/-5.0)
Romney - 42 %
Palin - 39 %
Undecided/Someone else - 19 %

On Wednesday evening, Entertainment Tonight announces that the Palin campaign has confirmed a special ABC exclusive interview, to air Friday Night on 20/20 with Governor Palin, and to be hosted by Barbara Walters. E.T. notes that Palin will be speaking about her recent separation, for the first time, in detail.

Friday, March 2, 2012

The 20/20 Barbara Walters / Sarah Palin interview was highly anticipated by political observers, if not the American public in general. Reportedly viewed by nearly 17 million viewers, the former governor explained to the American public the reasons for the recent dissolution of her marriage with Todd Palin. In the interview, Palin faced tough questions from Ms. Walters on when she knew of Todd’s infidelity, whether there had been any on her part, and how she is dealing with the pain. Below are select excerpts from the interview

Barbara Walters: When did you first learn your husband was having an affair?

Sarah Palin: Ummm, the day after the Super-Tuesday primary contests, he told me.

Walters: The day after Super Tuesday?

Palin: Yep. Talk about timing, right?

Walters: Oh my goodness. What did he say? How?

Palin: We were in Virginia, campaigning for that state’s primary. We had just finished lunch, and were regrouping quickly in the hotel room when he told me that he had some news that was going to forever change the way I viewed him, and would possibly change the nature of my political race. That’s when he told me that he had been involved in an affair for two years with an old friend . . .

Walters: Were you surprised? Any indication now, or in the past, that this was happening?

Palin: None, and I was shocked. Still am, to some extent . . .(continues talk)
__________________________________________________ ___________________
Later in the interview. . .
Walters: Have you ever been unfaithful in your marriage?

Palin: Absolutely not. And to my knowledge, no one is alleging that. (brief pause) Give them a second and I’m sure they will! (laughing)
__________________________________________________ ________________
Later in the interview . . .
Walters: What would you say to those wondering how something like this, a failing marriage, could slide under your radar?

Palin: You know, I think it’s important for people to remember that I’m not perfect, and I’ve never claimed to be. One of the reasons I’ve been successful in public life is because I’ve always held myself, and my family, out to be that all-American family. We have love, success, happiness, wisdom. But with all of that, like every American family, we have our darker sides. And I would be willing to argue that we’ve been scrutinized to a level that a lot of political families, even presidential families, have not. More than a few of our less proud moments have been broadcast on television for the world to see. As a public figure, and as a candidate for high office, I expect that. But I do not expect to be judged on a higher standard than my political colleagues and opponents. Marriages fail in this country, at a disappointingly high rate. My family, as is now obvious, is certainly not immune to statistics. But it’s dishonest to compare me to Fmr. President Clinton - a sitting president when his shenanigans took place, and it's dishonest to suggest I've done anything on the level of adultery. So I definitely have to question where some of these comparisons are coming from.

Walters: Would you call it sexism?

Palin: Yes, yes I think I would Barbara.
__________________________________________________ ____________________
Later in the interview . . .
Walters: You said that ‘marriages fail.’ You sound sort of like a woman that's made up her mind. Have you made up your mind about the fate of your marriage? Is there any chance at reconciliation, and if not, what would you say to those who argue that if Hillary did it, you can too?

Palin: I would have to respond by saying that everyone’s situation is different. I’ve been asked this a lot in the last week, and I’ve found that the best advice is to stay true to yourself, because no one story is the same as any other. Barbara, I don’t know yet what is going to happen between Todd and myself. It would be a lie to say that I’m not hurt, and I would be lying to say that I think the best recipe for the two of us is to remain in the same household. Who knows what time will hold for us. But then again, at least for now, I have to keep some things private. I just don’t know yet.
__________________________________________________ ______________________
Later in the interview . . .
Walters: Governor, I have to ask. When you found out, did you cry?

Palin: (brief pause) Yes, of course. I’m a human being, so I cried.
__________________________________________________ ______________________

The interview was well received by many in the media. Observers felt that Palin remained composed without appearing detached or unaffected by the recent bad news. Larry Sabato even speculated that the Walters “did you cry” question could be the single most successful recruitment tool for the Palin campaign in their quest for female voters. Others were less convinced that Palin had done herself any favors. “She still came off looking like a hypocrite,” argued CNN’s Campbell Brown. “She throws rocks at people that don’t live perfect Christian lives, but asks for privacy when that lense is focused on her own. And how can we be expected to believe that she just discovered a two-year affair? When did she really know about this affair, and for how long was it covered up for the sake of her presidential bid?” Even popular former Gov. Jeb Bush, in an interview with Fox News, wondered allowed: “Any talk of marital infidelity and adultery, no matter who its leveled at, when talked about in the capacity of a presidential candidacy, is a bad thing. Just ask former President Clinton. And I just don’t see how the media’s week-long obsession with Sarah Palin’s marriage does a thing to help the Republicans win back the White House in 2008. It’s up to her to get the party back on message. And if she doesn’t, well, that’s why Mitt Romney’s still in this.”






Wednesday, March 7, 2012 - - - RESILIENT PALIN SWEEPS BIG STATES, ROMNEY WINS SMALLER CONTESTS; PRESIDENT ANNOUNCES RECORD-BREAKING FUNDRAISING HAUL

El Paso, Texas - 03.07.2012 - In what was being hailed by Romney-backers as a voter referendum on Palin’s very-public handling of the break-up of her marriage, while hailed by Palin-ites as Romney’s last stand, both sides found reason to claim victory.

Sarah Palin was declared the victor in the night’s two most watched contests. Carrying both Ohio and Texas (the latter of which by a large margin), Palin was able to continue her delegate lead expansion, while also claiming to be the comeback kid for a second time around. “Thank you Texas,” screamed a jubilant Palin at a Texas victory rally in Dallas. “In the worst of times, you’ve been there. And your kind words of sympathy and dedication have touched me in a way I’ll never be able to quite explain. But as you can see, despite a brief pit stop, I’m still in this fight! (loud applause) And that’s the message you just sent to the talking-heads out there! (loud applause) I’m still in this, because America is on the cusp of a great reawakening! And we demand a leader who looks to the very best in America, not one that ignores its exceptionalism! We need a President who inspires, and lifts her up, and believes her best days are still ahead of her!”

The Romney campaign is also expected to make the talk show rounds this morning, as Romney carried Vermont, Rhode Island, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. “If she’s got this thing wrapped up, then we sure couldn’t tell it last night. We put up some valiant efforts in Texas and Ohio, but everyone knew all along those states were made up of our opponents demographics, and we came awfully darn close to an upset in Ohio, and a lot of people didn’t see that coming. So we reinforced what we've said all along: Gov. Palin performs poorly in the "open-primary" states, and she'll perform poorly amongst independents in November too, Bill,” argued Romney campaign manager Ed Gillespie on ‘The O’Reilly’ factor.' “And we swept her completely under the rug in three of the nights five contests. That’s not the sign of some one that has this campaign wrapped up. We like what we’re seeing in our poll numbers, and what you won't hear anyone saying in the media is that we exceeded expectations last night. But that doesn’t quite fit with the riveting ‘Obama v. Palin’ story being spun out there by you guys.” O’Reilly responded: “Hey, cheap shot, cheap shot! I’m not pushing anything, so I don’t know what you mean by ‘the likes of you guys.’ And I call it like I see it, but it seems to me like your guy is staying in this no matter what.” (interrupting) “Hold on Bill, one sec . . .” spurted Gillespie. O‘Reilly continued, “he wants to rack up as many states as he can, and he wants to lobby the pledged delegates over the summer. It’s the Clinton suicide strategy that never took shape in 2008!” “Absolutely not, Bill . . .” Gillespie argued.


2012 Republican Mini-Tuesday Primary Results
Red = Palin, Green = Romney

VERMONT: (open primary)
Mitt Romney / Sarah Palin - 62.1 % / 36.5 %
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 62,923 / 14
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 36,984 / 0


RHODE ISLAND: (open primary)
Mitt Romney / Sarah Palin - 64.7 % / 32.0 %
Romney popular vote / delegates won: 62,004 / 17
Palin popular vote / delegates won: 30,667 / 0


TEXAS: (open primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney - 58.2 % / 40.6 %
Palin popular vote / delegates won: 1,382,299 / 116
Romney popular vote / delegates won: 964,284 / 21


U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS: (open primary)
Mitt Romney / Sarah Palin - 58.4 % / 39.5 %
Romney popular vote / delegates won: 18,831 / 15
Palin popular vote / delegates won: 12,804 / 0


OHIO: (open primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney - 51.8 % / 48.0 %
Palin popular vote / delegates won: 976,670 / 65
Romney popular vote / delegates won: 905,022 / 20


Delegate Count to date (Total Delegates Available - 2,329; 1,186 for majority)
Sarah Palin - 1,060
Mitt Romney - 832

States won to date:

Red = Palin, Green = Romney




Wednesday, March 7, 2012 (cont.) - - - With the largest financial take of the primary season thus far, President Obama’s campaign announced that it raised $51.8 million dollars in donations in the month of February, with over 300,000 new contributors. The President’s February tally was his largest haul since he announced his reelection in mid 2011, and was nearly $20 million more than he raised in the previous month of January. Lots had been made of Obama’s fundraising by Washington insiders, which had fallen well short of the record-breaking levels of 2008. In the same month of February, 2008, the Obama campaign announced that they had raised $55 million. President Obama also holds the all-time fundraising record for raising $150 million in the final weeks of his campaign in 2008. Said campaign manager David Plouffe “We felt very comfortable with where we were at before this announcement, and we certainly do after it. You know, enthusiasm has suffered some since 2008, and that’s to be expected. But we’ve kept up well with our Republican opponents, and I think this number puts us on top.” He was correct, as Mitt Romney had the previous record of the season, having raised over $44 million in the month of January 2012, with Sarah Palin close behind, having raised $43 million in the same month. The President raised $33 million in the month of January, 2012.




Saturday, March 10, 2012 - - - As Romney campaigned in a Philadelphia suburb, attempting to stake out some ground in the final, primary-season-ending contests on April 10, a new PPP poll of Republican likely voters showed Palin receiving a slight bounce after capturing Texas and Ohio: Who do you want to be the GOP nominee for President in 2012? (PPP, 3/7-8; 1,200 likely Republican primary voters; +/-3.5)
Sarah Palin - 51 % (+1)
Mitt Romney: 44 % (-2)
Undecided/Someone else: 5 %


In the days following the Ohio/Tx/multi-state contests, the Romney campaign was faced with a difficult, if not unlikely road to the nomination. His opponent was only 125 delegates, give or take a few, from capturing the required number of delegates to claim the nomination. Romney was over 300 delegates away. In order to win the nomination outright by reaching the magic number of delegates, he would have to win virtually all of the remaining contests, save one or two. This led some commentators on the right to accuse Romney of being power-hungry and damaging to the party’s chances in November. “I’ve always had great respect for Governor Romney, viewed him as a rational, pragmatic guy. But I don’t understand his train of thought here,” stated columnist Charles Krauthamer. "All he has to do is take a look at the delegate count, and the polling in the upcoming primary states, and see that he’s going to fall well short of the nomination, and that Palin will secure the delegates required. Is he now suggesting that even if she secures the required delegates, he will not concede and will lobby those delegates to switch sides? Is that even allowed? All I know is it’s Romney, not Palin, who’s employing the dreaded “scorched earth” strategy, against one of the Republican’s own, nonetheless. He’s turning into a real spoiler.”

But in other circles, Romney was viewed as the party’s last hope at gaining the White House, and his surrogates were compelling in mapping his strategy for victory. Following O‘Reilly‘s suggestion a week earlier, former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan suggested that the primary may come down to a backroom delegate battle: “The only feasible way that I can see Mitt Romney becoming the nominee now is to perform strongly in the remaining contests. Win at least half, preferably more. Get as close to Palin’s delegate amount as possible, and then lobby the delegates like hell over the summer. Hope for a Palin implosion, and remember, drama follows her, so that’s not out of the question. Hope to steal enough delegates to clinch the nomination before the convention, but if necessary, take it to the convention floor. Unity will hopefully not be a problem, given both Palin and Romney’s public agreement to support the eventual winner’s campaign; granted, the longer this thing drags on, the less likely they seem to honor that commitment. But that aside, I can certainly justify why he’s still running.”

But on this day, while campaigning just outside of Philadelphia, Romney sensed a small wind at his back. Appearing on stage before a crowd of 6,000, the Massachusetts Governor was joined by former Presidents George W. and George H.W. Bush, as well as former Governor of Florida, Jeb Bush. Said former President George W. Bush to an excited crowd: “I’m standing here today with my pop, and my brother Jeb, to announce my proud endorsement of Governor Mitt Romney for the next President of the United States!” (loud applause)

“You know, it didn’t take long to figure out that despite the twists and turns of life, having a Democrat in office isn’t always the best solution. (applause) I think Mitt Romney can set us right again! He’s [exactly what we need in a president - somebody who can handle the tough decisions, somebody who won’t flinch in the face of danger.”]* After the rally in which the Bush men stood in unity behind Romney, George W. was asked by a local reporter how he felt about being asked to campaign for Republican candidates again after sitting out the 2008 elections. He bantered: [“It’s not about me. . . I’ve done my bit. . . I can help raise him money, and if he wants my pretty face standing by his side at one of these rallies, I’d be glad to show up. . . But they’re going to be looking at him.”]*
George W. Bush’s favorability rating amongst Americans, according to a CNN/Opinion Research poll from February 2012:
Favorable - 48 %
Unfavorable - 46 %
. . . amongst Republicans (63 / 32 %)
While it was no surprise that the Bush’s privately supported Romney (their attempts at coaxing Sen. Scott Brown from the race back in January before Super Tuesday were well publicized, though never commented on by any of the Bush clan; Jeb Bush actually endorsed Mitt Romney just before the Florida primary), pundits were surprised at the timing of the endorsement. Many thought it was risky. “You have to wonder where this endorsement was before February 7th,” argued Kathleen Parker on CNN’s Parker/Spitzer. “At this stage of the game, it seems too risky for me. Two, TWO former Republican presidents endorsing the long-shot for the GOP nomination? Even if this accomplishes their intended effect (the Romney base will get fired up and momentum will shift to Romney), it risks further alienating the conservative, anti-government Tea Party wing of the GOP, which have decisively backed Palin in the nominating contests to date. It’s just risky, very risky for two former Presidents, and risky for the Bush brand in general. What happens if she becomes the nominee? What if she actually wins in November? What would this mean for Jeb’s political future? I don’t think it was wise of them to do this today." Her co-host disagreed: “This is the best that Romney can hope for at this point, and it just might work. Look, at a time where Palin’s marriage is still distracting from the debate, Romney looks more and more appealing. The Bush’s want to return Republicans to power, not simply make a point in this election. For them, its principle, but it’s also about winning. They don’t think Palin can win, so they’re trying to shake things up. I think that it will help Romney. The Tea Party faction is strong, but the Bush’s are very appealing to the Romney-type-Republicans, and to a decent number of Tea Partiers. Will this endorsement win Romney the nomination? I just don’t know, but it helps."


A flash poll released by Rasmussen Reports shows a tight race in Wyoming, with Palin the favorite in Mississippi (Wyoming: Romney - 47 %, Palin - 46% ; Mississippi: Palin - 54 %, Romney - 38 %).



*W. Bush remarks: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23481178/


Monday, March 12, 2012 - - - UNEMPLOYMENT HITS 32-MONTH LOW; DECLINES FOR 5TH STRAIGHT MONTH!

Washington D.C., 03.13.12 - Newly released labor department statistics show that unemployment has dropped to 9.0% for the first time since May, 2009. The last time unemployment was lower was in April 2009, when 8.9% of Americans were classified as unemployed. While Republicans lamented the duration of high unemployment, Democrats pointed to positive trends. Speaking to reporters during a press conference about the new economic numbers, President Obama drove home his campaign theme of steady, consistent progress. “I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it 100 times over. We’re not there yet, but we’re on our way. I warned from the start that this process would be tedious. But alas, we can safely say that we are seeing real, steady signs of improvement. We’ve passed a government stimulus bill that pumped much needed resources into cash-starved states, and got Americans slowly, but surely, back to work. We signed tax cuts into law for the middle class, while vetoing irresponsible, deficit-creating tax cuts for the wealthiest of Americans. I recently signed the small businesses tax cut, a bipartisan compromise need I remind you, which provides our nations’s largest job creators with the necessary relief to allow them to increase payroll. Because of these policies, policies that my Administration has either endorsed or championed, private sector jobs are increasing, adding 76,000 jobs last month; a steady, yet consistent gain from the worst days of the recession that began almost 4 years ago. Public sector and government jobs held steady as well, adding nearly 4,000 jobs. For five straight months, the number of Americans seeking gainful employment has decreased, and more Americans are working today than there were over 3 years ago, just 2 months into my presidency. We’re not there yet, but we’re on our way. The trajectory is positive, and I don’t see how the Republicans can disagree. They will, but it will be hard for them to explain. You can’t campaign against growth.”

Potential opponent Gov. Palin responded during a fundraiser in Seattle, Washington: “It’s a sad, sad day when the NY Times sings hallelujah for a 9% unemployment rate. They’re really scraping the bottom of the barrel there. What that news headline should have read is ‘unemployment rate above 9% for 3 straight years’! That is an unacceptable economic record, and any other leader or manager would be thrown out on their behinds for such a performance. If this is not the clearest evidence of the need for change this November, then I don’t know what is.”

The daily tracking polls showed that President Obama’s approval ratings were stabilizing closer to 50 %, after nearly 2 years of being between 40-45%.
Obama Job Approval Rating
Gallup Daily Tracking Poll, 3/14/2012 (all adults)
Approve: 49%
Disapprove: 45%
Net: + 4

Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll (likely voters) 2/25/2012
Approve: 48% (strongly approve - 31 %)
Disapprove: 51% (strongly disapprove - 38 %)
Net: -3

In the Republican race, a quickly released national look at the GOP race showed that the endorsements of former Presidents George W. and George H.W. Bush may have shifted the few remaining undecideds in Mitt Romney’s favor - Romney had gained 4 points since the previous poll 5 days prior, while Palin had slightly lost ground: Who do you want to be the GOP nominee for President in 2012? (PPP, 3/11-13; 1,200 likely Republican voters; +/-3.5)
Sarah Palin - 50 % (-1)
Mitt Romney: 48 % (+4)
Undecided/Someone else: 4 %


Wednesday, March 14, 2012 - - - STALEMATE : CANDIDATES SPLIT THE NIGHT WHILE PARTY INSIDERS CALL FOR AN END; WARNER RUMORED TO ENDORSE!

Casper, W.Y. , 03.14.12 - Republican Party insiders grew increasingly weary Tuesday night as it became clear that the GOP nomination battle would continue until at least April 10th. Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney both claimed victories, with Romney winning a caucus in Wyoming, and Palin winning the primary in Mississippi. The national media paid little attention to either contest, instead focusing their attention attention on the final contests to take place on April 10th. But while the media was gearing up for a final Palin/Romney showdown, Republican Party leaders were privately pleading with both campaigns. An anonymous Romney Campaign insider informed a CBS reporter that RNC Chairman Michael Steele had spoken with the campaign earlier in the day about a meeting with the Palin camp, but would not speak further about what the purpose of such a meeting would be. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), who had remained neutral through the primary process, was now privately calling on Mitt Romney to suspend his campaign in light of the delegate math and the likely result on April 10th. The Romney campaign was defiant, believing that the Bush’s endorsement, coupled with Palin’s small decline with Conservatives in the wake of her divorce, would cause a much better than expected performance on April 10th. Then, he'd hope that the new momentum, along with a greatly decreased delegate gap with Palin, would cause Palin’s delegates to wobble, and Romney could clinch the nomination. Said Romney at a rally in Eugene, Oregon: “We’re not out of this. We just had another surprising win in Wyoming, and I think that with the help of fmr. President Bush 41 and 43, I will be the big winner on April 10. I think my victories show serious doubt and reservations about a Palin ticket in the Fall. I will be in this race until April 10, and after that I willl have a decision about what direction my campaign will go. Republicans deserve a choice, especially in light of recent developments.”

