Search The Web

Thursday, February 02, 2012

Romney And Republican 'Establishment' Responsible For Destroying GOP Enthusiasm Gap

By Susan Duclos

Back in December USA TODAY/Gallup Swing States Poll showed a 61 to 47 percent enthusiasm gaps favoring Republicans over Democrats.

By the New Hampshire primary, after the Republican establishment attempted to push for the "Romney is inevitable meme," actual Republican turnout for the primaries had dropped 16 percent from the 2008 figures.

When you eliminate independents and Democrats from the 2008 equation, actual registered Republicans made up 61 percent of the roughly 239,000 votes cast in the GOP primary, putting the turnout among Republicans at around 145,790. But last night, actual Republicans only comprised 49 percent of the electorate, according to exits. Even if we round up the final 2012 turnout number to 250,000, which would be slightly higher than current projections, that would only leave actual Republican turnout at 122,500, which would represent a 16 percent drop.


Then Newt Gingrich ran right over Mitt Romney in the South Carolina primary, winning with a 12 percent lead and the Republican establishment started pushing harder and harder against Newt Gingrich and for Mitt Romney.

Pew Research on January 30, 2012, released a report that shows in less than a month, from early January to the end of January, GOP voters rating the field fair or poor rose by 8 percentage points to 52 percent from 44 percent.

Those giving a positive excellent or good ratings to the GOP field dropped from 51 percent to 46 percent.

Then came Florida where Mitt Romney beat Newt Gingrich by 14 percent, but crunching the numbers showed a 14 percent drop from the 2008 figures despite an increase of 25,000 registered Republicans in Florida from four years ago, according to Reuters.

Furthermore:

"They are voting with their feet and simply not showing up," said Christopher Mann, a political science professor at the University of Miami.

Romney won 46 percent of the vote to closest rival Newt Gingrich's 32 percent in Tuesday's primary election.

But Florida Republicans were hardly swept off their feet by the former Massachusetts governor. In exit polls, four in 10 said they were not enthusiastic about their choice of candidates, according to exit polls.


Then we see that all the negative ads seem to be turning voters off as well.

As Southwest Florida heads to the polls, Many say they're frustrated with the barrage of attack ads.

They are direct and at times even back handed.

Romney spent $15 million on radio and TV spots in Florida. Gingrich over $3 million. Voters claim it's distracting them from what's important, hearing the candidates pitch for creating jobs and rejuvenating the economy.


So, lets take a look at where, when and who started with the negative ads.

Iowa, first caucus state, via New York Times:

A pro-Romney “super PAC” that has spent $2.85 million laying waste to Mr. Gingrich in Iowa plans close to $1 million worth of critical ads in Florida and South Carolina — the state Mr. Gingrich identifies as his “firewall,” where he still has a lead.

The concern surfaced in a recent conference call of South Carolina campaign leaders. “It’s something we’re concerned about,” said James Epley, the chairman for Beaufort County. “It’s made us more focused because we’ll have a real fight on our hands.”

The anti-Gingrich attack in Iowa is inescapable: 45 percent of political ads on television during December have been attacks on Mr. Gingrich, according to the Campaign Media Analysis Group.

Many are the work of Restore Our Future, the super PAC supporting Mr. Romney, whose latest ad, “Whoops,” shows Mr. Gingrich admitting he erred in past positions he took on health care and global warming. Earlier attacks by the group hammered him for a consulting deal with Freddie Mac and accused him of “too much baggage.”

Jason Geary, the Gingrich campaign chairman in Woodbury County, said, “I’m on the phone trying to gain support” daily for Mr. Gingrich. He said people were telling him they wanted the candidate to fight fire with fire. “They wish for it,” he added.

The closest Mr. Gingrich has come to responding in kind on the airwaves has been an ad in which he referred to opponents in the mildest of terms, without naming anyone. “Others seem to be more focused on attacks rather than moving the country forward,” he said.

A super PAC that supports Mr. Gingrich, Winning Our Future, has an ad that takes a shot at Mr. Romney as the choice of the “liberal Republican establishment,” but it does not name him and mostly praises Mr. Gingrich as “a principled conservative.”

The group, run by former Gingrich aides, seems constrained by his vow to tell supporters not to contribute to any group that runs attack ads on his behalf.


That same article opines on how senior aides and grass-roots Gingrich supporters insisted that Gingrich had to fight fire with fire.

