Wednesday, October 31st, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Elections
We are seeing the same narrative play out in the world of polling on a daily basis. Polls continue to show Obama leading, not just in Ohio, but in states where most people believe to be in the bag for Romney, such as Florida and Virginia (and even some polls in NC). At the same time, the polls continue to show the partisan turnout to be more favorable to Obama than in 2008, even though he is losing the white vote by historic margins and failing to energize minorities and young voters to the same degree he did 4 years ago.
However, all polls consistently show Romney leading, often by double digits, among Independents. Remember that Bush actually lost Independents by one point nationally in 2004. In other words, these polls don’t compute.
Here are some new examples from today:
CBS/New York Times/Quinnipiac: They polled 3 battleground states and showed Obama leading 50-45 in Ohio, 48-47 in Florida, and 49-47 in Virginia. Even if you buy into the Obama Ohio juggernaut, does anyone really think he’s ahead in Florida?
Wednesday, October 31st, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Debt, Economy, Taxes
We hear news that 62,600 jobs have been eliminated since Sept. 1, the sharpest two-month drop since the start of 2010. We hear news that consumer prices are ready to spike over the next year. We hear news about sharp declines in household income. Then we wonder why we are on such a protracted path of poverty and decline. However, when you consider the cost of the hidden tax of the regulatory state, there is no mystery as to why we are on decline.
Take a look at this chart from the Mercatus Institute, which tracks the growth of federal regulations over the past decade:
The amazing thing is that you could chart the growth of regulations with a straight line increase in poverty, welfare, income decline, and spike in consumer prices. For all the talk of poverty, nothing alleviates the burden of the impoverished like jobs, higher income, and lower prices. Nothing squeezes the poor and working class more than onerous regulations, which kill jobs, depress wages, and raise the cost of producing vital goods and services.
Regulations are a cancer on our economy, and things will never improve unless the next president stems the tide of the regulatory state. That is the only potent weapon in the war on poverty. Take a look at this analysis from CNS news of the latest poverty numbers and welfare spending figures. Can anyone honestly say that more welfare spending in the answer?
The federal government spent enough money on federal means-tested welfare programs to have sent each impoverished household a check for nearly $60,000, according to figures from the Census Bureau and the Congressional Research Service(CRS).
According to a report from the CRS produced for Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), $1 trillion was spent on federal welfare programs during fiscal year 2011 – with $746 billion in federal funds and $254 in state matching funds.
The U.S. Census Bureau reported that there were approximately 16.8 million households living below the federal poverty level of $23,000 per year for a family of four in 2011. ( See: 2011 Households Below Poverty 2011.pdf )
If each of the estimated 16.8 million households with income below the poverty level were to have received an equal share of the total welfare spending for fiscal year 2011, they each would have received $59,523.
So after spending $60,000 per household per year on welfare programs, poverty is at an all-time high! When will we learn that we can’t tax, regulate, or subsidize our way out of poverty? Our Republic will never recover unless we restore the free market and place a moratorium on major federal regulations. We already tried the Great Society; let’s try something that will actually work.
Wednesday, October 31st, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Family Values, News, Obamacare
Either Norm Coleman is a terrible surrogate for Romney or we need to gird ourselves for a fight. Earlier in the year, Coleman suggested that Romney would not completely repeal Obamacare. Now he is promising voters in Ohio that Romney will not push to overturn Roe v. Wade. We all understand that he is not an official spokesman for the campaign, but he better not be appointed to any major position in the administration. There is talk of him becoming Secretary of HHS. That would be an unmitigated disaster.
Tuesday, October 30th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Elections, News
There’s one fact that is being overlooked in much of the per-election electoral analysis. Not only are Democrats dramatically underperforming their 2008 early voting turnout, those who are turning out are predominantly their most committed voters. They are not getting new voters to turn out like the GOP is on their side. The Washington Examiner makes this point succinctly:
According to a GOP analysis of early voting and absentee ballot requests provided to Secrets, the Democrats are turning out their most reliable, or so-called “high propensity voters” than Republicans, leaving fewer for Election Day. The GOP is pushing weaker supporters to vote early, expecting high enthusiasm to drive their regular supporters to the polls next week.
“Democrats are cannibalizing their high-propensity voters in advance of election day to get stories that they are winning,” said a GOP analyst. “But in effect they are stealing from Peter, or Election Day, to pay Paul, or early voting.”
For example, in Ohio, the Democrats have turned out 43 percent of the most loyal supporters to vote, compared to just 27 percent of the GOP. In Iowa, the difference is 43 percent to 29 percent.
Tuesday, October 30th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Elections
With all the focus on the presidential race and some of the congressional elections, there are a number of important state ballot questions that we must not overlook. Many of us claim that conservatism is not on the ballot in many states where the candidates for Congress are underwhelming. However, there are a plethora of ballot questions that deal with taxes, marriage, and Obamacare – issues that are of great concern to conservatives.