Pundits on Tuesday evening were also focused on Sen. Mark Warner’s clearest indication since withdrawing from the Democratic Primary that he intended to announce an endorsement soon. After leaving The Hyatt hotel outside of Washington D.C. Tuesday afternoon, a reporter caught up with the former presidential candidate. When asked about who he would support for president, he replied: “I’ll be addressing that very soon.” The reporter pressed, as Sen. Warner walked away, “Are you saying you’ll be endorsing the President?” Warner quickly threw back: “I’m just saying I’ll be making an endorsement.” A few in the media quietly chattered about the possibility that Warner may not be backing the former President. . .

Wyoming: (closed caucus)
Mitt Romney / Sarah Palin - 55.7 % / 42.9 %
Romney popular vote / delegates won: 27,155 / 28
Palin popular vote / delegates won: 20,914 / 0


MISSISSIPPI: (open primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney - 62.0 % / 37.1 %
Palin popular vote / delegates won: 242,584 / 36
Romney popular vote / delegates won: 145,159 / 0


Delegate Count to date (Total Delegates Available - 2,329; 1,186 for majority)
Sarah Palin - 1,096
Mitt Romney - 860

States won to date:




Wednesday, March 15, 2012 - - - An off-the-cuff remark made by Vice President Joe Biden at a private fundraiser in Anaheim, California, dominated the blogosphere and cable news for the day. When questioned by an audience member about the need for an endorsement by Sen. Warner, VP Biden responded: “I think the President needs his endorsement about as much as he needs Dick Cheney’s endorsement.” A part stunned, part excited crowd reacted with muffled laughter. Later the same day, Vice President Biden released a statement through his press office in which he apologized to Sen. Warner for “crass, untrue” remarks. Fmr. Vice President Dick Cheney responded later in the day when asked by a reporter how he felt about Vice President Biden's comments: "He's incorrect. I'm almost certain they need Sen. Warner's endorsement more than they need mine."

Favorable/Unfavorable (CNN/Opinion Research, 3/3-7, 800 adults, nationally; +/-3.5)
Vice President Joe Biden - 42 / 50 %
Fmr. Vice President Dick Cheney - 40 / 51 %

Later that same afternoon, President Obama reiterated VP Biden’s apology: “You know, Joe sometimes opens his mouth, and he steps in it a little,” (laughter from president and press) “I’ve spoken to Sen. Warner today, and Sen. Warner is a former colleague of Joe’s as well, so he knows Joe, and he said there were no hurt feelings. I definitely think that this episode is a bit of a distraction though from what’s taking place in the United States Senate right now with my Supreme Court nominee, Judge Wood. Republican obstruction is on high alert again. Whether they’re shutting down the operation of the federal government, as they did just a few months ago, or holding up an overly qualified, remarkably intelligent nominee for the high court, the Republicans care about one thing, and one thing only; stopping all aspects of my agenda, no matter the cost. This is not good governance.”




Thursday, March 16, 2012 - - - Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has been in the process of guiding Judge Diane Wood’s nomination to the Supreme Court through the Untied States Senate. After a disappointing set of hearings, one in which the Appeals Court Judge appeared to state that she opposed any state attempts to limit access to an abortion, including the right to late-term abortions, Republicans were determined to filibuster. Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Jeff Sessions (R-Al.) was leading the pro-filibuster movement. However, anonymous congressional aids are reporting that Sen. Lindsey Graham’s office is currently leading negotiations between Majority Leader Schumer and Chairmen Sessions. One aid to Sen. Graham told Politico that Sen. Sessions will be advising Republicans not to filibuster the nomination and allow an up or down vote. Apparently, Sen. Graham convinced Sen. Sessions that Judge Wood’s disappointing confirmation hearings, as well as her unpopular positions regarding abortion, would guarantee that less than 50 senators would vote for her confirmation. According to Sen. Graham’s aid, Senators Mary Landrieu, Mark Pryor, Bob Casey, and Ben Nelson would vote against confirmation (all 4 senators have made public statements indicating such). Mark Warner was considered a toss-up, and had been purposefully vague in public statements regarding Judge Wood. All Republicans (save Olympia Snowe), were expected to vote against confirmation.
Despite Sen. Sessions urging an up or down vote to the Republican Caucus, Senator Jim Demint (R-SC), a known Conservative firebrand and star of the Tea Party movement launched a filibuster of Judge Diane Wood. Soon thereafter, he was joined by Sharon Angle (R-Nv), Marco Rubio (R-Fl.), Joe Miller (R-Ak.), and a host of other Class of 2010 Republican freshmen on the Senate floor. When order was finally reached, the Senate voted 62-34 to end the filibuster of Judge Diane Wood’s nomination. The full Senate vote on her nomination would take place following the Spring recess.



Saturday, March 18, 2012 - - - SEN. MARK WARNER COMES AROUND; PRESIDENT OBAMA ACCEPTS ENDORSEMENT!

Arlington, V.A., 03.18.12. - Former friend, then bitter opponent, now a supporter again, Sen. Mark Warner has announced his endorsement of President Barack Obama’s reelection campaign. Appearing at a rally of 19,000 in Arlington, VA, Sen. Warner argued that the President’s domestic agenda was the only way to sustain and accelerate economic growth: “The President and I, as if it wasn’t already obvious, don’t agree on everything. But we agree on the basic Democratic tenant of fighting for the middle class. And when unemployment declines for several months in a row, and private sector jobs grow for 6 straight months, that’s economic change that I can get behind! (loud applause) That’s why I’m proud to endorse President Obama for reelection, and am proud to do everything I can to see him return to Pennsylvania Avenue!” (loud applause)

After suspending his campaign for the presidency on February 14, many in the media speculated that Warner would soon endorse the President. When an endorsement did not follow quickly, many began to wonder if the prominent Senate moderate would withhold an endorsement all together, or worse, endorse the Republican nominee. “Arguably more than any primary race in recent history, the battle between Barack Obama and Mark Warner was one of not just personality, but of substance,” argued MSNBC’s Chuck Todd. “Real divisions within the Democratic bases’ views on the economy and the role of government were reappearing, and for a while, Warner almost looked like he would upset the President. So more than the Obama/Clinton battle in 2008, or the Carter/Kennedy battle in 1980, the Obama/Warner battle was one of philosophical substance, not mere method and personality. That’s why it wasn’t hard to envision Warner not endorsing Obama at all. This is a helpful surprise for the Obama campaign. The Palin and Romney camps were salivating at the idea of getting a phone call from Mark Warner.”


Tuesday, March 21, 2012 - - - In anticipation of the upcoming “Final Super Tuesday” contests, Quinnipiac released a host of polling on the GOP nomination. The polls showed that the Romney campaign’s attempts at planting the “seeds of doubt” in GOP voters regarding a Palin candidacy may be working, though the evidence was far from decisive.
In Oregon: Who do you support for the GOP nomination for president in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 3/18-3/20, 650 likely Republican voters; +/-5.0)
Romney - 47 %
Palin - 40 %
Undecided/Someone else - 13 %
In North Carolina: Who do you support for GOP nomination for president in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 3/17-3/20, 650 likely Republican voters; +/-5.0)
Palin - 47 %
Romney - 42 %
Undecided/Someone else - 11 %
In Pennsylvania: Who do you support for the GOP nomination for president in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 3/17-3/20, 650 likely primary voters; +/-5.0)
Romney - 48 %
Palin - 39 %
Undecided/Someone else - 13 %
In Indiana: Who do you support for the GOP nomination for president in 2012 (Quinnipiac University, 3/18-3/20, 650 likel primary voters; +/-4.5)
Palin - 47 %
Romney - 46 %
Undecided/someone else - 7 %
.
New Public Policy Polling surveys on potential general election match-ups also confirmed Republican Party Leaders worst fears; the long, grueling, and expensive primary season had damaged both Republican nominees image with voters. Obama enjoyed one of his largest leads of the election season:
Potential 2012 match-ups (PPP, 3/19-3/20; 1,500 likely voters, national; +/-3%)
Mitt Romney v. Barack Obama: 42 - 48 %
Sarah Palin v. Barack Obama: 41 - 51 %

Upcoming April 10th “Final” Primary States:

continued

Thursday, March 23, 2012 - - - TODD PALIN TALKS; MARRIAGE WASN’T ALWAYS ‘PERFECT,’ SARAH WAS UNAWARE OF AFFAIR

Los Angeles, California., 03.23.12 - Todd Palin has responded to assertions by some in the media, insisting that his wife, from whom he is now separated did not participate in any cover-up of his affair to protect her presidential bid. Speaking for the first time since the scandal broke to reporters at a local NBC Alaskan affiliate, Todd Palin confirmed that he had been involved in an affair with family friend Stephanie Johansen, and that the affair began in January 2010. Responding to a reporters question, Todd replied: “I have no excuses, and I’ve talked to Sarah in depth about this. But the period of our lives following the presidential election was a tumultuous time, and things weren‘t as perfect as the media portrayed it at times. Sarah was in the midst of her first book tour, our lives were drifting apart, spending less time with each other. Stephanie and I gravitated towards each other. It was something we knew was wrong then, like we know now.” The former Alaska Governor’s estranged husband defended the potential GOP nominee from accusations that she was aware of the affair months before the scandal broke, and actively covered-up the story in an attempt to protect her presidential bid. “It’s simply not true. Those are just her political enemies talking nonsense. They’ll always do that.” When asked where things currently stood between he and the governor, he responded, “I’ve asked for her forgiveness, and will continue to do so. That’s all I can do for now.” But rumors flew following Todd Palin’s answer to a reporter’s question about whether or not Sarah Palin had ever been unfaithful in their marriage: “That’s a private matter, and I’m not going to talk about it. A different question please. . .”

The Palin campaign had little to say in response, other than a quick comment by campaign manager Meg Stapleton: “Todd’s being coy about Sarah’s faithfulness has no place in a presidential campaign. It’s a lie, and the Governor is going to stay focused on restoring America, lowering taxes, reducing the reach of government, and reducing the massive federal deficit. That’s what this campaign is about. And she hopes that matters about her marriage can be kept as private as possible.”

At a time when the Palin camp was slowly getting back on message, the last thing they needed was a rogue Todd Palin speaking about private matters involving their marriage. The Romney campaign hammered home their message that Palin’s marriage had become a distraction, and would remain so through the general election. “Folks, the 2012 election is going to be about which candidate can restore the American voters’ faith in America. Which candidate can set America right again, can make America great again?” asked Mitt Romney. “That’s why I just received the endorsements of both former Presidents Bush. And call me cynical, but I think it’s going to be hard to make the point that Conservatism will save the day when the only thing the national media wants to focus on are the intimate details of the Palins' private life. It’s not presidential, and it won’t win us the White House!”




Monday, March 27, 2012 - - - IRAN'S GONE NUCLEAR! INTELLIGENCE INDICATES THAT TEHRAN WILL TEST NUCLEAR LONG RANGE MISSILE

Tel Aviv, Israel, 03.27.12 - Intelligence officials within the Pentagon, in discussions with ambassadors from Israel, are confirming that Israeli intelligence has learned that Tehran’s nuclear weapons program is complete, and the Iranian Navy will be testing a long-distance range nuclear missile in the Western Indian Ocean on Tuesday. There is an immediate international response of strong condemnation, with Israel and the United States being naturally the most aggressive in tone toward the Iranian regime. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded forcefully: “Mahmoud Amadiniajah, and his regime of blatant anti-Semitism, have thwarted international law, and basic principles of peace, for the final time. When the U.N. meets tomorrow in New York City, if there is not a commitment from NATO, or from the United States, to end Iran’s nuclear weapon’s program, then we will devise a plan ourselves!”

President Obama was instantly dragged into the difficult position of expressing public outrage and disappointment at Iran’s nuclear ambitions, while also attempting to talk Prime Minister Netanyahu out of a unilateral strike on Iran that could have disastrous international affects. Said President Obama during a press conference just before the U.N. meeting on Iran’s nuclear testing, “I am deeply disappointed in President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s decision to thwart international law, and I fully agree that his regime must be brought to bare for such blatant acts of aggression. But as President of the United States, I must urge all parties, including our ally Israel, to allow the benefit of forethought to help us set the right course in dealing with such an untenable situation. A nuclear Iran is indeed unacceptable. But in the interest of lives, and in the interest of cultures, and in the interest of peace, lets see what we can come up with over the next few days, especially following today’s Security Council meeting. Stay tuned, Americans.” Sec. of State Hillary Clinton served as Obama’s delegate to the UN meeting on how to deal with Iran’s confirmed possession of nuclear weaponry, and made an impassioned plea to the Security Council that Iran be dealt with harshly as a result of their violation. The end resolution, resolution 1753, implemented a fourth, and tougher, more stringent round of economic and military sanctions. Unlike previous sanctions intended to provide the US with mere leverage, the new sanctions as proposed were likely to cripple the Iranian regime domestically. Security Council members France and the United States both endorsed the sanctions as the official international response. Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel was defiant in his remarks following the UN Security Council Meeting: [“You don’t want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs,” he said. “When the wide-eyed believer gets hold of the reins of power and the weapons of mass death, then the world should start worrying that that’s what is happening in Iran.]* This will not sit with the citizens of Israel. We will not live in fear of complete annihilation at the hands of nuclear Iran.”


Wednesday, March 29, 2012 - - - American and international pundits speculated over what Bibi’s (“Netanyahu”) response to a newly nuclearized Iran would be. Fmr. President Bill Clinton backed Netanyahu in arguing that a nuclear Iran was unacceptable: “Everyone should be [worried about an entire complex of problems, and not only that Iran, or one of its proxies, will destory Tel Aviv. . . believe that if Iran gains possession of nuclear weapons, it will use its new leverage to buttress its terrorist proxies in their attempts to make life difficult and dangerous; and fear that Israel’s status as a haven for Jews would be forever undermined and with it, the entire raison de’etre of the 100 year old Zionist experiment.”]* From an American political perspective, a plurality of Democrats supported the President’s preference for heavier sanctions and non-military intervention, while nearly all Congressional Republicans, and a sizeable portion of pro-Israel Democrats, wanted a tougher approach. Presidential aspirants Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney both attacked President Obama for not backing Israel strongly enough. “The President just doesn’t seem willing enough to take a stand for American allies,” argued Gov. Mitt Romney to Fox New’s Chris Wallace. “There are numerous reasons that this is absolutely unacceptable. But I'm also worried about President Obama's path. He seems hesitant to say that he would help Israel if it came down to it. Now we all want to work to avoid any sort of confrontation, but if one's going to happen, I'd like to know what President Obama is going to do. Sit on the sidelines?"

Sarah Palin was asked by Sean Hannity on Fox News , “in the event that the President does not intervene militarily to help take out Iran’s nukes, would you support Israel acting unilaterally to take out the nuclear weapons?” “Sean, I would never suggest to Israel that they take anything off the table when it comes to Iran. But here’s what I would suggest. In the event that President Obama does not offer any help, militarily, to Israel to put an end to nuclear Iran, I would suggest that the risk might be too great for Israel not to act militarily. Look, Sean, Iran was dangerous and difficult to deal with without nuclear weaponry being at their disposal. They now, with their test launch, as you saw, have that strategic position they’ve been angling for for so many years. I would suggest a carefully orchestrated military strike of the nuclear sites we know about. An all-out ground invasion would be unnecessary and spark unintended consequences. Obviously there is no easy path here, but non-action on Israel’s or our part, is unacceptable. The President said the exact same thing, but his actions tell me he does not mean it.”

Polling on Iran:
Do you support or oppose the United States taking military action to destroy Iran’s nuclear weapons sites? (Fox News/Opinion Dynamics, 3/29-31, 1,100 adults, nationally; +/-3.5)
Support . . . . . 35 %
Oppose . . . . . .44 %
Unsure/No Opinion . . . 21 %
If Israel attacks Iran, should the United States help Israel, help Iran, or do nothing? (CBS/Time poll, 3/29-2/1; 1,100 adults, nationally; +/-3.5)
Help Israel . . . . . . . . 53 %
Help Iran . . . . . . . . . . .2 %
Do Nothing . . . . . . . . 34 %
Unsure . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 %



*http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...return/8186/1/



Monday, April 2nd, 2012 - - - Nancy Reagan broke precedent today by endorsing Sarah Palin in the Republican Primary contest over Governor Mitt Romney. In previous years, the former first lady had made a habit of only endorsing once the Republican Party’s nominee had been chosen. In her written statement, she made no reference to why she decided to wade into the Republican primary before its conclusion, and made no reference to Palin’s primary opponent. “Ronnie and I always knew there would come a day where a woman would lead this proud country, and I found so much strength and resolve in Prime Minister Thatcher, during our years in the White House. That’s why I’m endorsing Governor Sarah Palin to be President of the United States . . . I know that a lot has been made through the years by lots of proud, conservative candidates for office of how my husband would have handled various situations. I knew Ronnie’s heart, and I don’t think I’ve ever seen a candidate that captured the spirit, the magic, and the enthusiasm that Ronnie captured in the way Gov. Palin has. I urge you all to support her in November, and work together to restore America, like Ronnie once did.”

The Nancy Reagan endorsement was viewed as an asset for Palin who had been lobbying hard to increase her favorability among women. While most polling before her separation had shown Palin running better among men than women, the aftermath revealed that Palin had received what some pundits referred to as “The Hillary Effect,” a reference to the bounce Hillary Clinton received in the polls following revelations of husband, President Bill Clinton’s infedelities. The Palin campaign hoped to use the Nancy Reagan endorsement as a chance to change the media’s focus from Todd Palin’s interview a week earlier, back to her tea-party backed campaign of reduced spending and smaller government. She also hoped the endorsement would bridge remaining divides with more moderate, independent voters, while further solidifying her popularity with Conservatives.

Friday April 6, 2012 - - - JUDGE DIANE WOOD CONFIRMED TO SUPREME COURT IN CLOSEST CONFIRMATION VOTE IN HISTORY! PRO-LIFE LOBBY OUTRAGED

Washington D.C., 04.06.12 - In the closest, if not most contentious vote since the Clarence Thomas hearings of 1991, Judge Diane Wood was confirmed by the United States Senate, but only after a tie breaking vote cast by Vice President Joe Biden. The nomination vote also marked the first time a tie-breaking vote was required for a Supreme Court nomination. A total of 49 Democrats and one Republican voted in favor of Judge Wood’s confirmation (Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine was the lone Republican voting yay), while 48 Republicans and two Democrats voted against confirmation (Senators Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Bob Casey of Pennsylvania). VP Biden broke the tie, voting in favor of confirmation, for a final vote tally of 51-50.

Despite her somewhat clumsy hearings, and contentious confirmation battle, the appointment of Judge Wood was hailed by Democrats and the left as a major victory for the Obama Administration. In only three years, the President had appointed 3 Supreme Court Justices, but his influence on the Court was felt well beyond that. Two of his appointees were considered liberal, thus providing a needed reinvigoration to an aging liberal wing. But his final pick, as polarizing a figure as she was for Congress, tilted the court decidedly left for the first time in over 30 years. And fortunately for the President, recent polling showed that views of the new appointee were little changed since her announcement, a sign that the public had largely tuned out the bitter partisan rhetoric regarding her confirmation coming from both sides of the aisle. But just because the general public had largely resisted the partisan muckraking does not mean that pro-life groups remained silent. The Susan B. Anthony List, a well-known pro-life organization, vowed that it would initiate a national fundraising call for the purpose of putting pro-life legislation on the ballot in friendly states. The Palin campaign claimed to have raked in over $2 million in the 8 hours following Judge Woods’ confirmation.