By the time the candidates hit South Carolina when Gingrich had started to punch back, Gingrich was still outspent by Romney and pro-Romney SuperPACS by 2 to 1, the majority of which were negative ads, but, Romney was trying to rewrite history by stating "I needed to make sure that instead of being outgunned in terms of attacks, that I responded aggressively — and hopefully that will have served me well here", then he added "You know, in South Carolina we were vastly outspent with negative ads attacking me and we stood back and spoke about President Obama and suffered the consequence of that."

But the truth is that Romney outspent Gingrich about 2-1 in South Carolina, and over 4-1 in here the Sunshine State. Romney has also deployed an army of surrogates to bombard Gingrich with negative soundbites and statements. And Gingrich unilaterally withheld from running negative ads in Iowa, and saw his poll numbers collapse in the state amid millions of dollars in attacks from a pro-Romney Super PAC.

One paragraph from LA Times shows a contrast that pro-Romney forces cannot spin.

Last month, Republican strategists pointed to small increases in turnout for the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary and the big jump in South Carolina as evidence that their voters were getting fired up about the campaign to come. Now, the big drop in Florida turnout has caused some to suggest that Romney has failed to excite voters.


Emphasis mine

(Note- The increase in Iowa was due to the participation of Independents and Democrats in the GOP caucus)

What was the difference between South Carolina and Florida? That is right, Gingrich won South Carolina and Romney won Florida.

Romney's over abundance of negativity and the Republican establishments interference because they want to choose who will be the Republican nominee instead of allowing voters to decide for themselves, has destroyed whatever enthusiasm Republicans had for the 2012 elections.

"I spent much of my academic career telling reporters, 'Relax, this is not the most negative campaign ever," said Ken Goldstein, president of the Campaign Media Analysis Group, in an interview with CNN. "Well, this IS the most negative campaign ever." (Source)

The Bottom Line

Republican turnout was down in the states which Romney won and Republican turnout was up in the state Gingrich won.

Romney does not excite conservatives. While many will coalesce behind him if he wins enough delegates to become the Republican nominee, there is another segment that think he is no better than Obama and will not bother voting at all, handing Obama a win for reelection.

*Golf Clap* to the Republican establishment and Mitt Romney for turning what should have been an easy win into a possible defeat.

.

Komen Won't Bow To Political Pressure Over Elimination Of Grants To Planned Parenthood

By Susan Duclos

Background via NYT:

When the nation’s largest breast cancer advocacy organization considered in October cutting off most of its financial support to the nation’s largest abortion provider, the breast cancer group was hoping for a quiet end to an increasingly controversial partnership.

Instead, the organization, the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation, is now engulfed in a controversy that threatens to undermine one of the most successful advocacy campaigns. The foundation’s decision to eliminate most of its grants to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screening caused a cascade of criticism from prominent women’s groups, politicians and public health advocates and a similarly strong outpouring of support from conservative women and religious groups that oppose abortion.

Now, leaders of both the Komen foundation and Planned Parenthood are accusing each other of bad faith and actions that undermine women. And two organizations dedicated to detecting and curing breast cancer have found themselves on opposite sides of the nation’s divisive debate over abortion.

Then Nancy Brinker, the charity’s founder and chief executive officer posted a video on YouTube, explaining the decision. (Video and description below)

Susan G. Komen has spent 30 years providing real help to low-income, uninsured and underinsured women, and recent changes to Komen's granting policies only reinforce our commitment. Recent reports about those policies aren't getting it right. See the real story from SGK Founder and CEO Nancy G. Brinker in this "Straight Talk" video.



More from The Politico:

“We will never bow down to political pressure,” Brinker said. “The scurrilous accusations being hurled at this organization are profoundly hurtful to so many of us who put our heart, soul and lives into this organization. But more importantly, they are a dangerous distraction from the work that still remains to be done in ridding the world of breast cancer.”


JWF did a little bit of browsing through Planned Parenthood's website:

A quick visit to their website shows quick links to topics such as Abortion, Birth Control, Morning After Pill and Sexually Transmitted Diseases. The only mention in regards to breast cancer is their front page screed about Komen pulling their funding. So I decided to do a deep dive. Surely there is something there since they are screaming so loudly about how many mammograms they do. Under the general health tab I found this.

General health care services vary by location. They may include

  • anemia testing
  • cholesterol screening
  • diabetes screening
  • physical exams, including for employment and sports
  • flu vaccines
  • help with quitting smoking
  • high blood pressure screening
  • tetanus vaccines
  • thyroid screening

Finally, under the Women’s Health tab, I found a reference to breast cancer along with this information.