Here is an informal list of some important ballot questions – some good and some bad. We’ll update this post next week to reflect the results of the ballot initiatives and referendums.
Tuesday, October 30th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under News
Well, in addition to Bill Clinton visiting Minnesota today, Paul Ryan will make a stop in Minneapolis 4:15 this afternoon.
And what about Pennsylvania? He’ll begin running statewide ads tomorrow.
Hey, team Obama, that cracking sound you hear is the map beginning to collapse.
Tuesday, October 30th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Elections
One of the most portentous comments ever made by a candidate concerning his own campaign prospects was Romney’s off-the-record remark about Obama having an automatic 47% floor of support. The media attack dogs lambasted him for his “out of touch” sentiments. The reality is that Romney hit the nail on the head months before the pollsters would coalesce around that number.
Let’s confront an inconvenient reality: anyone who votes for Obama at this point is either inexorably dependent upon socialism or incorrigibly out of touch with American values. It’s not just the economy. Obama’s egregious disregard for the situation in Libya – one that he created in the first place – and the insidious cover-up of the attack that is continuing to this day, should be sufficient reason to dissuade any judicious voter from supporting him. Yet, despite Romney’s surge and likely win next week, Obama is still garnering exactly ……47% of the vote.
Yesterday’s Pew national poll had Obama at 47%.
Today’s NPR/Democracy Corp. poll (Democrat) has Obama at 47%.
Rasmussen has had Obama at 47% for over a week.
GW/ Battleground is predicting a 52-47% win for Romney.
Even in blue states like Minnesota and Oregon, Obama is now at…. 47%.
Monday, October 29th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Elections, News
Pennsylvania doesn’t have early voting, but if the absentee ballot requests are any indication, Republicans are slated to have a strong showing in the state on Election Day. Republicans now lead Democrats 55-36% in absentee ballot requests. In 2008, Republicans had a mere 2% edge in absentee voting.
Monday, October 29th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Issues
If and when Romney becomes our president-elect, we must temper our euphoria with level-headed vigilance over Romney’s policy agenda. One particular threat we must confront will be Romney’s attempt to disarm House conservatives by deploying Paul Ryan to keep them in line.
Last week, Politico published an article detailing the strategy for Romney’s first few months in office, based on interviews with campaign staff. There is a lot of disturbing information in the article, but this one is the most disconcerting:
One of the biggest worries for a Romney administration, according to the aides, will be keeping conservative lawmakers happy when the most urgent task, dealing with the nation’s fiscal emergency, is going to immediately alienate the loud, powerful wing of House Republicans that is resistant to raising revenues, even though their leaders recognize it is a mathematical necessity.
That would be the most urgent task for a Vice President Paul Ryan, who has credibility with the tea party wing of House Republicans from his stint as a reformist House Budget Committee chairman.
“We’re going to come in and need to be able to do a lot of things that aren’t easy to do,” the official said. “Ryan is going to have to help keep the conservatives at bay and on the field. Some of them are going to expect us to come in and do a lot of things that we aren’t going to be able to do.”
Of course, this comes as no surprise to our readers and activists. When Romney initially tapped Ryan as his running mate, we offered robust applause for his bold move, but articulated our concerns with him as well. While Ryan is an indefatigable and articulate spokesman for limited government and free markets, his voting record doesn’t always reflect that. In fact, he was one of only 6 Republicans to vote for every bailout. It’s not that he’s insincere about his convictions, it’s just that he buys into the Washington deal-making mentality. When the rubber meets the road, he feels that we must cut deals with Democrats, even if they completely abjure the very principles he so passionately defends.
Monday, October 29th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Elections
As we noted last week, there is some confusion in the polling data that is creating a bimodal projection as to who will ultimately win the election. The national polls seem to show Romney with a steady lead, and with Obama failing to break 47% as an incumbent. On the other hand, a number of state polls show the race tied or Obama slightly ahead in the key battleground states.
However, when you examine the party breakdown of the polls, they are really reflecting the same reality. There is almost a linear correlation between the level of Obama’s support and the size of the Democrat advantage in the given sample (duh?). Most of the national polls show a reasonable D/R split (not overwhelmingly optimistic, but somewhere between 2004 and 2008 turnout), while most of the state polls that show Obama ahead have a sample that is more advantageous to Democrats than 2008! Does anyone really believe that the turnout will be worse for us than 2008 when the enthusiasm level is completely reversed from 4 years ago?
The one common theme from all the polls is that Romney is winning Independents and other key swing constituencies that are needed to win. Some polls have him winning them by historic margins. As such, the only way Obama can win is if the D/R split is more favorable for him than 2008. And that is exactly what PPP and others are predicting. However, if he performs only slightly worse than 2008 in terms of D vs. R turnout, there is no way he can win, given the strong support for Romney among Independents.
Take a look at this chart put together by Josh Jordan of National Review, and tell me how Obama can win. (note that some of this is a day or two outdated, but the overall picture remains the same):