Saturday, April 7th, 2012 - - - As national attention shifted from a nuclear-ized Iran, to Supreme Court confirmations, to the upcoming economic numbers, the political talking-heads were abuzz about the final GOP contest of the season. Remarked Anderson Cooper, “As the primary season winds down, it’s amazing to reflect on how much has changed. The Palin-Romney battle royale was predicted years before it started, but something about the way it has all unfolded seemed so unpredictable. Despite an impressive start, a revived discussion on healthcare coupled with a devastating jab from Gov. Palin during a debate, knocked Romney off his game and put him and Governor Palin on a path towards stalemate for weeks to come. In the ensuing months, Governor Palin has established what many call an unshakeable lead, though not officially winning the nomination yet. However, claiming renewed momentum on the back of an endorsement by the Bush clan and the newest, if not juiciest installment in the latest Palin-family drama, Mitt Romney claims to have a strategy for victory. Is that possible, Candy?” Candy Crowley answered: “That’s exactly right, Anderson, though it’s not Mitt Romney himself who admits that the ‘suicide’ strategy is what he’s pursuing. That comes from some embedded Romney campaign insiders. But their overall belief has been, at least since March 6, that while it was clear they could not obtain a delegate lead outright, if they could narrow the gap by winning a few surprise contests on April 10, they could then lobby shaky Palin delegates to switch sides, focusing heavily on recent developments involving her marriage to make the case that she would be unelectable in November. So far, no evidence of such an occurrence has emerged, as state-earned delegates have remained fairly loyal behind the winning candidate of each state (though not bound by rules to do so). On the show tonight we have a rare treat, with Romney campaign manager and Palin campaign managers, Ed Gillespie and Meg Stapeleton, joining us, in a sense, for final arguments . . .” After several minutes, Gillespie concluded, “History over the last 4 years has confirmed one thing - Sarah Palin can not avoid distracting drama, and apparently not even if the presidency depended on it. America, after four years of a novice, wants a steady hand behind the will, and while Mitt Romney isn’t always the flashiest one of the bunch, or the rockstar of the group, he’s the one with proven track record. He’s the one that can bring the Conservative change that America wants. The other choice will ensure four more years of President Obama’s reckless, socialist, big spending agenda. We know that America cannot afford Barack Obama, but I also don't think it can afford Sarah Palin.“ Meg Stapelton retorted, “Ed’s still pushing that same tired line that the Governor can’t win. Well listen, the Governor has won. She’s winning the popular vote, she’s leading in the delegate count by a huge margin, and she’s in position to do a great job on April 10. So that argument has been shot down. Sarah Palin, like Ronald Reagan, is the only candidate in this race who speaks to the average American from a place of honest conservative conviction. She connects with the people on an emotional level, in a way Romney never could. November’s election is going to require someone who can compete with Obama on that emotional, gut level with voters. Sarah Palin can do that, and she can do it with a conservative spin. Romney can’t do it. This race is over.”





Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - - - HISTORY IS MADE: SARAH PALIN BECOMES FIRST FEMALE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE! EPIC GENERAL ELECTION BATTLE IS SET!

Wasilla, Alaska, 04.11.12, - Nearly 28,000 Americans from across the country gathered last night for Sarah Palin’s victory rally in her hometown. After sweeping 8 of the nights 10 contests, Mitt Romney phoned the former Governor to concede the race. When asked whether Governor Romney would be endorsing Governor Palin, Romney campaign manager replied with “no comment.”

As it so happened, President Obama was over 1,000 miles away, holding his own campaign rally of 38,000 people at an arena in San Francisco, California. Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson noted that “never in history, or certainly modern history, have I seen two more diametrically opposite candidates running for President. The first female, a conservative, versus the first African-American, a liberal. This is by far, the sharpest contrast I've ever seen, on a number of levels."

And in their respective rally’s, their rhetoric could not have been more different: “We are choosing hope over fear, again!(loud applause)” exclaimed the President. “We're choosing unity over division, and sending a powerful message that change is still coming to America. We‘re also proving that working together, having a common goal, can not only be a guiding principle of life, but when wielded by an efficient government, can be the machine that drives economic growth! (applause) We’ve shown that you don’t have to be afraid of big ideas or dreams, like affordable healthcare! Progress is taking place at this very moment. We‘re not there yet, but we‘re on our way!” (loud applause)
“Ignore those that tell you you’re angry, or you’re just afraid, or you just don’t get it,“ pleaded Gov. Palin. “We’re Americans, which means above all else, we are free! (loud applause) As Americans, we know the common-sense conservative values that are required to live in a prosperous nation. Keep taxes low so that the people have more of their money and so that businesses can put people to work. Balance a budget because the feds cannot live by a different set of rules from the American people regarding how much we take in and how much we spend. And most importantly, keep government small, because a big government is all powerful, and is the enemy of the central tenant of American exceptionalism: Freedom! If we can do these things, America will again be that ‘shining city on a hill!” (loud applause)


. . . And the general election between President Barack Obama and Governor Sarah Palin has begun . . .

Tuesday, April,10, 2012 - ’FINAL-SUPER-TUESDAY’ REPUBLICAN PRIMARY ELECTION RESULTS, Sarah Palin v. Mitt Romney
Red = Palin, Green = Romney

Pennsylvania: (closed primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney - 57.6 % / 39.4 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 1,095,688 / 47
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 749,481 / 15


West Virginia: (open primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney - 74.3 % / 23.9 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 201,839 / 20
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 64,925 / 0


Kentucky: (closed primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney / Scott Brown - 69.4 % / 29.0 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 333,386 / 42
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 139,311 / 0


North Carolina: (open primary) 1,468,053
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney - 60.9 % / 38.2 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 894,044 / 58
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 560,796 / 11


Guam: (open primary)
Mitt Romney / Sarah Palin - 63.7 % / 35.4 %
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 37,622 / 20
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 20,908 / 0


Puerto Rico: (open primary)
Mitt Romney / Sarah Palin - 61.3 % / 37.2 %
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 280,539 / 39
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 170,245 / 0


Indiana: (open primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney - 54.7 % / 42.6 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 611,804 / 38
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 476,469 / 19


South Dakota: (closed primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney - 66.5 % / 32.6 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 58,761 / 24
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 28,806 / 0


Montana: (open primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney - 58.8 % / 40.1 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 91,800 / 25
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 62,605 / 0


Oregon: (closed primary)
Sarah Palin / Mitt Romney - 51.8 % / 47.9 %
Palin popular vote/delegates won: 277,756 / 30
Romney popular vote/delegates won: 256,844 / 0


Final Delegate Count (1,186 needed for majority)
Sarah Palin - 1,380
Mitt Romney - 964

States won to date:

Red = Palin, Green = Romney, Purple = Brown



2012 PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES - COUNTY-BY-COUNTY RESULTS



REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES, 2012, SARAH PALIN V. MITT ROMNEY

Red = Palin, Green = Romney, Purple = S. Brown, Brown = Barbour

Final Popular Vote Tally

Palin Pop Vote % - 47.26 %
Vote total - 16,272,412
Romney Pop Vote % - 40.40 %
Vote total - 13,910,481
Brown Pop Vote % - 9.00%
Vote total - 3,095,316
Barbour Pop Vote % - 1.13 %
Vote total - 388,662
Thune Pop Vote % - < 1.0 %
Gingrich Pop Vote % - < 1.0 %
Pawlenty Pop Vote % - < 1.0%
Pataki Pop Vote % - < 1.0 %
Other Pop Vote % - < 1.0 %
TOTAL VOTES - 34,429,887





DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES, 2012, BARACK OBAMA V. MARK WARNER

Blue = Obama, Red = Warner, White = non-voting counties

Final Popular Vote Tally

Obama Pop Vote % - 62.39 %
Vote Total - 12,414,494
Warner Pop Vote % - 36.80 %
Vote Total - 7,322,289
Other Pop Vote % - < 1.0 %
TOTAL VOTES - 19,736,789






Saturday, April 14, 2012 - - - Immediately following the historic GOP battle, both presidential opponents were barnstorming with swing-state congressional candidates. While attending a rally in Seattle, Washington with Vice President Joe Biden, gubernatorial candidate Christine Gregoire and senatorial candidate Maria Cantwell, President Obama attacked Palin, and argued that her economic and foreign policies would undermine and harm long-established American traditions: “Sarah Palin is advocating economic policies that pre-date the Great Depression! Her ideas would completely sabotage American’s social safety nets. Her foreign policy is just as reckless, and some have even called it dangerous!” Governor Gregoire was running for her third term (a feat only accomplished by one other governor in the state’s 123 year history), and the race was expected to be tight (something Gregoire was accustomed to after winning 48% of the vote in 2004 and 53% in 2008; the 2004 race was one of the closest statewide elections in history). Gregoire was even facing stiff competition from US Representative Jay Inslee in the Democratic Primary (PPP shows Gregoire ahead 44-30 %). Sen. Cantwell was similarly positioned, though she was unopposed in the Democratic primary for United States Senate. Recent polls showed her tied with her likely Republican opponent, US Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers.

Appearing at a campaign stop in Ft.Worth, Texas alongside incumbent Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Palin played defense, but with bite: “Talk about ‘fear campaigns,’ huh? What’s so extreme about thinking a projected deficit of $15 trillion is outrageous? What is so extreme about supporting tax cuts for hard-working American’s as opposed to tax hikes? What’s so extreme about defending a close, democratic ally, Israel, against a dangerous, nuclear renegade? So who is it, America, that’s outside the mainstream?” Pundits commented on the irony of Palin’s stumping with Sen. Hutchison given their rocky past. Palin endorsed Gov. Rick Perry when the incumbent senator challenged him in the Republican primary. Since then, Hutchison had suffered from less-than-stellar poll numbers and a tough challenge from former Houston Mayor and 2010 Perry challenger, Bill White(D). Many blame her going back on a pledge to not run for reelection for why she is facing her toughest challenge since taking office in 1993. Hutchison was one of the first among many GOP senators who originally endorsed Gov. Romney but quickly endorsed Palin in the name of GOP unity.


. . . On the international scene, Israeli/Iranian tensions became a major campaign issue, as the world awaited a response by Israel to Iran’s testing nuclear weapons. The official United States response, as approved by the U.N. Security Council, was one of strong condemnation and historal economic sanctions. However, the US public was slightly more hawkish than international thought with regards to how Israel and the United States should respond. Discussions between the United States and Israeli ambassadors, as well as President Obama and Prime Minister Netenyahu were frequent. Israeli defense ministers had given clear signals that the country was prepared to take action (through what medium was still unknown) in response to Iranian nuclear testing. Even more interestingly, a pro-Israel, but war-weary American public was roughly split on whether or not the United States should take military action to aid Israel in the event of an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear sites. Many pundits felt this contributed to the increasingly divisive nature of the historic presidential campaign.


Monday, April 16, 2012 - - - JOBS SITUATION IMPROVES FOR 6TH CONSECUTIVE MONTH; PALIN OUTRAISES OBAMA IN MARCH

Washington D.C., 04.16.12 - In a string of better economic news for the Obama Administration, the Labor Department announced that the United States economy added 102,000 jobs in March, enough to cause the unemployment rate to drop to 8.8 %, the largest percentage drop in unemployment in 18 months. The Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) for March was 11,950 pts, and today sits at 11963 pts. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, during a press conference, took note of the gradual economic improvement. “There’s been nothing but good news coming from the Labor Dept. for at last half a year. So I find it very funny that the Republican's entire election strategy is blowing up in their face. Sarah Palin and congressional Republicans have been banking on economic decline since the 2010 midterms, so they’re going to have a real hard time following through with their campaign message.”


Both the Obama and Palin campaigns announced their March fundraising totals. Sarah Palin had her largest fundraising haul to date, raising $53.8 million, beating her previous months record of $50.1 million, also becoming the largest take of the presidential election season thus far. The president raised $46.9 million. In all, fundraising totals are down roughly 15% from the 2008 presidential election.

Polling showed President Obama ‘s approval ratings continuing to hover around the 50% range, despite better economic news, and a mounting foreign policy crisis between Israel and Iran. Polling on the economy also showed that at least thus far, Americans were not feeling the affects of the gradually dropping unemployment rate. Insider Advantage polls:
"Which of the following statements comes closest to your view of economic conditions today? The economy is starting to recover from the problems it faced in the past 4 years. An economic recovery has not started but conditions have stabilized and are not getting any worse. The economy is still in a downturn and conditions are continuing to worsen.”
Starting to recover Stabilized Still in a downturn
24 % 42 % 33 %
. . . Do you approve or disapprove of how Barack Obama is handling the economy?
Approve - 42 %
Disapprove - 53 %


Obama Job Approval Rating
Gallup Daily Tracking Poll, 4/17/2012 (all adults)
Approve: 48 %
Disapprove: 46 %
Net: + 2

Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll (likely voters) 4/17/2012
Approve: 46% (strongly approve - 28 %)
Disapprove: 52% (strongly disapprove - 40 %)
Net: -6

Yet polls also showed that the newly nominated Republican nominee wasn’t terribly popular either, despite receiving a modest bounce following her winning the Republican primaries.
2012 Republican Candidate, National (Quinnipiac, 4/15-18, 2,000 All likely voters, +/- 2.5)
Favorable / Unfavorable.
Sarah Palin - 46 / 49 %

… and among self-identified ‘Independents,’ the Presidentt maintains a clear advantage
“Who would you vote for President if the election were held today?” **independent voters only**
Barack Obama - 52 %
Sarah Palin - 37 %

. . . Polling of all adults, as well as a new batch of state-by-state polling, showed a tighter race, but an Obama advantage nonetheless
Who would you support for President if the election were held today? (PPP, 4/14-4/17; 1,500 likely voters, national; +/-3%)
Barack Obama - 49 %
Sarah Palin - 44 %

In Ohio: Who do you support for the presidency in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 4/16-4/18, 650 likely voters; +/-5.0)
Obama - 45 %
Palin - 41 %
Undecided/Someone else - 14 %
In North Carolina: Who do you support for the presidency in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 4/16-4/18, 650 likely voters; +/-5.0)
Palin - 46 %
Obama - 45 %
Undecided/Someone else - 9 %
In Pennsylvania: In North Carolina: Who do you support for the presidency in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 4/16-4/18, 650 likely voters; +/-5.0)
Obama - 48 %
Palin - 41 %
Undecided/Someone else - 11 %
In Indiana: Who do you support for the presidency in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 4/16-4/18, 650 likely voters; +/-5.0)
Palin - 42 %
Obama - 38 %
Undecided/Someone else - 20 %
In Florida: Who do you support for the presidency in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 4/16-4/18, 650 likely voters; +/-5.0)
Obama - 44 %
Palin - 43 %
Undecided/Someone else - 13 %
In Virginia: Who do you support for the presidency in 2012? (Quinnipiac University, 4/16-4/18, 650 likely voters; +/-5.0)
Obama - 48 %
Palin - 45 %
Undecided/Someone else - 7 %





Monday, May 9, 2012 - - - At a campaign rally in St. Louis, Missouri, President Obama appeared with Vice President Biden, as well as Senator Claire McCaskill (D) and Governor Jay Nixon (D), both of which were locked in close reelection races in 2012. McCaskill, a loyal supporter of the President, and frequent surrogate during the 2008 election, decided to sit the television circuit out this election, as she campaigned for her political life against former opponent and former Senator Jim Talent (R). Senator Talent lost to Claire McCaskill by a 50-47% margin in 2006, a good year for Democrats in the midterms. After losing, Talent joined a DC lobbying firm and waited for a rematch with McCaskill. A recent Rasmussen Reports Survey found Talent leading McCaskill by 5 points (44 - 39 %), more a result of President Obama’s approval rating in the state (44 / 55 %) than any real voter attentiveness to the race 6 months out.

Governor Jay Nixon was another beneficiary of a Democratic wave election, this time from 2008. He was elected to a red-state governorship by a whopping margin (58 - 39 %), and maintained high approval ratings through the 2010 midterm elections. However, as the economic recovery proceeded at a snails pace, Missourians like the rest of America were growing weary of those in power, and his approval ratings had dropped to 45%. Two-term Lt. Governor Peter Kinder had dispensed of nominal Republican opposition in his primary, and was now trailing the incumbent governor, 49 - 42 %.


During the rally, the Vice President argued: “Missouri, we’re standing at a crucial moment in American history, in my opinion. After the greatest economic recession in history, we’re recovering. Is it tedious? Sure it is! But it’s happening, folks! Now at the same time as this, you have a dramatically unstable situation in the Middle East, with the leader of Iran defying international law. Now picture this Missouri: the new President cuts federal spending by billions of dollars, and the elderly can’t rely on their Social Security, the poorest among us won’t receive healthcare, and America’s unemployed will be robbed of any standard of living. You can kiss the economic recovery good-bye right there. After that, the new President sends in ground troops to fight our third war in just 10 years, or god forbid, even considers the nuclear option. That new President could be Sarah Palin!” (loud boos from the crowd of 9,000).

Later that night, the Associated Press broke with a big story: the former Attorney General of Delaware, and son of VP Joe Biden, had suffered a major stroke, his third stroke in 3 years, with the first occurring in early 2010. Beau Biden was admitted to Christiana Hospital in Newark, Delaware, earlier that morning, when his wife found him in an apparent state of unconsciousness. Reports indicate that this stroke was the most severe of the three, and he is currently in critical condition and in the intensive care unit under the care of Dr. Timothy Gardner, the medical director for the hospital’s Center for Heart and Vascular Surgery. Beau Biden is a member of the army national guard, and recently served for one year in Iraq. He is a former prosecutor for the U.S. attorneys office in Pennsylvania , and was heavily rumored to be a candidate for his father’s former Senate seat in 2010, before eventually declining not to run. Beau Biden is 43.

Beau Biden


Friday, May 13, 2012 - - - On Friday the 13th, the typical day for news dumps involving stories that the candidates don’t want the voters to pay too much attention to, Palin Campaign Communications Director Rebecca Mansour announced that 2004 Bush/Cheney Campaign Manager Ken Mehlman would replace long-time confidante, Meg Stapleton, as the new official Campaign Manager, and the head of the entire Palin campaign apparatus. The move was viewed as controversial by some pundits; Palin could risk alienating social conservatives, a group that the former Governor hopes to turn-out in droves in November (Mehlman is a recently out-of-the-closet gay man.) But other pundits argued that this was a crucial step in reaching out to Republican party elders and establishment members, the very groups that Palin railed against throughout the Republican primary. Mehlman was viewed as a ‘party-man,’ and was highly revered for what was viewed as one of the most impressive get-out-the-vote efforts in history in the 2004 Bush/Kerry campaign. Democratic strategist Paul Begala argued that Mehlman’s selection to head the Palin campaign was a sign of what their general election strategy would be: “I know there’s been a lot of talk about how ‘Palin’s reaching out to moderates,’ ‘Palin’s trying to win independents,’ blah blah blah. I'm sure that's somewhat true, but Ken ran a hell of a campaign for former President Bush, and a lot of people would argue that Bush won that campaign due to massive base turn out. Obama had massive base turnout in 2008, but he was relying on independents as well to win the election. Mehlman is one of the few out there who thinks that a Republican can win with a perfectly orchestrated, Republican-base oriented, get-out-the-vote effort. I don’t think they can win like that, because demographics are changing, but if anyone ever could make it happen, it’d be Ken.”