Planned Parenthood doctors and nurses teach patients about breast care, connect patients to resources to help them get vital biopsies, ultrasounds, and mammograms, and follow up to make sure patients are cared for with the attention they need and deserve.

Reading that I would come to the conclusion that Planned Parenthood doesn’t actually do the screenings but rather refer you to someone who will. In other words, breast cancer screenings were never high on their list of things to do.



This knee jerk reaction on the part of liberals over Planned Parenthood after a while becomes like the little boy who cried wolf.

Worth noting, then simply moving right along.....

[Update] Those darn mischievous pro-abortion activists hacked into the Komen for the Cure website to change headline the slogan "Help us run over poor women on our way to the bank."

Isn't hacking a crime? Why yes, it is.

.

Donald Trump Tweets About 'Major Announcement' : UPDATE- Endorses Romney

By Susan Duclos

[Update] Trump just endorsed Romney. (Headline changed to reflect the final outcome)

[Update] ABC News The Note:

Why would Romney want Trump’s nod when it could be more likely to turn voters off than turn them on to Romney? A Fox News poll last month found that Americans were nearly three times as likely to say they’d be less apt rather than more apt to vote for a candidate Trump endorsed, 27 percent to 10 percent. Two-thirds said it would make no difference.


Last night then against this morning Donald Trump, via his Twitter pages, said he would be arriving in Nevada at 11:30pm and had a major announcement regarding the presidential race and all media were welcome.

I will be making a major announcement tomorrow (Thursday, February 2) at 12:30 pm at Trump International Hotel & Tower, Las Vegas, Nevada. I will be arriving this evening at approximately 11:30 pm. The announcement will pertain to the Presidential race. All media welcome.


He reiterated that this morning.

According to KLAS-TV8 News Now, The Politico and The Hill, sources are saying that Trump's major announcement will be his endorsement for a GOP candidate and that candidate will be Newt Gingrich.

CNN on the other hand comes out with a breaking news announcement claiming that Trump is endorsing Romney according to their sources.

Donald Trump will endorse Mitt Romney for president, sources with knowledge of the endorsement tell CNN.


The Hill piece provides a little more background on Trump and Gingrich, from their meeting back in December as well as Gingrich publicly defending Gingrich over criticisms from other GOP candidates.

"This is a country that elected a peanut farmer to the presidency. This is a country that elected an actor who made two movies with a chimpanzee to the presidency," Gingrich said. "Donald Trump is a great showman; he's also a great businessman. I think one of the differences between my party and the other party is we actually go to people who know how to create jobs. We need to be open to new ways of doing things."


Nevada's GOP caucuses will be held on Saturday, February 14, 2012. Polling in Nevada shows Mitt Romney with a 20 point lead just two days before caucus goers cast their votes.

Stay tuned, will update with which candidate Trump endorses after he makes his announcement at 12:30pm this afternoon.

Wednesday, February 01, 2012

Newt Gingrich And Florida Residents Challenging Florida's Winner-Take-All Rule

By Susan Duclos

Keep in mind when reading the post below that Gingrich won 34 out of 67 counties in Florida with Romney winning 33 counties.

Newt Gingrich to challenge the winner-take-all rule Florida adopted this year on the grounds that it is against the RNC's own rules which state that no state can be a winner-take-all state prior to April 1, 2012.

Fox News has learned exclusively that on Thursday, a Florida Gingrich campaign official will begin the process of trying to have the RNC rules enforced so that the Sunshine State delegates are distributed based on the percentage of the vote each candidate got.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus warned Florida Republican Party Chairman Lenny Curry of the violation in a December letter quoting the rule, "...'winner-take-all' states cannot hold a primary or caucus before April 1, 2012."


RNC Memo HERE

Gingrich won 34 out of 67 counties in Florida and Mitt Romney won 33 counties. A proportional allocation of delegates which all states conducting primaries before April are supposed to use, would give Romney less delegates to add to his totals.