Saturday, May 14, 2012 - - - VICE PRESIDENT’S SON SUCCOMBS TO COMPLICATOINS FROM STROKE; JOE BIDEN WITH HIS FAMILY, ASKS FOR PRIVACY

Beau (left) with his father (right) at the Democratic National Convention in 2008
Wilmington, Delaware; 05.14.2012 - The Vice President’s son, Beau Biden, diedast night following two unsuccessful operations to repair damage done by a massive stroke 6 days ago. The Vice President has been by his son’s side since he learned of his stroke following a campaign appearance in Missouri with President Obama. The death of the Vice President’s son is a continuing story in family tragedy for Joe Biden. Well known in many political circles, though not by the general public, VP Biden has suffered from the death of his first wife, baby daughter, and adult son, all since winning his Delaware Senate seat in 1972. Just a few weeks following his election in 1972, his first wife Neilia, and his first daughter Naomi, were killed when a tractor trailer crashed into their automobile on their way home from Christmas shopping. Naomi was just 13 months old. His other son Hunter, as well as Beau, were critically injured in the car accident, but recovered. Joe Biden was sworn into the U.S. Senate from their bedside. In his 2007 memoir, ‘A Promise to Keep,‘ Biden said of his first wife and daughter’s death: "I liked to [walk around seedy neighborhoods] at night when I thought there was a better chance of finding a fight ... I had not known I was capable of such rage ... I felt God had played a horrible trick on me."*

Later Saturday afternoon, the Presidential candidates, as well as the entire nation, reacted to the news of Beau Biden’s sudden death. “Fellow Americans, while I would give anything to not be standing here, telling you the news I’m about to deliver, it is my sad duty nonetheless. The Vice President, and my close personal friend, Joe Biden, lost his son Beau today, as a result of complications from a massive stroke Monday. Starting immediately, I will be suspending my campaign until funeral services are concluded on Thursday. As someone who knows the Biden family well, I have been in direct contact with Joe, his wife Jill, and various members of the Biden family. The loss of a family member, especially your child, is one of the most unspeakable things to happen to anyone, or any family. I pray, and ask you all to join me in that prayer, that my good friend Joe and his family are comforted during these times. He assures me that he will be speaking to you all soon. Until then, Joe, we love you. America loves you. And your entire country is here for you during this time of sorrow. God bless the Biden family, and God bless America.”


Later that evening, Sarah Palin opted out of a written statement and spoke to reporters for one minute outside her adopted lower-48 home of Lawrenceville, Georgia: “I want to extend my deepest condolences to Joe and Jill Biden, and the entire Biden family. Like many of you, I’m still kinda trying to wrap my head around exactly what they’re going through right now. I think that it goes without saying that the loss of one of your own, the loss of a child, is a parent’s worst fear, and the most gut-wrenching thing for anyone to ever go through. But to have to deal with this for a second time takes strength that most don’t have. I hope this reminds us to hold our children a little closer tonight, and be thankful for what we have. I too will be suspending my campaign until funeral services have been completed, and to Joe and Jill: We’re unspeakably sorry, my deepest love and sympathies, and prayers from me and my family. The Good Lord is with you. Thanks.”



Sunday, May 15, 2012 - - - The next day on the Sunday morning talk show circuit, after respects were paid for the Vice President's son, instant speculation began of the potential ramifications for the 2012 Presidential race. “Looking at the pink elephant in the room, one has to seriously wonder what all of this means for Joe Biden’s role in the 2012 election,” argued Peggy Noonan on a Meet The Press roundtable including James Carville, Mary Matalin, and David Brooks. Noonan continued: “Replacement-talk has been on the backburner for a long time since the President and Hillary Clinton squashed that talk back in 2010. Is this an opening for Joe Biden to step down? Is he emotionally able to complete the job? How long do you think it will take for Republicans to start making that argument?” replied: “Of course everyone’s thinking about that. This is a much larger event than what it seems, because I think something is going to come of this. Look, I’m a father of two myself, and what Palin said the other day about a parent’s worst fear, losing a child, might be the truest thing she’s ever said. But Jesus Christ, Joe Biden, that poor son-of-a-gun, he has had it bad! Unfathomably bad, to be dealing with this for the second time, to bury two of your children in a lifetime. His head must be about to explode. And I know Joe. He’s got to be wondering, ‘can I still do this?’ And sheesh, who could?! I couldn’t. I don’t know anyone that could. This is just so sad, but with huge 2012 ramifications.” Carville weighed in as well: “Look, I know Joe Biden too, and he’s the oldest workhorse in the business. When his first daughter died 40 years ago, he started taking the train from his home in Delaware to DC, an almost 4 hour roundtrip, everyday, to be by his injured sons’ bedside. The character this man possesses is matched only by his determination and resolve. I don’t think Joe’s going anywhere. I’d never, ever fault him if he did, but I think he’s staying put. I never once thought Biden would be replaced on this ticket, because not only would Obama have been essentially admitting he was weak, but Biden was an effective and capable VP. The choice is his, and I support him no matter what he does, but I think it’ll be Barack Obama and Joe Biden on the ballot in November.”



Wednesday, May 18, 2012 - - - As the days passed leading up to the funeral for Beau Biden, the talking heads ramped up the speculation of Biden being replaced on the ticket, with Hillary Clinton being the name on everyone’s mind. Yet on Tuesday, Hillary responded from the Secretary of State’s office with an obvious flash of anger: “Joe is a friend of mine, and I think any chatter about 2012 is disrespectful at this point. Joe Biden is the Vice President, and he will remain so. I have no interest whatsoever in leaving my post, and will not be taking any other position. Now, can we please remain respectful of the Vice President, in light of recent events?”


*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden



Friday, May 18, 2012 - - - Following the funeral for his son, Vice President Joe Biden spoke to the nation at Noon, eastern time, from the Vice President’s office: “America, I’d like to thank you all for the outpouring of support and sympathy my family has received in the last week. I’d also like to thank you for allowing me the time to speak to you briefly, and I promise you, it will be brief,” said the VP with a joking smile. “When you’re a public servant, you dedicate yourself totally to the public. That’s what I’ve done for the last 45 years. It’s been my life’s work, and it’s been my passion. That passion remains today. But my first duty is the duty I owe to my family. We’ve been through a lot over the years, and thankfully, we’ve gotten through it with the support of so many loving and caring Americans. But now, more than ever, I feel (brief pause) . . . I feel my family needs me more than my country,” said Biden with visible tears in his eyes and a raspy voice. “That is why I will respectfully resign the office of the Vice Presidency effective today, and I thank the President for accepting my resignation. (brief puase) America, I want to thank you for so much, but I’ve promised to remain brief. So I’ll just thank you for allowing me the opportunity to serve you. I also want to thank my beautiful home, Delaware, for giving me the opportunity to serve them for so many years (brief pause) I’d be lying if I told you that my family and I were not hurting right now, and are not shell-shocked. It hurts more than I can say. But we’re so touched to know that America is hurting. You are all hurting, and your understanding is more touching than I could ever find the words to say. They say that time heals all wounds, and I know through past experience that this is true. But thankfully, time hasn’t made me forget. I can still remember the first and last time I (brief pause, clears throat) I saw my daughter Naomi. Same for my wonderful son, Beau. And they will stay with me for the rest of my days, living comfortably in my heart, and in my memories. So please do not be sad for me America, as I’ll be just fine. Thank you so much for the opportunity to serve, thank you so much for the outpouring of support, and thank you so much for your time today. I won’t be a stranger, but for now, farewell America, and God Bless.”



Saturday, May 19, 2012 - - - In the midst of an outpouring of sympathy for Joe Biden, political pundits were already mulling over who would replace the vice president. For a Vice President to step down from office during an election year was unprecedented, so pundits salivated over the possiblities: “So what in the world are you going to do if you’re President Obama right now,” asked Fox News personality Glenn Beck. “With complete respect to Joe, and from a purely political analysis perspective, this has got to be seen as a big plus for the Obama campaign. The Vice President, or I suppose former Vice President, doesn’t really bring anything to the table electorally for Obama. He chose him in 2008 for the “experience” question to be put to rest, but many thought even then that the pick showed a lack of imagination. Obama has the chance to really make this a more difficult race. Palin’s trailing in the polls, but she’s within striking difference. The economy is barely improving at all, at worse than a snail’s pace, so Obama is still vulnerable, and that bodes well for Palin. And if all the talk about Palin driving up Republican turn-out and Democratic enthusiasm being low is true, Obama has been given the rare opportunity to change that. He could pick someone exciting, new, attractive, spunky, whatever….as long as it drives up Democratic enthusiasm. But who would do that?”

ABC World News with Diane Sawyer followed the same theme, and even revealed an alleged shortlist of Vice Presidential candidates from an anonymous advisor to the Obama campaign. Said Sawyer, “the stunning resignation of Vice President Joe Biden today leaves a lot of questions. But ABC has obtained a list of potential Vice Presidential replacements: Hillary Clinton has been the main topic since rumors of Joe Biden’s resignation began, despite an ardent insistence, just a few days ago, that she was not interested in the post. But insiders tell us that an Obama-Clinton ticket is still a Democratic dream ticket, and our source tells us that Obama/Clinton would blow Democratic enthusiasm out of the park. But there are a host of other possible considerations ranging from sitting members of Congress, to Governors, to current private citizens. Mark Warner, some say, is an obvious choice for the Vice Presidency because of his appeal to white moderates and fair showing in the Democratic Primaries. Although many analysts say the President has compromised more of his agenda since the 2010 midterms, there still seems to be a perception from the American public that the President is outside of the mainstream. A new ABC poll asks:
"In general, would you say that President Obama's views and proposed programs for the country are too liberal, not liberal enough, or just about right for the country?"
Too Liberal Not Liberal Enough Just About Right
49 % 9 % 36 %


Sawyer continues: “But some old Obama campaign hands say that a Warner Vice Presidency would be a slap in the face to those who so loyally fought against him in the Primaries, and some of the old primary wounds have not had time to heal. Kathleen Sebelius, the former Governor of Kansas and current Secretary of Health and Human Services is one of the top females to be considered, according to our source. She attracted a coalition of Democrats and Conservatives when Governor, and some are saying she would effectively deny Palin any hope of attracting the female vote, which leans more Democratic than the nation as a whole. But the source says her detractors claim that her close ties to the unpopular health care legislation of 2010 could hurt with voters, thus hurting her chances of being selected. Former Senator, and moderate to conservative Democrat, Evan Bayh is also rumored to be under heavy consideration, for the same reasons as Sen. Mark Warner. However, some of his past conservative votes, again, could hurt with turnout amongst the liberal base of the party."
Sawyer continued: "In terms of more non-conventional candidates, the popular mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigosa, whose close ties with the Hispanic community, could potentially bolster Obama in 2012. He would also be the first VP, and highest ranking Mexican-American government official in US history. Potential drawbacks would be his complete lack of name recognition, and the fact that he has yet to hold any office higher than that of mayor. Our source tells us that if Obama is trying to expand the electoral college map, Governor Brian Schweitzer (D-MT) would be under consideration in the hopes of improving Obama’s appeal in the Mountain West. And lastly, our source tells us that former Vice President Al Gore could be under consideration. After refusing to rule out interest in the job after a reporter’s questioning yesterday, it would be impossible for the Obama Administration to not think that the almost-president, but now private citizen Gore would increase Democratic enthusiasm in his reelection bid. An Obama/Gore ticket, America? Let us know your views at ABC.com.”


Sunday, May 20th, 2012 - - - With Obama’s appointment of a new Vice President just “days away,” according to Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, Public Policy Polling has released a new poll showing Americans views on Joe Biden’s resignation, as well as their favorite for his replacement.

Which one of the following statements about Vice President Joe Biden’s recent resignation comes closer to your view? I understand and support Vice President Biden’s decision to leave office before the end of his term OR I think it was a mistake for Vice President Biden to leave office before the end of his term and I do not support it. (PPP, 5/18-5/19, 1100 adults nationwide, +/- 3.0)

Understand and support VP’s Decision - 67 %
Think it was a mistake, do not support - 14 %
Do not know / no opinion - 19 %

Of the following potential nominees, which of the following would you most prefer replace Joe Biden as the Vice President? (PPP, 5/18-5/19, 1100 adults nationwide, +/- 3.0)
Sec. Hillary Clinton - 24 %
Fmr. V.P. Al Gore - 12 %
Sen. Mark Warner - 11 %
Sen. Evan Bayh - 2 %
Sec. Kathleen Sibelius - 2 %
Gov. Brian Schweitzer - 1 %
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa - 1 %
Someone else - 29 %
Undecided / No opinion - 17 %



Saturday, June 2, 2012 - - - MITT ROMNEY DECLARES PALIN “THE ONLY WAY FORWARD”; FORMER PRIMARY OPPONENT ENDORSES GOP HOPEFUL

Madison, Wisconsin, 06.02.12 - In what many considered long overdue, former GOP presidential front-runner Gov. Mitt Romney endorsed his one-time bitter rival today during a campaign stop in the capitol city of Wisconsin. Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney appeared alongside Rep. Paul Ryan who was locked in a close election battle with former Sen. Russ Feingold (recent Quinnipiac poll shows Feingold leading Ryan, 45-41%).


Politico had reported earlier in the week that Mitt Romney was seen leaving the Palin campaign headquarters in Georgia on Wednesday night. Relations between the two opponents were thought to be frosty following the longest and most bitterly fought Republican Primary battle since 1976, and when a Romney endorsement was not forthcoming after Palin secured the delegates, many Palin and Romney loyalists assumed the former Governor would not be endorsing at all. Both camps confirmed today, however, that Governor’s Palin and Romney did in fact meet face-to-face earlier in the week to discuss an endorsement, as Politico reported.


Before a large crowd, Gov. Romney argued that electing Sarah Palin to President would be the only way to lift America out of the economic and foreign policy quagmire it had been involved in for the previous 3 years. “. . . Many of you know that for a brief period, Sarah and I were opponents in a primary battle. And boy did the media love to highlight our differences? (boos from the crowd) But what they ignored all along was that on about 95% of the issues, Sarah and I see eye-to-eye. We both believe that you can’t lift America out terrible job stagnation by burdening businesses with taxes disguised as something else. We both believe that raising taxes when Americans are suffering is a recipe for economic collapse! (loud applause) We both believe in supporting and defending our long-time allies, and calling-out our enemies when they threaten the security of America and the world! I’m here today not just because I whole-heartedly support and endorse Gov. Palin for the presidency of the United States . . . (loud applause) . . . but because America can’t take four more years of Barack Obama!” (loud appluase).

The following day on Meet the Press, pundits analyzed and discussed Romney’s endorsement. “I have it good authority that these two people do not like each other,” declared conservative analyst William Kristol. “The primary battle really left nasty tastes in both their mouths, and I just can’t fathom that Mitt Romney would have gone back on his apparent commitment to not endorsing unless there was some sort of discussion or deal made. And yes, I’m referring to the Vice Presidency,” he concluded. NY Times columnist Kristen Powers retorted: “You know, that’s a pretty strong statement for you to make, Bill, based on pure conjecture alone. It can be refuted that these two people hated each other, and absolutely no one can give any evidence or proof that a deal for the vice presidency was made in exchange for an endorsement. Why does Romney’s endorsement even matter at all, Bill?! Palin’s almost neck-and-neck with Obama right now. So why do you think Mitt Romney still holds any sway with conservatives? He flushed that down the toilet when he stayed in the race after the delegate math became virtually impossible. He flushed that down the toilet when he engineered universal health care in Massachusetts. I really don’t see how his lack of an endorsement was important, much less important enough to warrant her offering him the vice presidential spot.” Replied Kristol: “It’s important because he got 40% of the vote from Republicans in the primaries, and it’s important because Sarah’s weaknesses are his strengths.”

Polling from PPP released on Monday showed Sarah Palin enjoying one of her highest net approval ratings since the 2008 election. (Public Policy Polling, 5/29-6/2; 2000 registered voters, +/- 2.5 margin of error)
Favorable / Unfavorable
Favorable - 46 %
Unfavorable - 44 %
Net - +2



Monday, June 4, 2012 - - - NEW DEMOCRATIC TICKET SET! PRES. OBAMA SELECTS W.V. GOV TO REPLACE BIDEN

Washington, D.C., 05.28.12 - Nearly 3 weeks following the resignation of VP Joe Biden as a result of his son’s unexpected death, President Obama shocked the nation, as well as political observers, when he announced earlier today that West Virginia Governor Carte Goodwin (D) would be appointed to the Vice Presidency. While pundits speculated for weeks as to what sort of person Obama would replace Joe Biden with, few had considered the one-time West Virginian Senator, now youthful Governor. At the age of 38, Goodwin is the youngest Governor in the country. Appointed to a Senate seat by then-Governor, now Senator Joe Manchin (D) following the death of the legendary Robert C. Byrd in 2010, Goodwin won a close special election battle to finish out Gov. Manchin’s governorship on Feb. 22nd, 2011 against U.S. House Representative Shelley Moore Capito by a 51-48% margin (Gov. Manchin, who remained quite popular with WV voters, campaigned heavily for Goodwin, though president Obama remained unpopular in the state). In the intervening year-and-a-half, Goodwin has enjoyed impressive popularity in his home state, with Rasmussen Reports recording an approval rating of 55 / 24 % in April of this year. A YouGov poll of 400 likely special-election voters showed Goodwin and Capito locked in another tight rematch, though Goodwin had a discernable advantage: 46-40 %.

Gov. Goodwin, who was raised in rural West Virginia, graduated magna cum laude from Marietta College in 1996 where he earned a B.A. in Philosophy. He then attended Emory University School of Law in Atlanta, graduating in 1999. Goodwin worked a well-known West Virginian private law practice until Joe Manchin was elected Governor in 2004. Goodwin then left private practice at the request of Gov. Manchin to serve as his chief counsel at the age of 31. After Manchin’s first term as Governor was up in 2009, Goodwin returned to private practice. [In June 2009, Manchin appointed Goodwin chair of the Independent Commission on Judicial Reform, which studied the need for changes in the judicial system in West Virginia. On July 16, 2010, Manchin appointed Goodwin to the U.S. Senate seat vacated by the death of Senator Robert Byrd, until a special election could choose a permanent successor. Goodwin stated that he would not seek election to the seat in his own right, and that he would leave office once a new senator had been elected. Observers suggested that Goodwin had been appointed as a placeholder for Manchin, who had himself expressed interest in running for the seat. Goodwin was sworn into the Senate on July 20, 2010, and quickly joined with fellow Democrats to pass an extension of unemployment benefits. Sen. Goodwin's wife Rochelle works for West Virginia's now-senior U.S. Senator Jay Rockefeller, as Rockefeller's state director. The Goodwins have two children, a son, Wes and a daughter, Anna.] *

Pundits are continuing to express amazement at President Obama’s selection of such an unknown and young Governor of a red-state for the second-in-command post. Argued Bill O’Reilly on Fox News: “You know, we were talking about all the things Obama could consider when picking a replacement, and I can’t really see where this one fits on that map. I mean, you have the electoral map argument - but they can’t possibly be thinking of winning WV this go ‘round, not when Obama’s approval rating is struggling to make it to 30 % in that state. It goes without mentioning that Appalachia is not his strongest region of the country. I don’t care how popular anyone is, at some point, you’re not going to be able to lift the president’s numbers, and the president is going to hurt your numbers. That’s what’s going to happen to Carte Goodwin now. Mark my word, you watch, his approval rating is going to tank in WV, and what else is Obama thinking he’s going to bring to the table?” Responded Megyn Kelly: “But Bill, there absolutely ARE other things that this guy brings to the table. How about Obama’s ’middle-class-white-voter’ problem, huh? You don’t think that Carte Goodwin is exactly the type of guy that that demographic would love? He’s young, he’s attractive, he’s charismatic, he’s moderate, and most importantly Bill, he’s new and fresh. This is so incredibly reminiscent of the 2008 campaign when John McCain selected Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate. What did everyone say then? ‘She’s too young, She’s too inexperienced.’ Well, where is she now? She could very well be the next President of the United States. This guy is good because he helps Obama where he needs it, with white, middle-class voters.” Shephard Smith also chimed in: “True, but then again, it’s still unknown as to whether or not McCain’s selection was a net benefit for the ticket. I mean, he did lose by 7 points Megyn, and you can’t deny that Palin had her share of missteps on the trail in ‘08.” “Exit polls have shown, Shep, that for voters that said Sarah Palin influenced their vote in 2008, 56% split for McCain, and 43% split for Obama,” Megyn Kelly shot back. “And yes, while she had some missteps, you can’t deny that the Sarah Palin of 2008 is not the same as the Sarah Palin of 2012.” O’Reilly concluded, “Well either way, you can’t deny that the Republicans have the right to use the experience card against this guy if they had the right to use it against Palin. But unlike the 2008 scenario, Megyn, is that Palin fired up the base! How is Goodwin going to fire up the base?! He’s got a rating of 55 from the ACLU… the liberals, in principle, ought not be able to stand this guy!”


Yet despite O’Reilly’s assertions, polling released on Thursday of that week revealed that the so-called ‘liberal-base’ was indeed ‘fired-up.’ Democrats, and indeed Americans, seemed generally pleased by the idea of a fresh-face on the scene.
Do you approve or disapprove of President Obama’s recent selection of Gov. Carte Goodwin to become Vice President? (SurveyUSA, 6/5-6/6, 1200 Democrats Nationally, +/-3.0% margin of error)
Approve - 70 %
Disapprove - 16 %
Unsure - 14 %

Obama Job Approval Rating
Gallup Daily Tracking Poll, 6/7/2012 (all adults)
Approve: 50 %
Disapprove: 45 %
Net: + 5

Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll (likely voters) 6/7/2012
Approve: 51% (strongly approve - 38 %)
Disapprove: 49 % (strongly disapprove - 38 %)
Net: +2

Who would you support for President if the election were held today? (PPP, 6/6-6/8; 1,500 likely voters, national; +/-3%)
Barack Obama - 52 %
Sarah Palin - 42 %

Economic Outlook (May 2012 statistics):
Unemployment Rate - 8.5 %
Jobs Added - 162,000
Dow Jones Industrial Average (end of month tally) - 12,100 pts.



* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carte_Goodwin





Friday, June 8th, 2012 - - - Over the past week, the political chatter had remained focused on the President's recent selection of Gov. Carte Goodwin to be the country’s Vice President. What had become readily apparent in the immediate aftermath of his selection, was that the Obama campaigns hope of sparking the enthusiasm of Democrats had been achieved. The two men set out across the country on a barnstorming tour, and the crowds were larger and louder than before. Unlike past Vice Presidential appointments, Goodwin was being appointed in the midst of arguably the most watched presidential campaign in history. So while President Obama understood, per the 25th Amendment to the US Constitution, that Goodwin’s appointment required Congressional majority approval, he also understood that in order to capitalize on renewed Democratic enthusiasm, no time could be wasted.

Since the passage of the 25th Amendment, Congressional votes to approve Vice Presidential appointees have been overwhelmingly deferential to the President (both Gerald Ford and Nelson Rockefellar were confirmed by the House and Senate by nearly unanimous margins). Many Republicans grumbled throughout the week about the new VP’s seeming youth and inexperience. “We don’t know anything about this kid,” complained minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky). “It would be nice if some of this hysteria could be calmed down a bit and we have a discussion about this fella’s qualifications.” But while a few congressional Republicans shared the minority leader’s sentiment, that wasn’t reflected in the ultimate vote. On Friday, the Republican-led House of Representatives voted to confirm Gov. Goodwin to the Vice Presidency, 353 - 69. Later that same afternoon, the Senate voted for confirmation as well, 73 - 21. Goodwin was sworn in that same afternoon by Vice President Joe Biden. And as the grumblings just began regarding Goodwin’s employment and firing at his old law firm in Charleston, W.V., Republicans couldn’t help but wonder what would have happened had the confirmation vote been held one week later.




Thursday, July 19, 2012 - - - ISRAEL MOVES FORWARD WITH NEW SETTLEMENTS; WHITE HOUSE NOT PLEASED, PALIN QUESTIONS MOTIVATION

Tel Aviv, Israel, 07.19.12 - [The White House condemned Israel's approval of 1,600 new settlement homes in disputed East Jerusalem Tuesday. Israel approved the new construction earlier in the day- a move that immediately clouded a visit by President Obama aimed at discussing Israeli options in the wake of recently obtained nuclear weapons by Iran. Spokesman Robert Gibbs, when asked by ABC’s Jake Tapper if President Obama’s opposition to new Israeli settlements had changed in the wake of Iran’s defiant stance on nuclear weapons, told reporters that President Barack Obama's position on the settlements is known by both the Israelis and the Palestinians. “The President supports holding Iran responsible for violating international law, but does not think Israel doing the same thing as Iran is the best answer. He supports a peaceful resolution, and doesn’t see how expanding settlements at such an unstable period contributes to that.”

A high-ranking Israeli defense member responded to Tel-AvivT.V, “We find it to be the ultimate betrayal that the President of the United States, within one sentence, would compare Iran’s possession of nuclear missiles to our expanded settlements. It’s almost as if the president does not understand the consequences of a nuclear Iran. Since April, missile attacks from Hamas have increased 30%. They’re emboldened by Iran’s aggressive acts. And we get compared to them by the President of the United States?” President Obama responded: ". . . the substance and timing of the announcement (on expanded settlements), particularly with the launching of proximity talks, is precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions that I’ve had here in Israel.”]*


Many international observers, and American Democrats felt the recent move by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netenyahu, while in violation of international law, was meant to antagonize Iran after the recent revelation that they possessed nuclear weaponry. Yet Sarah Palin espoused the view of the majority of Republicans when responding to a question from Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday. Said Wallace: “Gov. Palin, everyone from President Obama to British Prime Minister David Cameron has said that Prime Minister Netenyahu‘s decision to expand settlements is an irrational, reactionary response. Do you not agree?” Replied Palin:: “ . . . Can we all at least agree that we’re not paying enough attention to the long-term consequences of a nuclear Iran? With nuclear weapons, Iran is official the bully of the region. But even more alarming, is that the leader of that nation, who is a known eliminationist-type of anti-Semite, has a nuclear weapon at his immediate disposal. So Israel is rightfully on alert, if not downright alarmed. So can we all agree that that’s a fair reaction? Fine, is Israel’s response of expanding settlements a good reaction? No, I don’t see how it is. And I would have to question Bibi’s motivation there. But you’ve got to understand what’s going through their heads. And President Obama is clearly signaling to Tel Aviv, and Tehran, that he is not going to commit any sort of military aid to this whatsoever. So you have an Iran that is growing rapidly in power, and an Israel that is growing increasingly threatened. The President needs to change course, and make it clear to Israel that we will support them if they must defend themselves against a nuclear threat.”


The issue of Israeli settlements has been at the forefront of Middle Eastern politics for decades. Interior Ministry spokeswoman Efrat Orbach said the new homes would be built in Ramat Shlomo, a neighborhood for ultra-Orthodox Jews in East Jerusalem. [As of July 2009, approximately 304,569 Israelis live in the 121 officially-recognized settlements in the West Bank, a further 192,000 Israelis live in settlements in East Jerusalem and over 20,000 live in settlements in the Golan Heights. Palestinians argue that the policy of settlements constitutes an effort to pre-empt or even sabotage a peace treaty that includes Palestinian sovereignty, and claim that the presence of settlements harm the ability to have a viable and contiguous state. The Israel Foreign Ministry asserts that some settlements are legitimate, as they took shape when there was no operative diplomatic arrangement, and thus they did not violate any agreement. Many religious Jews assert the biblical Jewish connection to the areas in dispute, arguing that their claim to build is equal to the biblical Jewish connection to the other areas in Israel. Since the mid-1990s attacks against settlers became a frequent phenomenon. Settlers are mostly targeted by Palestinian armed groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad, whose representatives argue that the settlers have forfeited their civilian status because they reside in illegal settlements. Types of fatal attacks by Palestinians militants against settlers have included the firing of rockets and mortars, and drive-by shootings, amongst other methods. Children have sometimes been victims in these attacks]**




Monday, July 23, 2012 - - - Polling released by the Gallup organization showed that American’s remained divided over the heated situation in the middle-east. While results showed Ahmadinejad’s Iran to be deeply unpopular, Americans were not confident in Israel’s strategy of defense.

In light of recent international events, do you have a favorable or unfavorable attitude towards the country of Iran? (Gallup, 7/20-7/22, 1803 adults nationally, +/- 2.5% margin of error)
Favorable - 19 %
Unfavorable - 64 %
No Opinion/Unsure - 17 %

Do you approve or disapprove of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netenyahu’s recent decision to re-start Israeli Settlement developments? (Gallup, 7/20-7/22, 1803 adults nationally, +/- 2.5% margin of error)
Approve - 33 %
Disapprove - 44 %
No opinion/Unsure - 23 %




* http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...n6282500.shtml
** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settlement




Thursday, August 2nd, 2011 - - - In the 2 months since Vice President Goodwin replaced Joe Biden, grumblings under the surface have begun regarding his past as a private practice attorney. On the eve of the Senate and House confirmation of the new Vice President at the start of June, information was being disseminated amongst the big players regarding Carte Goodwin’s past, with particular attention being paid to his activities as a private attorney with the law firm of Goodwin & Goodwin. The Vice President practiced in the firm's white collar crime unit, as well the firm’s lucrative personal injury and products liability defense unit. In 2002, 3 years into his law practice, Vice President Goodwin was tried and suspended by the West Virginia state Board of Law Examiners for alleged tampering with billable hours to a client, a large tobacco firm being sued for millions in a class-action suit for the deaths of several WV residents. It was alleged, though never proven, that VP Goodwin was involved in numerous ‘billable-hour’ tampering situations with a number of Goodwin & Goodwin clients. Lawyer’s are admonished from time to time, and even occasionally suspended. Carte Goodwin, however was tried for disbarment, which would have prevented him ever practicing law again in the state of West Virginia. Goodwin was not disbarred, though his license to practice law in the state of West Virginia was suspended for two years. He was found guilty of tampering with the tobacco client’s money, while the other charges of bill-tampering were dropped.


News of unethical activity on VP Goodwin’s part, while discussed heavily on right-leaning blogs and on the Fox News Network, received little attention from the other cable outlets, as well as the big 3 networks. As a result, the American public was not as privy to the scandal as one would expect, and Goodwin’s numbers had only stabilized from their lofty highs:

Do you have a favorable or unfavorable impression of the following people: (favorable/unfavorable) (YouGov, 7/27-7/31, 1233 registered voters via internet; +/-3.0%)
Barack Obama - 50 / 47 %
Carte Goodwin - 51 / 36 %
Sarah Palin - 46 / 49 %
For who would you vote if the election for president were held today?
Obama - 47 %
Palin - 41 %

Karl Rove also made news today after appearing on Fox’s Brian Kilmeade show, in which he asserted that his 527 group, American Crossroads, was “prepared to do the job that the mainstream media won’t do.” American Crossroads is a 527 group that promotes Republican candidates across the country, and is run by some of the Republican Party’s oldest hands and leaders (including Karl Rove himself). The group claims to have spent some $40 million dollars on getting Republicans elected in their successful 2010 midterm election. “Could you please elaborate further on what you mean Karl?” asked Kilmeade. “The evidence of media bias has been written about and proven ad nauseaum, Brian. That’s nothing new. But for the mainstream media to sit on their hands over this Carte Goodwin story and make it seem like it’s no big deal - well, that’s malpractice to the nth degree, especially in light of what they did to Gov. Palin four years ago. So my group, American Crossroads, has been raising money across this country like crazy for well over the last year. We’ve got $250 million that we’ve intended on allocating down the ballot to help Republicans in the House of Representatives and the Senate. I’m willing to commit ALL of it….every last dime of that $250 million to running television ads in all 50 states about the media’s refusal to cover the Carte Goodwin ethical scandal. And in our ads, we’ll explore the story, in-depth, ourselves!”

The Obama Administration responded the following day through Press Sec. Gibbs: “Look, wild-eyed Karl is going on Fox and jumping around, screaming like a fool, and he still can’t get any attention. The Vice President and the President have dealt with this topic, weeks ago, I do believe. Goodwin was accused of many things while a private practice attorney, as it was well known that his family name had lots of detractors. And nearly all of those accusations were thrown out because they were bogus. Events that took place in his private life 10 years ago are irrelevant to this campaign.”

Vice President Goodwin responded to Rove’s threat as well to reporters: “You know, for Karl Rove to be pretending like I’m not receiving fair scrutiny, I’d invite him to take a small walk in my shoes. The Republicans have been throwing the kitchen sink at me since I took office two months ago. But have I complained once? Have I once acted like things were too hot in the kitchen? Absolutely not, and you won’t see that, because I’ve defended my record whenever it was attacked, and I’ll continue to do so vigorously. They have nothing else to throw at me. And if this is the best they’ve got, then I think I’ll survive.”

Monday, September 17th, 2012 - - - MIDDLE EAST NIGHTMARE!! ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER ASSASSINATED, IRAN SUSPECTED!
Tel Aviv, Israel; 09.17.12 - The international community is still reeling today after the discovery on Saturday that Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netenyahu, was killed when a mortar struck his vehicle outside of Tiberias, Israel on Friday afternoon. The Prime Minister was pronounced dead early Friday evening. President Obama, in his remarks to the nation on Saturday, stated “We are deeply saddened by this tragic, senseless, act of violence and hatred. While we didn’t always agree, Bibi loved his country, and loved his people, and he will be missed by so many. I must stress, in this time of discontent in that region of the world, that it remains in everyone’s best interest to allow the facts to come to light before taking action. Whoever was responsible for this attack will be brought to justice by the Israeli people. But in the midst of this investigation, lets keep our hearts and minds on notice for facts and justice.” However, in the two days since the President has spoken, Hezbollah, a paramilitary organization based in Lebanon, and a terrorist organization according to official United States policy, has claimed responsibility for the attacks, and there are increasing reports that the attack was carried out at the direction of Iran, under President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad .

Israeli press is reporting that mortar and missile attacks by Hezbollah and Hamas have increased by 15% since Iran made news in March about testing nuclear weaponry in the Indian Ocean. Then, in July, Israel took what many regarded as a retaliatory action by reigniting work on nearly 2,000 new Jewish settlements, nearly 2,000 new settlements. Netanyahu was visiting one such site when his motorcade was struck by a missile, since identified as having come from a Hezbollah rebel. President Obama has been vocal in his support of Israel and opposition to Iranian nuclearization, though he has been noncommittal in terms of whether or not the United States would back an Israeli led attack on Iran’s nuclear weapons and facilities. President Obama seems inclined to let Prime Minister Netenyahu deal with his own nation's security, while privately urging him to allow intense sanctions to take their course, and avoid military action.

The world is holding its breath as it awaits news from Tel Aviv regarding how they are coping with news of their popular prime minister's assassination at the hands of a national enemy. News out of that country has been sparse, and it is believed that Israeli President Shimon Peres is carrying out Netenyahu’s dutes. Both the Secretary of State and Defense appeared on Monday night on ABC World News with Diane Sawyer. “Can either of you somehow provide some perspective for our viewers; what could America be facing with the recent assassination of Prime Minister Netenyahu?“ asked Diane Sawyer. Responded Sec. Clinton: “Well, that truthfully depends on a lot of different things taking place on the ground. What will Israel do? At this point, we don’t know, but we do know through lack of communication that they must be shell-shocked. But it has become increasingly obvious, before Bibi’s barbaric murder, that a nuclear Iran is untenable. The power, the attention, the fear they are commanding right now is too great, almost to the point which it could endanger American security, and indeed, as they seem to have just tried in Israel, endanger the entire population of the Middle East.” Sec. Gates echoed her sentiments: “Yes, it will be impossible to know what role if any the American military could play until we can get a reading on where Israel is with this. The official stance of the Obama Administration has always been one of diplomacy, coupled with crippling sanctions, and an open dialogue between the two parties. That’s where he’ll remain, until facts on the ground necessitate a change.” “You don’t think the assassination of the country’s Prime Minister necessitates a change?” , asked Diane Sawyer. “I think it does, but I’ll let the President have the final word on that,” replied Sec. Gates

A new AP/GfK poll taken after word of the Israeli Prime Minister’s assassination showed an already anti-Iranian American public becoming more so.
In light of recent international events, do you have a favorable or unfavorable attitude towards the country of Iran? (Gallup, 9/16-9/18, 1803 adults nationally, +/- 2.5% margin of error)
Favorable - 9 %
Unfavorable - 76 %
No Opinion/Unsure - 15 %


TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18th, 2012 - - - SAUDI ARABIA OFFERS ISRAEL ASSISTANCE; CIA HEAD: ‘ATTACK IS IMMINENT’
Riyadh, Saudia Arabia; 09.18.12 - CIA director Leon E. Panetta announced in an early-morning pres conference that, according to Saudi Arabian intelligence, the Saudi Arabian military has conducted tests to stand down its air defenses in the event that Israel requests permission to use there air space to make an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Just days following a successful assassination attempt on Israeli Prime Minister Netenyahu, allegedly planned and ordered from Tehran, defense sources in the Gulf say that Saudia Arabia’s capital has agreed to allow Israel to use a [narrow corridor of its airspace in the north of the country to shorten the distance for a potential bombing run on Iran. To ensure the Israeli bombers pass unmolested, Riyadh has carried out tests to make certain its own jets are not scrambled and missile defense systems not activated. Once the Israelis are through, the kingdom’s air defenses will return to full alert.

Sources in Saudi Arabia say it is common knowledge within defense circles in the country that an arrangement is in place if Israel decides to launch the raid. Despite the tension between the two governments, they share a mutual loathing of the regime in Tehran and a common fear of Iran’s nuclear ambitions. “We all know this. We will let them [the Israelis] through and see nothing,”]*said one Saudi Arabian defense force member who will remain anonymous. Panetta was pressed further in his press conference about the military exercise in Saudia Arabia, and about the likelihood of a military attack on Iran. “I would say that this signals an Israeli leadership in transition that is feeling lots and lots of vengeful feelings right now. But facts are facts, and an attack appears likely.”

Sarah Palin tweeted later that night : “Israel is a sitting duck with a nuc. Iran. Saudi Arabia has promised their assistance. When will her closest ally, America? Man up, Mr. President!”