AllahPundit over at Hot Air, crunches the numbers:

Newt’s goal here, of course, is to signal to his supporters that he’s in the race for the long haul by scrapping for every available delegate. If Florida used the simplest possible proportional rules instead of “winner take all,” Romney would win 23 delegates from his 46 percent last night and Newt would win 16 — reducing a 50-delegate margin to just seven in one fell swoop. Problem is, the RNC’s already punished Florida once for moving its primary up by taking half its delegates away; if they forced them to go proportional on top of that, it would be an additional sanction. So, to compromise, they could in theory restore all of Florida’s delegates and then award those proportionally. That would mean, obviously, 46 for Mitt and 32 for Newt for a margin of 14. Team Mitt will battle to preserve the current “winner take all” scenario, but as we get closer to the convention, Florida pols will inevitably start demanding that all of the state’s delegates be seated notwithstanding its violation of RNC rules. (The same thing happened in the 2008 Democratic primary between Obama and Hillary, you may remember. Eventually the full Florida delegation was reinstated when the results of the primary became immaterial to Obama’s overall victory.) It’d be hard for the RNC under any circumstances to ignore claims that it’s disenfranchising swing-state Floridians by penalizing the state, but the convention this year is in … Tampa. Good luck telling half the Florida delegation to go home when they already are home. Which means if Mitt and Newt end up battling to the bitter end, the proportional scenario may be the compromise solution.

This is not the first discussion on this issue as Tampa Bay Tribune explained on January 26, 2012, and by ABC News on the 28th.

That's not guaranteed, however. All it takes is a registered Florida Republican to file a protest with the RNC, and the party's contest committee would have to consider the issue when it meets in August just before the convention.

"August is going to be a very tense month for those of us on the committee on contests. We could be the group that everybody loves or everybody hates," said Fredi Simpson, an RNC member from Washington state who sits on that committee and also helped write the rules.

Like other RNC members, Simpson thinks the rules clearly bar Florida from being winner-take-all. At an RNC meeting in August, members of the Presidential Nominating and Selection Committee passed a resolution calling for the RNC to enforce its rules for proportional delegates on states like Florida that set primaries earlier than April.

"Florida ought to be proportional, and it is up to the RNC legal office to figure out how they do that. That was absolutely the intention when we wrote that rule," said Pete Ricketts, an RNC member from Nebraska who served on the RNC committee appointed in 2008 to draw up delegate selection rules for 2012.



From the Gingrich memo:

Any registered Republican voter within the State of Florida is authorized to challenge the RNC's application (or lack of application) of Revised Rile 15(b)(2)with the RNC's Contest Committee and ultimately on the floor of the Republican Convention. Such a challenge would call upon the RNC to apply this rule as to the allocation of delegates for each and every state that conducts its binding primary or caucus prior to April 1, 2012. It is my understanding that such challenges have already been filed with the RNC with respect to the State of Florida.

It is important to note that RNC Rules supersede any state party rules or state statutes with respect to Republican Party delegate allocation. The rules as to the allocation and recording of delegates at the convention are completely and solely within the authority of the RNC.


The battle for Florida may be over but the battle for the Florida delegates may have just begun.

.

Video- Mitt Romney: 'I'm Not Concerned About The Very Poor'

By Susan Duclos

In context Romney says on CNN, "I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. “If it needs repair, I’ll fix it. I’m not concerned about the very rich, they’re doing just fine. I’m concerned about the very heart of the America, the 90 percent, 95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling.”

Video below:



Safety nets, entitlements, welfare, food stamps, medicaid... that is Obama's answer, it should never be a GOP presidential candidate's answer.

More:

Host Soledad O’Brien pointed out that the very poor are probably struggling too.

“The challenge right now — we will hear from the Democrat party the plight of the poor,” Romney responded, after repeating that he would fix any holes in the safety net. “And there’s no question it’s not good being poor and we have a safety net to help those that are very poor . . . My focus is on middle income Americans ... we have a very ample safety net and we can talk about whether it needs to be strengthened or whether there are holes in it. but we have food stamps, we have Medicaid, we have housing vouchers, we have programs to help the poor.”

The goal should be getting everyone to the point where they don't need a "safety net", where they are working, earning enough to support their families.

If the GOP establishment gets their way, conservatives will have yet another Food Stamp presidential candidate by the name of Mitt Romney.

Jobs for everyone, especially the very poor should be the focus.

.

Videos- Florida Primary 2012, Victory and Concession Speeches

By Susan Duclos

Newt Gingrich concession speech:



Ron Paul Concession speech:




Rick Santorum concession speech:



Mitt Romney victory speech:



(Note- Email subscribers, click link to page to see video, some emails will not show the video.)

WAKE UP AMERICA DELIVERED TO YOUR MAILBOX

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Top Political Discussions