Fox News and CBS polling shows a divided, if not largely unsure, American public with regards to committing military power to the elimination of Iranian nukes.
Do you support or oppose the United States taking military action to destroy Iran’s nuclear weapons sites? (Fox News/Opinion Dynamics, 9/17-9/19-31, 1,100 adults, nationally; +/-3.5)
Support . . . . . 34 %
Oppose . . . . ..36 %
Unsure/No Opinion . . . 30 %
If Israel attacks Iran, should the United States help Israel, help Iran, or do nothing? (CBS/Time poll, 9/17-9/19; 1,100 adults, nationally; +/-3.5)
Help Israel . . . . . . . . 47 %
Help Iran . . . . . . . . . . .2 %
Do Nothing . . . . . . . . 31 %
Unsure . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 %



TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18th, 2012 (continued) - - - Late in the evening in Washington D.C., Sec. Gates and Sec. Clinton sped down the dark hallway that led to the Pentagon’s war strategy room. The President had just gotten off the phone with [Israeli national-security adviser, Uzi Arad, and the Israeli defense minister, Ehud Barak. Israeli President Shimon Peres, despite a heated conversation with the President just two hours earlier, had just ordered roughly one hundred F-15E, F-16Is, F-16Cs, and other aircraft of the Israeli air force to fly eastward to Iran - utilizing both Saudi airspace (as had been speculated earlier), and by threading the border between Syria and Turkey. In the phone call earlier in the day, the President pressed Israeli President Peres: “Shimon, why such a drastic step? You’re aware of the international consequences of this!?” “Barack, Bibi’s dead,” replied President Peres. “My people demand retaliation and justice. If ever the international community needed more proof of the danger we’ve been placed under by Mahmoud, now they’ve got it. They’re a threat to our survival, Barack. They’re a threat to all Jewish people. We will not ask for permission, because it is too late to ask for permission. We have no choice.”]**



*http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7148555.ece
**http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...return/8186/1/



WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2012 - - - ISRAELI AIR STRIKES ON IRAN BEGIN! HEZBOLLAH VOWS ANNIHILATION, OBAMA TO ADDRESS NATION

Washington D.C.; 09.19.12 - "Israel began unilateral air strikes against strategic weapons stockpiles throughout the country of Iran late last night," according to White House spokesman Robert Gibbs. International observers have declared that it is too soon to determine whether or not the Israeli mission, still uncertain, was successful. [“It could take a little while for the Israeli’s to receive confirmation that they destroyed the missiles, centrifuges, as well as other hard to replace parts of the Iranian nuclear program,” said Andrew Miller, Defense Department spokesman. “But the Israeli’s will have to dispatch commandos to finish the job and bring back proof of the destruction. The commandos would likely be launched from the Kurdish regions of Northern Iraq, but they would have to be launched.”] *

In the wake of the murder of their popular Prime Minister, Benjamin Netenyahu, Israeli President Shimon Peres has adopted a “code red” mentality, and appears to be attempting to take out all known or speculated locations of nuclear materials, ranging from missile stockpiles, to facilities believed to be enriching uranium. Members of the Israeli defense department received reports early this morning that Hezbollah rocket fire has begun, and at a much more violent rate than normal. It is believed that Iran is ordering Hezbollah to fire rockets in response to the Israeli air raid. Estimated civilian Israeli casualties stand so far at 650, while Iranian civilian casualties stands at 410.

At 8:30pm ESTD, the major networks and cable outlets covered the President’s address to the nation, as he explained the Israeli’s military actions to the American public, and laid out American policy and strategy for dealing with the Israeli/Iranian conflict moving forward: “As history as shown us time and again, catastrophic mistakes, such as targeting the leader of a free country, can have disastrous consequences. And as our Israeli allies and Iranian counterparts move further down there path to war, they risk worldwide destabalization. Whenever possible, as the commander of the largest military in the world, I will avoid war at all costs. That is why I call on Israel tonight to heed my advice: Cease military force in response to the desperate actions of a rogue nation. Allow crippling sanctions, very recently enacted, to hold their course. If it works as projected, these sanctions will rob Iran's military of any financial backing, diminish the value of their currency below its already low level, and fundamentally prevent Iran from expanding power, with or without nuclear capabilities. This will not only save money, and thousands of human lives, but it would prevent igniting a firestorm of discontent throughout an already unstable Middle East. But not only will Iran be faced with crippling sanctions that force them into disarmament, we also propose forming a NATO-manned, multinational military shield around the country of Iran. Such a shield would envelope Iran, and would consist of high-technology anti-missile systems prepared to see to it that Iran’s missiles cannot fly, no matter what. Likely locations would include Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Afghanistan.”



Thursday, September 20th, 2012 - - - Pundit reaction to the President’s speech was the typical hyper-partisan tone that most political controversies take during an election season. Argued James Carville: “No matter what this guy does, the Republicans are going to hate it. It’s been proven! Look at Judge Garland. Republicans have all but promised they would keep him from getting seated, and he’s a conservative! Israel launches a unilateral air raid, in violation of international law, against a country with nuclear weapons, and the president sanely and pragmatically is pushing for crippling sanctions, and a multi-lateral anti-missile shield over Iran. I think this sounds fantastic! What’s the Republican’s problem!? Oh, I know what it is - it’s the fact that it’s the President’s idea. That’s it!”

Former Secretary of Defense William Cohen responds: “But James, here is where there is a fundamental misunderstanding, I think, by the Obama Adminstration with their “anti-missile shield over Iran” strategy. It’s almost accepted as fact now that the order to kill Bibi came from Tehran, in response to his settlement expansion. Iran would never had done this if they didn’t feel they had the power and ability to do it - and their newly tested nuclear weaponry did that for them. And now, Hezbollah, again at Tehran’s urging, is launching rockets into Israel like a full-on war. And it’s now being reported that Hamas is joining in. Civilian casualty estimates in Israel, I’ve heard, are reaching 1,100. This just started! Israel is still a sitting duck, and we have no confirmation that the nukes were destroyed. And Obama wants to sit and wait for sanctions to have there hoped-for affect? He wants to put up a shield around Iran so they can’t launch any missiles? What if they’re launching missiles by proxie? This is a do-nothing, hope-for-the best strategy, and it stinks.”



*http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...return/8186/1/




Saturday, September 22nd, 2012 - - - Fresh off of a campaign stop in Raleigh, NC with gubernatorial hopeful Pat McCrory (who would be competing in a rematch with Gov. Beverly Perdue (D)), Palin wrote an editorial for the local Raleigh News & Observer while traveling by bus to Richmond Virginia to make a campaign appearance with George Allen (who was challenging Sen. Jim Webb in another 2006 rematch). In the editorial, Palin laid out what her administration would do differently from the Obama Administration in dealing with the Israel/Iran conflict, as well as offered a scathing critique of the president’s ’timid foreign policy.’: “The Obama Administration is floundering at a time when they should be their strongest. Iran is engaging in an all-out proxy war against our closest ally in the Middle East, and the president not only has the audacity to not help, but to ask Israel to cease their fire. This will not obtain the Middle East stabalization the President so desperately seeks. Now, certainly if fears are confirmed and Iran has maintained its nuclear program, or a working nuclear process, the United States should consider military force as an option. I’m talking about a joint collaboration between the American and Israeli defense forces. An attack by Israel, in response to the Hezbollah/Hamas offense, would be led in close liaison with the Pentagon and NATO, in an effort to defend Israel from the fear of nuclear threats, and from incessant guerilla warfare at the hands of terrorist organizations. With our financial backing, and with the assistance of our air force only, we would devastate Iran’s nuclear weapons, as well as their means to create more. Such a show of force will cause Tehran to call back Hezbollah and Hamas, because they will no longer enjoy the protection of a nuclear Iran. Look, no one likes war, as the President said, but strategic military strikes, especially when done in cooperation with Israel, and hopefully NATO, could go a long way in reigning in Iranian excesses, and restoring stability to the region.”

….and the political chattering class weighs in: “So Wow, Sarah Palin wants to go to war with Iran. Sarah Palin wants to blow up Iran. Is anyone here surprised?,” mocked Fox News analyst Juan Williams. “That’s basically what she’s doing. She stopped just short of saying that she supports war on Iran, but did say she supports “military force” I believe. This is exactly what the Obama Administration could have hoped for. Picture it: it’s 7 weeks before the election, a frighteningly unstable situation is emerging in the Middle East, and then que Sarah Palin talking about military force, and you have the recipe for a landslide.” Replied William Kristol: “Not so fast, David. Sarah is stating the obvious - Iran is reacting just as predicted, and they’ve launched an all out proxy war on Israel. And we’re supposed to do nothing. And look, you better not think for a second that there aren’t American ramifications for Obama’s sit-on-your-thumbs policy towards Iran. You have to remember David that Ahmenijiahad is nuts, so we have no idea what he’ll do over the next several days to respond to Israel. But you can bet it will be something. He could slash Iran domestic production of oil in an attempt to screw with oil prices across the world! You think the President will still be sitting on his thumbs when oil shoots back up to $5 and $6 a barrell?”



SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 2012 (continued) - - - MISSION NOT ACCOMPLISHED! ISRAELI REPORT SAYS IRAN NUCLEAR PROGRAM ROCKED, BUT NOT DISMANTLED
Bethlehem, Israel; 09.22.12 - Reports from the Israeli Defense Department reveal that while Israel succeeded in destroying 40% of Iran’s nuclear arsenal, as well as several nuclear facilities, Iran still maintains nuclear weapons and the means to create more. Stated an Israeli defense official: [“The four main targets in the raid were the uranium enrichment facilities at Natanz and Qom, the nuclear research center at Isfahan, and the heavy-water reactor at Arak. Of those four main targets, we were able to destabalize two of them, the enrichment facilities at Natanz and Qom. The research center at Isfahan was damaged, but minimally. The reactor at Arak was lightly damaged as well. One of the secondary targets, a light-water reactor at Bushehr, also suffered only superficial damage."]**


Polling Wrap - UP

Which of the following policy stances do you agree with more in regards to handling the conflict between Israel and Iran? 1)America should stick with economic sanctions and provide for a missile defense shield around the country of Iran, or 2) the American military should collaborate with the Israeli military to launch an attack on Iran’s nuclear arsenal. (Reuters Poll, 09/23-09/25, 990 likely voters, live phone interviews; +/-3.5% margin of error)
Sanct & missile def. shield / American/Israeli military collaboration / Unsure/No opinion
44 % 36 % 20%

Who do you trust most to handle the situation between Israel and Iran? (USA Today, 09/23-09/26; 1,001 likely voters, live phone interviews, +/-3.0% margin of error)
Barack Obama - 47 %
Sarah Palin - 36 %
Neither/Unsure - 17 %

Obama Job Approval Rating
Gallup Daily Tracking Poll,9/24(all adults)
Approve: 48 %
Disapprove: 46 %
Net: + 2

Sarah Palin Fav Rating
Gallup Daily Tracking Poll, 09/24
Favorable - 43 %
Unfavorable - 51 %
Net -8


Obama Ras. Reports Job Approval(Likely V)09/24
Approve: 48% (strongly -30 %)
Disapprove: 52%(strongly-41 %)
Net: -4

Sarah Palin Rasmussen fav/unfav tracking
Favorable - 47 % (very-29%)
Unfavorable- 50 %(very-30%
Net -3



**http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7148555.ece




TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2012 - - - IRAN TAMPERS WITH WORLD OIL SUPPLY! LAUER GRILLS VP GOODWIN ON PRIMETIME EXCLUSIVE; GOODWIN DISCUSSES ETHICAL QUESTIONS, RECORD AS GOVERNOR
Washington D.C., 09.25.12 - As reports continue to flood in of massive violence between Israeli defense forces and Hezbollah and Hammas forces, the US State Dept has received intelligence indicating that Iran intends to reduce their exports of domestic oil in an attempt to influence world oil prices. Long feared to be one of Iran’s most drastic responses to an Israeli missile strike, unconfirmed intelligence states that Iran plans to reduce its foreign oil exports by 30%. As oil prices have risen since the Israeli air strike days ago (currently at $94 a barrel), economists fear that any reduction in oil production by a high oil producing country could have dire effects on worldwide, and indeed American, gas prices. The current national average price for gas per gallon is $2.95. While economists fear the move could lead to a worldwide hike in gas prices, many also agree that the move could have more dire consequences for Iran than for the rest of the world: Said economist Paul Laffer: “Look, you’ve got to consider the fact that 45% of the government of Iran’s budget comes from oil and natural gas revenues. So when they cut their production by 30%, sure, they’re going to reduce the supply of oil in commerce, and prices are going to rise. While this will not help any economy, it won’t be crippling. But for Iran, however, just 2 months of 30% reduced output of oil could have disastrous effects on their government, their people, and their ability to lead. With that kind of reduced revenue, they’d be cutting off their foot to spite their faces.”

In other news, Vice President Carte Goodwin faced his toughest and most contentious media interview of the campaign season after speaking earlier tonight with NBC’s Matt Lauer on World News. Lauer, perhaps sensitive to Karl Rove’s repeated claims that the media was avoiding this story, was particularly scrutinizing when discussing the Vice President’s past legal license suspension.

Matt Lauer: Mr. Vice President, a whole lot has been made by Republican operative Karl Rove and his 527 group, American Crossroads, about your past record as a young attorney with the law firm of Goodwin & Goodwin. Now, we have actually obtained court documents that show the West Virginia State Bar held a hearing on the matter, you were present at that hearing, and you plead no contest to a charge of ‘tampering with a clients funds.’ You also faced a hearing for disbarment, in which the State Bar determined you had not committed a disbarable offense. Your position all along has been that these accusations are misrepresented, and irrelevant. Would you please elaborate on how a past ethical record is irrelevant to the Vice Presidency?

Vice President Goodwin: Matt, to be clear, I’ve never, ever insinuated that one’s ethical record is irrelevant to the Vice Presidency. It is highly relevant, and I would argue that I have an exemplar ethical record, when you consider all of the facts. In 2002, I was in my second year out of law school, twenty-eight years old, felt like the world was at my feet. I was thrown into some pretty intensive and serious legal matters, one of which involved a lawsuit with a major tobacco company, one that was on the Fortune 500 list. As almost any new attorney will tell you, when you practice in the real world, you can be taken back by how little you’re taught in school. Minute details that seem so trivial, such as learning and understanding a complicated computer billing program, can wind up, as I found out, having profound consequences on your professional life. Due to some computer-illiterate-inspired errors on my part, I was put in a very unfortunate, and unlucky situation. I’ve sense paid for my ignorance and my errors, and will maintain forever that there was nothing unethical about the incident. It was purely accidental.

Lauer: … But ads are currently being run in 32 out of the 50 states, in nearly 140 media markets, attacking you for not only having made questionable choices as an attorney, but also for differences between your views on politics and policy, and the President’s views. As Senator and Governor of West Virginia, you spoke out against cap and trade, stated you would oppose the White House if they failed to extend the Bush tax cuts for top income earners, and made off the cuff remarks about the President’s political-leanings, such as this quote you made in March 2011, regarding healthcare: "He’s tilting this country, I believe, too far left. . .” Do you feel that way today, or will you walk-back those statements?

Goodwin: . . . Look, I know this is hard for old political hands and old political watchers to understand, but President Obama chose me to be his running mate because he knew I wouldn’t be a rubber stamp in his Administration. He knows, from my record, as you’ve just pointed out, that I’m a policy-oriented, not ideology oriented, kind of guy, and that’s why he chose me. Now, having said all of that, I was the Governor of conservative-leaning state, and . . .

Lauer: (interrupting) But there are growing concerns coming from Democrats that your views could be too far to the right of the Presidents, and that . . .

Goodwin: (interrupting) My views are not too far to the right of the Democrats and certainly not President Obama. I governed in a conservative state, and acted as their delegate. I voted my constituency as Senator, and spoke my constituency as Governor. But make no mistake about it Matt, there’s a lot more that me and President Obama have in common than things we don’t. Karl Rove and Sarah Palin’s attempts to destroy my character, and twist my record, are all too typical of a campaign that has promised a revolutionary, outside-the-box approach. This doesn’t sound very outside-the-box to me. It seems so incredibly….ordinary.



THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2012 - - - With the first presidential debate scheduled to take place in one day in Mississippi, the national average price of oil had risen 3 cents in two days, to $2.98 per gallon. However, as predicted, Iranian markets were reeling, and their currency lost 9% of its value in just two days. It appeared as though Iran, more so than the rest of the world, would be dealing with the consequences of reduced oil supplies.

Also, new polling showed the Vice President’s numbers continuing to fall. Pundits speculated that Goodwin’s interview with Matt Lauer did little to stop the damage being done by Karl Rove’s massive ad-buy on the part of his 527, American Crossroads.
Do you approve or disapprove of the job Carte Goodwin is doing as Vice President? (Quinipiac, 09/26-09/27; 1,233 registered voters via live telephone; +/-3.0%)
Approve - 40 %
Disapprove - 46 %
…………Do you have a favorable or unfavorable feeling towards the following public figure? (favorable/unfavorable) (1,233 registered voters via live telephone; +/-3.0%)
Carte Goodwin - 43 / 44 %

Yet on the same day new polling confirmed that Rove’s ads were having some effect on perception of the new Vice President, a new ad was being tested in 14 major media markets throughout various swing states questioning an adulterous affair between blogger Will Folks, and Republican Vice Presidential nominee, Nikki Haley. As a hot political issue in Haley’s successful 2010 S.C. gubernatorial campaign, billionaire Democrat George Soros agreed with Obama campaign manager David Plouffe when he contacted the socialite weeks earlier. “They’re demolishing our VP with those ads, airing in over 100 markets! I’ve never seen anything like it!” exclaimed Plouffe. “We’ve got to fight back, and the Haley/Folks affair was never fully explored. Lots of fishy stuff that hasn’t been explained. Can you help?” Soros’ 527, Americans for Truth in Government, was ready to spend over $100 million on national advertising, and had agreed to test the anti-Haley ad with a $13 million national ad buy. The ad featured a deep-voiced narrator reading excerpts of a sworn affidavit by Haley’s accuser, detailing the two’s adulterous affair. Pundits soon took note that Campaign 2012 was shaping up to be the ‘battle of the scandal-ridden Veeps.’

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2012 - - - UNITED STATES MILITARY ENTERS IRANIAN FRAY ! AIR FORCE COMMENCES BOMBING RAID TO BEGIN RE-OPENING OF STRAIT OF HORMUZ
Washington D.C., 10.23.12 - - The United States Military has commenced operations intended to re-open the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway located in the Middle East crucial to world oil supplies. The Strait was closed by Iran on Saturday through a combination of strategic water mine placement and land-based, anti-ship missile defense. It is believed the closing of the strait was an intended punishment for Israeli air raids on Iranian nuclear sites mid-September.

The American airforce began air raids on the Iranian island of Qeshm, in the area near Bandar Lengeh, and in the Zagros mountains along the coast, in an attempt to disrupt Iran’s land-based mobile missile capabilities, thus disrupting one of their primary means of keeping the strait closed. Specifically, the United States targeted Iranian missile radars in an attempt to prevent future anti-ship missiles from being launched at the strait. The U.S. has received word that this portion of the mission appears to have been successful, with multiple missile radars confirmed destroyed (although it will take more time to ensure adequate radar destruction took place). The other, more time consuming part of the mission requires the U.S. Navy to locate and deactivate the roughly 1,000 estimated mines that have been placed in the strait. The U.S. Navy’s mine recovery operations require stable, non-fighting conditions to be conducted properly. As a result, the United States has placed a number of mine-countermeasure-ships (MCM ships) at the site to defend the mine gathering mission from possible land based missile attacks from Iran.

The United States military mission in Iran indicates a change in policy and direction for the Obama Administration, who up until now had remained insistent on not committing the U.S. military to the conflict, instead choosing to rely on a combination of recently passed harsh sanctions, an anti-missile shield enveloping Iran, and financially backing Israel’s defense against Hamas and Hezbollah attacks. Yet with worldwide economies feeling the affects of Iran’s reduced oil production, and American gas prices on a sharp rise, the Administration felt compelled by American public opinion to act on the strait closing. President Obama took great strides, however, in his address from the oval office tonight, to explain that the U.S. military mission in Iran is a limited mission, with specific and ascertainable goals - the main one being the re-opening of the Strait of Hormuz, and ensuring stable travel through the area, for the sake of providing some stability to the world oil markets.

“Let me be very clear for my critics on all sides. I will always reserve the right to commit American troops to any conflict that I feel threatens the stability and security of the American people. But while I reserve that right, I employ it cautiously, erring on the side of diplomacy when possible. In this particular case, the threat and risk of inaction is too great. The Strait of Hormuz is vital to world commerce, and absolutely necessary for the continued integrity of the world’s oil markets and oil supply. Iran’s increasingly hostile actions towards Israel and the rest of the world necessitate a calculated, though limited, U.S. military mission. Make no mistake about it - we are not at war with Iran, and have no intention of being at war with Iran. The U.S. military’s mission in Iran is two-fold; One, seek out and destroy the water mines placed in the Strait of Hormuz by Iran so that confidence in safe passage can be restored, thus restoring some stability to world oil markets. Two, take out Iranian missile radars so that they not only will be prevented from disrupting America’s anti-mine activities, but they would also be prevented from stopping the passage of other ships. This is not a commitment to the region indefinitely for the purpose of regime change or anything else. This is a mission with a specific goal, laid out by me, and planned by our military experts, for the purpose of effectuating a specific outcome: the re-opening of the Strait of Hormuz. We will succeed, and it will be as swift as possible.”

Sarah Palin responded the following day at a rally in Ohio with Nikki Haley for U.S. Senate candidate Mary Taylor (R ), who was locked in a close reelection battle with incumbent Senator Sherrod Brown (D). “It took 6 weeks after the assassination of a democratically elected leader of Israel by a terrorist organization, with funding from a nuclear regime, for the Obama Administration to show any sort of reaction. I think he absolutely had to commit the military to reopening that strait. It’s not like he had any other sort of choice. Leaving the strait closed and in the possession of the Iranians would have been like committing global economic suicide. But the President is fundamentally mistaken if he thinks the Iranians, with nuclear capabilities at their disposal, will stop with the Strait of Hormuz. Their reign of terror is just beginning, as you can see by the increasingly brutal attacks by Hamas on Israeli civilian centers. Experts say a nuclear-emboldened Iran is likely to up their attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. We have too much invested in this region to turn it over to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. I stand by my belief, along with so many other Americans, that Iran’s nuclear arsenal is providing them with cover to commit atrocities they are otherwise incapable of. The President needs to stop being so squishy on these issues, and take a stand.”

Polling released two days later showed a slight, though detectable bump in Americans’ approval of Obama’s handling of the Israeli/Iran conflict. American’s were at least currently happy about military involvement at the Strait of Hormuz. The real question for Obama’s pollster was whether or not the bump would last, and whether or not military action in the Strait of Hormuz would satisfy voter anger over a stagnant economy and rising gas prices.

Do you approve or disapprove of the way the President is handling the conflict between Israel and Iran? (Fox News Dynamic; 10/24-10/25; +/-4.5% margin of error)
Approve - 40 %
Disapprove - 55 %

Favorable/unfavorable rating (PPP; 10/23-10/25; 1233 likely voters by automated phone, +/- 3.0% margin of error)
Sarah Palin - 45 / 51 % [net: -6]
Barack Obama - 46 / 52 % [net: -6]
Nikki Haley - 48 / 44 % [net: +4]
Carte Goodwin - 43/ 50 % [net: -7]


Obama Job Approval Rating (10/25)

Gallup Daily Tracking Poll (all adults)
Approve: 44 %
Disapprove: 51 %
Net: -7

Rasmussen Daily Track Poll (likely voters )
Approve: 44 % (strongly approve - 27 %)
Disapprove: 54 % (strongly disapprove - 44 %)
Net: -10


2012 PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE

GALLUP Daily Tracking Poll
For who will you vote for President this coming November - Barack Obama or Sarah Palin? (Gallup daily tracking; 10/25/12; 2,002 likely voters nationally, +/-2.5% margin of error)
Sarah Palin - 44%
Barack Obama - 46%
(Obama +2)
……… among registered voters only (1,378 sampling size, +/-3.0% margin of error)
Obama - 48 %
Palin - 44 %
(Obama +4)

RASMUSSEN REPORTS Daily Tracking Poll
For whom would you vote if the election were being held today - Gov. Sarah Palin or Pres. Barack Obama? (Rasmussen daily tracking; 10/25/12; 1,998 likely voters nationally, +/-2.5% margin of error)
Sarah Palin - 44 %
Barack Obama - 47 %
(Obama +3)
…………results when including ‘leaners’ (those who initially did not express a preference, but when pushed, revealed where they were leaning)
Palin - 47 %
Obama - 48 %
(Obama +1)



MONDAY, OCTOBER 29TH, 2012 - - - ON EVE OF DEBATE , OBAMA & PALIN MEET AT SADDLEBACK CHURCH , BUT DON’T SHARE THE STAGE
Orange County, California; 10.29.12 --- The President and his Republican opponent met last night backstage at Saddleback Church in Southern California, a popular Southern California mega-church led by best-selling author Rick Warren, but did not share the stage together. Similar to the ‘Forum on Religion’ held by Rick Warren four years earlier, both the President and Sarah Palin addressed an array of issues that “matter to the men and women of faith across the United States,” in the words of the Pastor himself. But in keeping with the 2 year tradition, the candidates did not meet face-to-face on stage, and were not able to hear the answers of the candidate that came before them.

While speaking to a group of evangelical Christians, Pastor Warren asked the President: “Like last year, I’d like to ask you what you think your greatest moral failure has been. Four years ago, you cited that yours and the country’s greatest moral failure was selfishness. Do you still feel that way." “Well, Pastor Warren, a lots happened since mid-August 2008, and I think if there’s one thing out country’s done plenty of in the last several years is suffer," replied President Obama. "At this point, I’d say my greatest moral failure has been an inability to effectuate policy that lifted this nation out of its recession faster. The economy fell harder and faster than we initially thought possible. Gridlock in Washington got the better of us at times. The bottom line is still that we’ve put in place the tools to kick start this economy. Those tools are at work now, despite the hiccup we’re seeing. But it is a moral failure on my part, because I misread a few things. I’m taking some corrective actions now, but it’s been a failure, nonetheless." When Palin was asked the same question, she cited the failure of her marriage as her greatest moral failure. “As a Christian, I believe that marriage vows are sacred vows, meant to remain intact at all costs if feasible and safe. To be married for 24 years to someone, and to raise 5 children with that person, and to know someone inside and out the way Todd and I do, it was a real smack in the face, and a real dose of reality, when we separated. I realized I was taking something for granted. Todd and I remain separated, and I consider that to be a true breakdown in our marriage. It’s rarely solely one person’s fault for a marital break-up, and so I consider what happened between Todd and I to be one of my biggest moral failings.”

Touching on an array of social issues, Palin was succinct when pressed on abortion: “I’m pro-life, Rick. [I’ll do all I can to see that every baby is created with a future and potential. And I think our legislatures should do all they can to protect human life]*. But I’ve been consistent on this from the start, and I won’t waffle now. [With the exception of a doctor’s determination that the mother’s life would end if the pregnancy continued, I believe that no matter what mistakes we make as a society, we cannot condone ending another life.”]* The President would not be making the “it’s above my pay grade” mistake he made on the abortion question at the religious forum last year, and while acknowledging the religious sentiment surrounding abortion, navigated the divisive issue before a group of evangelicals well, “I’m pro-choice, but I certainly think there’s common ground to be reached that we haven’t achieved yet. [There is a moral dimension to abortion, which I think that all too often those of us who are pro-choice have not talked about or tried to tamp down. I think that’s a mistake because I think all of us understand that it is a gut-wrenching choice for anybody to think about. People of good will can exist on both sides. Nobody wishes to be placed in a circumstance where they are even confronted with the choice of abortion. How we determine what’s right at that moment, I think, people of good will can differ.]** But I do believe it is the woman’s right."

The Saddleback event passed by with little incident, although the President’s response to Pastor Warren’s final question instantly perked Republican and Palin campaign workers interest. Asked Rick Warren: “Mr. President, will you not acknowledge that America, either through this economic recession or through other powers, is not the superpower she once was? Or acknowledge that her status in the world has changed?” The President replied: [“We are a very large, very wealthy, very powerful country. We have had outsized influence over world affairs for a century now. And you are now seeing a situation in which a whole host of other countries are doing very well and coming into their own, and naturally they are going to be more assertive in terms of their interests and ideas. And that's a healthy thing."]***

Pundits offered mixed reviews of both candidates performances, with the liberal pundits praising Obama’s honesty and candor about his shortcomings in dealing with the economy, and attacking Palin as extreme on abortion for not mentioning rape as an exception to her opposition to the procedure. Pundits on the right praised Palin as candid, consistent, and principled during the forum, and seized on the President's final comments regarding America’s status as a superpower. “Did I hear the President correctly earlier today at Rick Warren’s forum?” asked radio and TV personality Glenn Beck. “Did he seriously, just one week before the election, say that? Did he really just admit that America is in decline in his view, and that that’s a good thing?! Am I dreaming?!” Sarah Palin took to facebook, twitter, and her campaign email list to use the Obama quote as part-fundraising drive, part-media push to cover the story. “The forum was a truly candid exchange for the both of us, but unfortunately for the President, he let slip his true feelings about America’s standing in the world, and from his own words, it appears he’s quite content with a diminished United States.”


MONDAY, OCTOBER 29TH, 2012 - - The Wall Street Journal and the LATimes run with front page stories covering Obama’s comments concerning America’s standing in the world as a superpower at the Saddleback event over the weekend. Many newspaper editorialists defended the President's comments as either mere truth or a mere agreement with Rick Warren, who had asked the President for his opinion on the matter. But many other editorialists attacked the President’s comments as tone-deaf at best, and treasonous at worst. Cable news chatter begins to pick up on the story by mid-day, and by late that evening, just one day before the final presidential debate, the White House issued a statement on the matter. “The President has a firm faith and belief in America’s superpower status, and is proud to be the leader of the world’s leading superpower. But Republicans are distorting what was said at the Saddleback event, and are taking the President’s comments completely out of context. Pastor Warren asked the President whether or not he agreed with the Pastor that America's superpower status was being questioned. The President agreed and elaborated. To insinuate that the President of the United States is somehow anti-American is just as treasonous as the Republicans are claiming the President's comments were."

By the end of the day, Palin campaign media operatives were busy writing the ad (although they felt the ad wrote itself). Picture the typical, dark screen, and plaster a black and white edit of video of Obama sitting on Pastor Warren’s couch and discussing how America’s decline is a healthy thing. The narrator closes with an almost cocky sounding “Need I say more?” Aside from a closing Palin mini-film set to start airing the Friday before election day, the “Need I say more?” ad would be Palin’s closing attack.



*http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Sara...n_Abortion.htm
**http://www.ontheissues.org/social/ba...a_abortion.htm
***http://www.lipmantimes.com/?p=17167




WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 31ST, 2012 -- FINAL DEBATE VIEWED BY 74 MILLION AMERICANS; PALIN ASSAILS OBAMA AS ‘UTTER FAILURE,’ & ‘POST-AMERICAN’ ; OBAMA SAYS PALIN ‘UNQUALIFIED,’ ‘DANGEROUS.’
Chapel Hill, N.C. ; 10.31.12 - Becoming the 2nd most watched debate of all time, the final debate between President Barack Obama and Governor Sarah Palin was viewed by 74.3 million Americans, nearly 1 million more viewers than the 73.4 million Americans that watched the first debate between the two presidential hopefuls (making the 1st debate the 3rd most watched debate in presidential history). Last night's debate was 2nd only to the sole Jimmy Carter - Ronald Reagan debate from 1980, which holds the record with 80.6 million viewers. The Nielsen results from last night confirm that Sarah Palin has been a contestant in 3 of the 5 most watched debates of all time (2008 VP, 2012 Presidential x2), and Obama in 2 of the 5 most watched debates of all time (2012 Presidential x2). The 2012 Vice Presidential debate is the 5th most watched debate of all time.

As expected, both candidates went negative in a final attempt to label their opponent as the designated caricature created by each campaign - Obama as an out-of-touch socialist who is willfully spending America into decline, and Palin as a dim-witted, dangerously unqualified right wing extremist who cannot be trusted to complete a full term. The tumultuous debate was held at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, N.C., at 9pm EDT, and was moderated by NBC News correspondent Tom Brokaw. In continuing the debate trend of 2012, the candidates were given more time to directly speak and respond to each other, with less moderator intervention. The debate was intended to focus on foreign policy and social issues, though it touched on nearly everything. From Palin’s 2008 Couric interview, to Obama’s unpopular health care bill. From Obama’s 2008 ‘spreading the wealth’ statement to Palin’s recent marital separation - little was left unsaid. But pundits afterwards agreed that there were two critical parts of the debate in which Palin appeared to get under Obama’s skin: During the conversation over Israeli/Iranian policy, Palin chided the president for weakness in the face of security threats, and later threw his statement to Pastor Warren in his face, and brought the quote front-and-center to the attention of American voters:

Palin: “Every President from FDR, to Harry Truman, to John F. Kennedy, to Ronald Reagan supported and believed in the idea that America will defend itself militarily if our security is threatened, or if our allies are attacked. It’s been 6 weeks since Israel bravely tried to rid a dangerous regime of nuclear weapons, and Obama did nothing. It’s been almost 7 weeks since Prime Minister Netenyahu was assassinated, and no action from the President. It’s been 7 months . . . Yes, 7 months since international intelligence informed us that Iran was testing long-range nuclear missiles in the Indian Ocean. And what did the President do then? Nothing. . .

(interrupting) President Obama: Sarah, that’s just not true, that’s not my record . . .

Moderator Tom Brokaw: We need to let Gov. Palin finish her statement, then you will be given time to respond to all of it. Gov. Palin?

(continuing) Palin: My point is that there has been a pattern of inaction on the part of the President, not just with regards to our faltering economy, but as it relates to his constitutional chief executive duties. During all of this inaction, Iran has gained the upper-hand in the Middle East, just simply by their having these nuclear weapons. Oil has spiked above $100 a barrel again, and gas prices are headed towards $3.50 again, if they’re not already there in some places. This is a weakness that American’s cannot continue to afford. Now if . . .

(interrupting) Moderator Tom Brokaw: Gov. I’m going to have to cut you off in the interest of time allocation to allow the President time to respond. Mr. President . . .

President Obama: First of all, I don’t appreciate being lectured to on the finer points of my constitutional duties to my country by someone that abdicated her duty as Governor to her state just over half-way through her term (applause with scattered boos; Palin smiles widely then gives a subtle eye-roll). And as a former constitutional law professor, I’d argue that I do know and understand fully what my constitutional duties are to this nation, and I have fulfilled them to the best of my ability, and will continue to do so if given that chance. (quiet applause) But Governor Palin, what you’ve just said amounts to a blatant misrepresentation of what my Administration has done concerning Israel and Iran. When we learned that Iran was testing nuclear weapons, Sec. Clinton, Sec. Gates, and Susan Rice were instantly involved in negotiating some of the very sanctions that are now crippling Iran’s internal governance and infrastructure. When Israel struck Iranian nuclear sites, we sought out to defend them by building a NATO-backed anti-missile shield to envelope the entire country of Iran, to ensure that if they shot a missile, be it nuclear or not, it could not fly. And just last week, when Iran attempted to further disrupt the world’s oil flow, our incomparable, precise military turned them out of the Strait of Hormuz, and as of yesterday, the first commercial vessel traveled through that very strait. So I have to ask you, Gov. Palin, where are you getting your facts? Because the fact is, I have not done “nothing,” as you’ve implied. We’ve acted in America’s best interest every step of the way.

Brokaw: Gov. Palin?

Palin: Mr. President, you’re responding to symptoms of the larger problem in the Middle East. How long will you continue to ignore the source of the problem? The source of the problem is Iran’s nuclear arsenal. That’s why gas is so expensive, that’s why the world economy is being rocked again, and that’s why Israeli civilians are dying. How many more atrocities will Ahmadinejad be permitted to commit before we commit to one truth - that a nuclear Iran is unacceptable! You yourself have said this in the past, albeit, it was before the words mattered. Israel had the right idea, and they foresaw what is taking place now - a nuclear Iran is a dangerous Iran, and one that becomes much harder to predict or contain. You said something very interesting during our joint appearance with Pastor Warren. . .(crowd shuffles, Obama grins, appears frustrated)….you said . . . you said, and I’m paraphrasing, that America has had outsized influence in the world, that other countries will rise up in our place, and that’s a healthy thing . . .

(interrupting) Obama: That’s not what I said Sarah, that’s not . . .

(interrupting) Brokaw: You’ll have full rebuttal time Mr. President. Ms. Palin, please finish your statement.


Palin: You said that this change in American influence, this decline in American influence, was a healthy thing, Mr. President. Your words. Well like I said at the Convention, I do still believe in American Exceptionalism. I do still believe our best days are ahead of us, and I don’t think that America is in decline, but if we were, I certainly wouldn’t think it’s a healthy thing. That’s why I believe we have a duty to see to it that Iran does not blow-up the world, because if they do, we’re all in decline. And that’s NOT a healthy thing (loud applause)

Brokaw: Ladies and gentlemen, if I could please remind you to hold your applause. Mr. President . . . ?

Obama: Gov. Palin, since you’ve never sat in that chair, I don’t think you would understand what sort of burden a President carries knowing he can commit the largest, most powerful military in the world to any cause he sees fit. But I will say that as President, you receive information from all sides. Despite the fact that Ms. Palin has provided no specifics, whatsoever, with regards to what exactly she would have the military do in Iran, I’ll inform you all of what we could be facing with an attack the likes of which I think Ms. Palin is supporting. In this time of Republicans screaming about the back-breaking deficit, an air strike on Iranian nuclear facilities and arsenals, one that would be completely effective and correct the first time around, would cost upwards of $170 billion in the first year. Depending on international reaction, we may just be kicking off a start to World War III, and that number will only grow. The number of service men needed could top . . .

(interrupting) Palin: I’m proposing a strategic military strike of known nuclear sites, not a . . .

(interrupting) Brokaw: Gov. Palin . . .

(interrupting) Palin: . . . Not a ground invasion or takeover of Tehran . . .

(interrupting) Brokaw: Gov. Palin, please. . . Mr. President?

Obama: The number of service members required for Palin’s proposed military attack would drain our reserves, and put our members at service in other locations across the world at more risk. And as belligerent as Iran is now, they could potentially become more so after a strike the likes of which Gov. Palin is proposing. America, don’t be fooled by fear-mongering rhetoric. Iran, through a combination of their own willful ignorance, such as their reducing their oil production, and through a number of crushing economic sanctions, is on the verge of internal collapse. When you can’t provide for yourself or for your people, your nuclear weapons lose a lot of their luster. We can, and are, achieving all of this without an overreaction that would overstretch our military, and further deepen American resentment in that part of the world. I don’t think Gov Palin’s plans to help our economy, through a unilateral strike on Iran, is prudent, nor in America’s best interest. I think Gov. Palin's plan is very, very dangerous, and a huge gamble. One I don’t think America can afford.

Brokaw: Gov. Palin, last word on this topic, very quickly please . . .

Palin: I am not proposing anything near the scale that the President just falsely accused me of. I am proposing an Israeli fashioned air raid, but one based on better intelligence and knowledge of known nuclear sites and arsenals. One that will actually get the job done. I agree that Iran will face eventual internal collapse, but experts don’t agree with the President that it will happen soon. Depriving Iran of their current life source, nuclear weapons, would usher that internal collapse along even further. And some even say the Iranian people could greet such a collapse of Ahmadinejad‘s radical rule with open arms. But no, I’m not proposing an all out war with Iran. Just a strategic military operation, mapped out by our experienced military leaders, for the sole purpose of ridding Iran of nuclear weapons, and ushering along their internal collapse. Until this happens, we have to live in fear of an irrational Iran’s next move.



FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 1ST, 2012 (5 days until election) - - - The political punditry discussed the ramifications of the final, highly watched, highly - charged debate between Gov. Sarah Palin and President Barack Obama. Opinion appeared to be more divided than in the prior VP debate and the first presidential debate, where Barack Obama and Nikki Haley were declared clear winners. But there did appear to be a consensus that Palin over-performed her expectations. Argued George Stephanopolis on ABC World News: “Palin seemed very comfortable in the attack mode, as she was in for most of the night. She got in several good jabs where it almost appeared as if the President was biting his tongue, and most importantly, she got to highlight that comment that was made at the Warren forum for those people that don’t read the front pages everyday. And at the same time, her campaign is launching today a national ad buy, alleged to be around $75 million dollars, in the swing states, attacking the president for those comments he made regarding America’s status around the world. The Palin folks desperately wanted to make this into a campaign issue, and for now, it looks like they’re getting what they want.” Interjected Diane Sawyer: “You know George, I’m not so sure the American people care so much about Obama’s comment at the religion forum, but I do agree with you that Palin appeared to get under his skin a little there, especially during their discussion on Iran where the Governor started trying to, go in for the kill, so to speak, and was making her case for why the President is weak on foreign policy, and how he isn’t quite as American as her or other Americans, and how he seeks the decline in American status….during a lot of that, if you paid attention to his body language, you could see that she was really getting to him, that those tactics were bothering him for whatever reason, and that he was itching to respond. He wasn’t wearing that well.”

“Well to be fair, Obama got his jab in there with the reference to Sarah abdicating her gubernatorial duties in Alaska, yet earlier in the debate she questioned whether he was fulfilling his constitutional duties as president, which I think was a trap she walked into by herself. That was a definite gaffe,” argued Gwen Ifill. “But when he mocked her for leaving office early, she could be seen, smiling almost happily, but then you catch that little eye-roll of hers, so he was getting under her skin there. You can tell, that’s a sore subject for her.”

When asked by host Diane Sawyer which candidate made the better case for what should be done in Iran, Charles Krauthammer responded: “Because as a matter of philosophy I think we must take nuclear weapons out of Iran, I think Sarah Palin made the more compelling case. But I’m admittedly biased there. The question is, do most Americans agree with her? She’s made a compelling case for why it needs to be done. But the other question is, ‘has the president redeemed himself at all with the military strike in the Strait of Hormuz, or did any damage control that that provided get wiped out by his bone-headed remark at the forum on religion regarding American superpower status?’ Americans don’t want to hear there president say that America is on the decline, they don‘t . . .” (interrupting) “Oh don’t patronize us, though Charles, cause we’re not stupid. And American’s aren’t stupid either. We’re adults, and Obama was simply telling the truth, in response to a direct question where Pastor Warren agreed that American superpower status is on the decline. That’s making a mountain out of a mole hill and the Republicans know it.”

Polling released in the days following the final presidential debate showed a plurality of Americans feeling that Palin won in the 2nd round, though opinion was much more divided than previous debate polls.
Who do you think did a better job in last night’s debate between Gov. Sarah Palin and President Barack Obama? (CNN/Opinion Dynamics; 10/31-11/01; 787 debate watchers, via live telephone; +/-4.5% margin of error)
Barack Obama - 40 %
Sarah Palin - 48 %
Unsure - 12 %
……….Debate winner amongst undecided debate-watchers
Obama - 39 %
Palin - 46 %

Do you approve or disapprove of the way the President is handling the conflict between Israel and Iran? (Fox News Dynamic; 10/31-11/01; +/-4.5% margin of error)
Approve - 38 %
(40% 1 week ago, 10/24-10/25)
Disapprove - 57 %
(55% 1 week ago, 10/24-10/25)

Who do you trust more to handle the conflict between Israel and Iran? (Fox News Dynamic; 10/31-11/01; +/-4.5% margin of error)
Barack Obama - 37%
(40% said Obama 1 week ago, 10/21-10/22)
Sarah Palin - 45 %
(44% said Palin 1 week ago, 10/21-10/22)

2012 PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE
GALLUP Daily Tracking Poll
For who will you vote for President this coming November - Barack Obama or Sarah Palin? (Gallup daily tracking; 11/02/12; 2,002 likely voters nationally, +/-2.5% margin of error)
Sarah Palin - 45%
Barack Obama - 47%
(Obama +2)
……… among registered voters only (1,378 sampling size, +/-3.0% margin of error)
Obama - 49 %
Palin - 44 %
(Obama +5)

RASMUSSEN REPORTS Daily Tracking Poll
For whom would you vote if the election were being held today - Gov. Sarah Palin or Pres. Barack Obama? (Rasmussen daily tracking; 11/02/12; 1,998 likely voters nationally, +/-2.5% margin of error)
Sarah Palin - 47 %
Barack Obama - 46 %
(Palin +1)
…………results when including ‘leaners’ (those who initially did not express a preference, but when pushed, revealed where they were leaning)
Palin - 51 %
Obama - 47 %
(Palin +4)



SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 3RD, 2012 (3 days until election)- - - OBAMA CAMPAIGN RELEASES CONTROVERSIAL ATTACK AD! PALIN SAYS SIGN OF DESPERATION
Tampa, Florida ; 11.03.12 - The Obama campaign started running a brand new attack ad against Sarah Palin on WFTS-TV, in Tampa Florida, a crucial swing-vote area in a crucial swing state. And the Obama campaign says that these ads will be airing across the country, in over 30 markets considered crucial swing areas, and spending nearly $85 million in the final four days of the campaign. The ad campaign is meant to be the response to an attack ad released by the Palin campaign titled “Need I say more?” which highlights the president’s comments regarding America's status in the world at the Saddleback Church Religion Forum. The Obama ad is already being compared to Lyndon Johnson’s 1964 “mushroom cloud” ad, which warned that an America under Barry Goldwater could lead to worldwide nuclear war. The new ad, meant to stoke voter’s concerns regarding the Israeli/Iranian conflict, is set in obvious modern day Middle East, where there appears to be mass construction projects and rebuilding taking place, and a general scene of productivity and commerce. But in a quick flash, the screen turns black, and the closing scene is a frightening war-zone, with bombs dropping, mortars lighting up a night sky, and fires brightening up a dark Middle Eastern city. In the end, a narrator states, as the caption is displayed: “Sarah Palin: unqualified to lead in these dangerous times.” The Palin campaign instantly decried the ad as a sign of desperation on the part of the President’s reelection campaign. But pundits and Republicans openly discussed whether or not Obama was about to replicate the success of the controversial 1964 political ad. Polling as recent as the final week of October showed Americans were still doubtful of the Palin / Haley ticket’s qualifications and ability to lead. While Palin seemed to have the weight of public opinion behind her regarding what to do in Iran, voter’s weren’t sure they wanted her to be the person implementing the policy. Pundits seemed split as to whether or not the ad would be effective or backfire, but no one could deny that it put voter's strongest doubts about the female Republican presidential nominee on loud display, and was certainly not the last thing Palin wanted people remembering when heading into the voter booth. But time would tell . . .



SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 4TH, 2012 - - - On the final Sunday before the general election, the political roundtables reflected on the 2012 campaign, and offered their predictions of the final result on Tuesday night. “One thing I will say about campaign 2012 is that it will go down in history as a fascinating election for a multitude of different reasons, regardless of who wins Tuesday night,” argued pundit George Will. “The first African American President, challenged by the first female candidate for the Presidency, so you can look at it as a victory for America from that standpoint. But if I had to predict a winner on Tuesday night, I think America will stick with the President. This election has gotten closer than I ever thought possible, but I thought the President eloquently made the case in the last debate that he hasn’t sat on his thumbs, he’s acted in response to the Middle Eastern conflict. And ultimately, his closing Johnson-esque ad is pretty damaging, if you ask me. Palin just has not quite convinced voters that she’s capable. She’s definitely come a long way in her familiarity with policy and her presentation, and though she‘s proven herself a highly formidable challenger, I don’t think she’ll ultimately pull it off.” “Yeah I think she’s shown herself to be more formidable than many of us ever expected possible,” added Peggy Noonan, “but I agree with George that it’s not going to be quite enough. The old saying goes, ‘you don’t switch horses mid-stream,’ and America gave us a shining example of that in 2004, when you had an increasingly unpopular president with increasingly unpopular policies, but in the end, that old saying rang true, and America rejected John Kerry, albeit closely. I think that’s Sarah Palin’s best bet at this point - that she could finish close behind the President, but only for the sake of saving face. But yeah, I see Obama pulling this one out in the end.” “I hate to just fall in line, but I’m going to join my colleagues in agreeing that I think Obama will pull this one out,” argued Donna Brazile. “Statistics would suggest that when a President’s approval rating is around the mid-40s, he has a better chance than not of getting reelected. Now when that approval rating drops below 40, the odds of reelection drop exponentially. But I think all the elements are there for Obama to see the turnout he needs to pull this one off. Palin / Haley are going to give it a good run for their money, but so far, my money’s on Obama.” William Kristol: “Okay, you knew I was going to play devil’s advocate, but I think that Palin is going to shock the socks off all of us and pull this one right out of her hat, and here’s why: Unemployment is at 8.8%, and it’s hovered at these high rates for nearly four years. The economy is not growing at nearly the rate we’re being told, and the Middle East is an absolute mess. Meanwhile, you have the President seemingly content with America’s declining worldwide status, and the perception that he isn’t acting in our best security interests. Throw in a magnetic, charismatic, uplifting superstar like Sarah Palin, a VP that is equally as loved by conservatives, and a fired-up Republican base, and you have the recipe for a President Sarah Palin. My money’s on Sarah, and I’ll buy you all a round if I’m wrong!” (laughter from the group).

“One final topic before we go,” proposed moderator David Gregory. “A recent Fox News poll showed that American voter’s are indeed suffering from Obama AND Palin fatigue, and who wouldn’t after the last four years? But what kind of effect could this have on the spoiler candidates, like Ralph Nader, who is running as an independent on about fifteen different state ballots.? And Chuck Baldwin, who made the ballot in nine states. And a small handful of other no-name candidates. Any chance that this voter disgruntlement could bleed over into larger 3rd party support?” George Wills responded: “I think that you could run the real chance that someone like Nader, or even Baldwin, will see a higher percentage than typical. Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m still talking less than five percent total, all of them put together. But that’s more than one should expect in a normal year.” Kristol was the last to chime in: “I’m not so sure I see the third party candidates benefiting any more than in a normal year. But the Obama/Palin fatigue is real, and whoever wins is going to be facing a weary populace regardless. Something makes me think that neither Obama or Palin will see the lofty 60 and 70% approval ratings so many Presidents-elect enjoy. As a result, I think that voter turnout will actually be down compared to 2008, or at least down proportionally.”



MONDAY, NOVEMBER 5RD, 2012 - UNEMPLOYMENT RATE DECREASES ON ELECTION EVE, BUT WILL IT MATTER TO VOTERS?
Washington D.C.; 11.05.12 - Brand new Labor Department statistics provided the Obama Administration with a brief sigh of relief, as the governmental department announced the unemployment rate had dropped from the month of September to the month of October, from 8.8% to 8.6%. Roughly 41,000 new jobs were added to payrolls in October. The Dow Jones Industrial Average, however, fell to 11600 pts for the month, a drop of over 200 points from the previous month. Speculators suspect the conflict in the Middle East, recently compounded by military action in the Strait of Hormuz, when combined with an upcoming uncertain presidential election, have caused the large monthly drop in the Dow from September. Though the economic news is mixed for October, the fact that unemployment decreased surprised pundits and economists alike. Republicans especially had been very vocal about the pending effects on the economy caused by Iranian acts of aggression. Democrats clamored loudly that the unemployment rate decrease signified that predictions of another crash were premature, and Republicans were showing their true defeatist colors. Republicans, on the other hand, latched on to the shaky stock market, and insisted that the dropping market was a sign of things to come.

After nearly seven straight weeks of stark rises in prices at the pump, the national average for gas has steadied at about $3.48 a gallon, with oil at about $119 per barrel. The Obama Campaign, very eager to seize on last minute news that could influence voters' opinions, held a press conference Monday morning to tout the new labor department statistics. Pundits, however, express some skepticism that the news could influence voters' opinions. “You know, it isn’t unprecedented that economic news makes the headlines just days before an election, but it is unprecedented that election-influencing economic headlines makes the news on the day before election day,” stated political scientist and commentator Larry Sabato. “But what remains to be seen is whether or not the new economic numbers will influence voters opinions, and then if so, is it too late for the news to filter out?”


FINAL PRE-ELECTION POLLING WRAP UP (Mon. Nov. 5th, 2012)

Do you approve or disapprove of the way the President is handling the conflict between Israel and Iran? (Fox News Dynamic; 11/03-11/04; +/-4.5% margin of error)
Approve - 35 %
(38% 1 week ago, 10/31-11/01)
Disapprove - 59 %
(57% 1 week ago, 10/31-11/01)

Favorable/unfavorable rating (PPP; 11/03-11/04; 1233 likely voters by automated phone, +/- 3.0% margin of error)
Sarah Palin - 45 / 52 % [net: -7]
Barack Obama - 45 / 53 % [net: -8]
Nikki Haley - 47 / 45 % [net: +2]
Carte Goodwin - 42/ 52 % [net: -10]

Obama Job Approval Rating (11/05)

Gallup Daily Tracking Poll (all adults)
Approve: 43 %
Disapprove: 52 %
Net: -9

Rasmussen Daily Track Poll (likely voters )
Approve: 41 % (strongly approve - 28 %)
Disapprove: 57 % (strongly disapprove - 46 %)
Net: -16


2012 PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE

GALLUP Daily Tracking Poll
For who will you vote for President this coming November - Barack Obama or Sarah Palin? (Gallup daily tracking; 11/05/12; 2,002 likely voters nationally, +/-2.5% margin of error)
Sarah Palin - 47 %
Barack Obama - 51 %
(Obama +4)
……… among registered voters only (1,378 sampling size, +/-3.0% margin of error)
Obama - 51 %
Palin - 46 %
(Obama +5)

RASMUSSEN REPORTS Daily Tracking Poll
For whom would you vote if the election were being held today - Gov. Sarah Palin or Pres. Barack Obama? (Rasmussen daily tracking; 11/05/12; 1,998 likely voters nationally, +/-2.5% margin of error)
Sarah Palin - 48 %
Barack Obama - 47 %
(Palin +1)
…………results when including ‘leaners’ (those who initially did not express a preference, but when pushed, revealed where they were leaning)
Palin - 50.7 %
Obama - 47.4 %
(Palin +3.3)

Electoral Map projection, 2012 (as of 11/05/12)

Obama - 209
Palin - 186
Toss-up - 143



ELECTION DAY : NOVEMBER 6TH, 2012 - - - MIDDAY REPORTS INDICATE HIGHER THAN EXPECTED TURNOUT; REPORTS OF VOTING IRREGULARITIES SCATTERED , FEWRichmond, Virginia; 11.06.12 - It is ‘election day, 2012,’ and perhaps the most watched and covered presidential campaign in history is about to come to an end. Democrat Barack Obama is vying for another four years in office, and Republican Sarah Palin is hoping to send him packing. And we’re hearing this morning and midday that turn-out is higher than expected. There was some polling and punditry in the days leading up to the election that indicated Americans were suffering from election fatigue, and enthusiasm for voting, which had been initially very high, was dropping off. But reports on the ground from polling stations in and California, New York, Georgia, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan - all are indicating steady-to-heavy traffic throughout the day.

DRUDGE REPORT HEADLINES throughout election day provided a constant source of speculation, if not mild entertainment. Below are a sample of some of Matt Drudge’s election day, 2012 headlines.

Black Panthers make return visit to Philadelphia polls. . .
Video. . .
Campaigns eagerly await early 5:00pm exit poll data. . .
***Obama camp receiving reports of long lines in Cleveland, OH, Philadelphia, urban areas. . .
**Sen. Brown Campaign on edge in Mass: Obama juggernaut out in full force for Patrick. . .
Frank Luntz: ‘Looks like rural turn-out is exceeding 2008, on par for 2004 levels. . .’
*TN Upset! Country crooner for senate down in election day DSCC poll, 49 - 43%. . .
Lieberman said what??? Election day push: Ct. Sen. urges backers to support McMahon. . .
***OBAMA LEADS (in first votes cast in small N.H. town) 89 - 56 votes. . .



CNN ELECTION COVERAGE: BREAKING ! ! EARLY EXIT POLLS SHOW ECONOMY REMAINS TOP CONCERN , WITH IRAN / ISRAEL IN SECOND Atlanta, Georgia - 11.06.12; 05:19:23 P.M. E.S.T. - Early data is being filtered into the CNN computer system now, and we have some of the first results from exit polling taken across the country today. This comes from a sample of over 19,000 voter’s, nationwide, and according to those voters, the biggest concern on everyone’s minds as they head to the polls today is the economy, just as it was in 2010 and 2008. The data from today’s election shows that 47% of voters nationally said the economy was the most important issue to them. That’s down from the 62% of voters that named the economy as the top issue in 2008. But in a clear sign that American’s are growing increasingly concerned over the Israeli/Iranian, 33% of voter’s nationally agreed that the situation in the Middle East was their top concern in the voting booth this year. About 6% of voters said government spending was their top concern, while about 6% of voters viewed terrorism as their top concern. Healthcare was the top concern only for about 3% of voters, nationwide.

The Exit poll also revealed that about 68 % of Americans view the economy as “not so good,” or “poor.” That’s also down from the 93% of voters that had the same view of the economy in 2008, when voter’s cast their ballots at the height of the financial meltdown.

Also, in perhaps the most interesting teaser from the just obtained exit poll data, about 52% of first-time voter’s say they cast their ballot in favor of President Barack Obama. That number is down from his 2008 exit poll numbers of 69%. How did Sarah Palin fair amongst first-time voters? 46% of first-timers went for the former Alaska Governor. Recall that McCain/Palin lost to the Obama/Biden ticket by a margin of 7 points. We’ll keep you updated as more exit poll data comes in.



CNN ELECTION COVERAGE: BREAKING ! ! EARLY EXIT POLLS SHOW VOTERS ARE MORE PESSIMISTIC THAN THEY WERE IN 2010 - Atlanta, Georgia - 11.06.12; 05:42:45 P.M. E.S.T - Voters this year may be more nervous than angry, but they are a bit more pessimistic about the direction the country is headed than they were 2 years ago.
Just 31 percent think the country's on the right track, according to exit polls Tuesday night, to 65 percent who think things are heading in the wrong direction. This is a slightly higher percentage of Americans who think the country is heading in the wrong direction than in 2010, but less than the number of Americans that felt the same way in 2008 (when 74% of Americans thought we were headed in the wrong direction).

In addition to those numbers, further exit poll data shows that American’s do not believe they are better off than they were four years ago. The question was first made popular by former President Ronald Reagan, when he uttered the phrase to voters during a debate with Jimmy Carter in 1980. Today, 37 % of Americans say they are worse off than they were four years ago. 28 % say they are better off than they were when President Obama first won election. 35 % they are the same as they were in 2008. In 2008, 42 % of Americans said they were worse off than they were four years earlier.



CNN ELECTION COVERAGE: BREAKING ! ! YOUNG VOTERS BREAK STRONGLY FOR OBAMA , BUT NOT AS STRONGLY AS 4 YEARS AGOAtlanta, Georgia - 11.06.12; 05:42:45 P.M. E.S.T - - - Strong support from young and minority voters provided good news for Obama today, with 18-29 year olds giving the President 58% of their votes. But that margin is down from from 66% in 2008. Sarah Palin received about 40% of the vote from voters 18-29 years old.

Sarah Palin, however, won the 65+ demographic, 54%, to Obama’s 45%