Various Thoughts

A)      Reflections on Europe…Personal

Your very tired author is somewhere over South Dakota, having started his day at the idyllic Ibis Hotel at Heathrow Airport.  Six weeks after beginning our trip in New York, crossing the Atlantic with my Mother and Uncle, driving around the magnificent Dordogne region of France as well as much of lovely Scotland, a few sleep-deprived observations.

Our European brethren do many things well.  Beyond the obvious accolades due EVERY FRENCH CHEF/BAKER, they’ve made some smart choices. 

Publicly owned museums in Great Britain are free.  While almost everything else in Europe is pretty pricey for us Dollar-denominated Yanks, some of the finest galleries, collections and looted treasures from around the globe can be observed without any cost.  Just yesterday, we saw the remnants of King Mausolus’ tomb (one of the 7 ancient wonders), the Rosetta Stone, the Portland Vase and the much-debated-over Elgin Marbles “purchased” in Athens and removed from the Parthenon to the British Museum.   Guess what?  So did thousands and thousands of others including scads of young people.   Such choices by the UK can only lead to a better-informed, more cultured and open-minded society.

Ironically, the only comparable American example of such an approach is the extraordinary Smithsonian Institution…a private entity founded and endowed by a Scotsman who had never been to America but felt compelled to help the new nation grow and develop.

Did I mention driving?  Well, if you choose to enjoy the convenience and “ease” of operating a car…brings lots of cash.  Gasoline runs about $10 per gallon.  France charges 10 Euro cents per kilometer for use of its superhighways ($.21 per mile).  Parking in the central cities makes New York look like a bargain.  While I would be less than frank if I didn’t fess up to being annoyed by the expense, a system which eliminates the subsidy usually afforded cars and, rather, taxes drivers to help fund public transit is more logical and sustainable than our upside-down modus operandi.

I am not one of those “everything European is better” advocates, far from it.  Yet, we could and should think about some of their models and make more of them our own.

B)      Reflections on Europe…Political

So, everyone looks pretty pissed.  UK voters told Cameron not to get too comfortable at 10 Downing.  France replaced it’s charismatic, supermodel-marrying President with the stylistic equivalent of a hardware store manager.  Greece…well… more than just the Acropolis, Delphi and Olympia are in ruins.

What do we take from these results as harbingers of November 2012?  Two pretty divergent trends come to mind.   First, being an incumbent and “responsible” for the current condition is not a good thing.  While Sarkozy came pretty close to winning at the end, the clear message was to send him packing rather than adoration for Hollande.  The Tory/Lib Dem coalition government in Britain really got their clocks cleaned in local elections.  Nazi sympathizers garnered 7% of the vote in Greece and, as of this writing, no government is foreseeable.   If you’re an Obamaphile, the message is a bit chilling.

On the other hand, being on the right-wing looks equally precarious.  As stated, Labour rebounded strongly and exorcized the ghost of Gordon Brown.  The French Socialists unseated a right-of-center president for the first time since 1981.  Austerity is out and stimulus is in.  The magic word in both countries seemed to be “growth”…a synonym for higher marginal tax rates to fund public projects and employ the many who’ve been left behind.  Sounds a bit like the argument Democrats are making on our side of The Pond.

Does the European present mean prologue in the US?  Perhaps.  Any number of arguments can be made both ways.  The good news for Obama and our side…Romney is such a festering candidate that he makes Hollande look like a rock star…and Hollande barely squeaked by.  Plus, Obama is way taller than Sarkozy!

C)      A&Q

The most recent candidate to receive electoral votes for President in 3 consecutive elections was Ronald Reagan.  In addition to his overwhelming victories in ’80 and ’84, he received one vote in ’76 from a Washington State elector who had been pledged to Ford.   Accomplishing this feat is fairly rare.  In the era of political parties (aka post Monroe), only 4 other people can make this claim…JQ Adams, Jackson, Cleveland and, of course, 4 timer FDR.

Today’s question…most successful presidential candidates come from large, electorally-relevant states.  But not always.  Which 20^th Century president was elected from a state with the fewest electoral votes?  (hint:  Coolidge, while born and buried in Vermont, was a Massachusetts politician…so don’t guess him)

Happy 72nd Mom!

(Author’s note:  This blog is sent from Cuzance, France in the Dordogne River Valley.  Earlier today, saw 24,600 year old cave painting from the Cro-Magnon era.  Stunning.  Moving.  Putting things into their proper perspective.  I did apologize for interrupting the meeting of the Republican Central Committee going on in the cave.)

1)       Happy 72^nd Mom!

Sydney May, mother of your author, achieves her 72^nd birthday today.  Beyond being a thoughtful son, what other rationale would there be for mentioning same in today’s blog?

Not only has it been 72 years since my mother was born, it’s been that long since the GOP nominated a “fresh face.”  Yeah, Wendell Willkie’s unlikely nomination in 1940 is the most recent time that the GOP nominated someone they hadn’t considered previously.  While the Eisenhower situation is a bit of an aberration, let’s look at the facts.

Here is a list of GOP nominees who had previously sought the nomination:  McCain, Dole, GHW Bush, Reagan, Nixon in ’68, Goldwater, Dewey.  The slobbering, drooling idiot from Crawford was a president’s son.  Ford was president.  Nixon in ’60 was vice president. 

For the record, during the same period, we’ve nominated 7 first-time candidates/fresh faces:  Stevenson, Kennedy, Carter, Dukakis, Clinton, Kerry, Obama.

So, my mother was a three months old the last time the Grand Old Party took a chance on a Grand New Candidate.  Evidently, Rick Santorum is aware of this.

Now, now…stop laughing!  I know the concept of Santorum being aware of anything is oxymoronic but here’s his, dare I say it, thinking.  Polling is clearly showing B. Hussein Obama as 2012’s likely winner.  Worse for Little Ricky, he’s not only polling well behind the President, but can’t even keep pace with Seamus’ driver.

Pressure continued to mount that prolonging his candidacy would damage the chances of the beloved Willard.  So, hoping that the past truly is prologue, Santorum exited the race.

In 2016 we’ll have a new candidate (named Andrew Cuomo in case you’re interested) and the GOP will not be re-nominating either Romney or his magic underwear as he’ll have achieved John Kerry status.  

Santorum in Sixteen…it just sounds right…especially if you’re a Democrat!

2)      “Willard and the Wing Nuts”

Coming soon to a theater near you, “Willard and the Wing Nuts” will be performing their melodious stylings.  “Krush the Kenyan”, “We’ll Take It All”, “Repeal the 14^th”, “Darwin’s Deception”, “Taxes as Flat as the Earth”, “Retire at 95” and the true mob pleaser “Yeah He’s a Mormon But at Least He’s White” will be heard throughout the next 7 months.  For those who can’t attend a performance in person, these recordings are available on 8 track and wax cylinders.

3)      Obama has clear lead

Data continues to amass which indicates that the public is adequately pleased with Obama’s performance to afford him another term.  National polls indicate leads from 2 up to 10 percent.  More importantly, states like Virginia, Florida and even North Carolina currently favor the President.  There isn’t a practical scenario where Romney wins without all three of these states.  There does appear to have been some recent slippage with the disappointing jobs report, the GSA scandal and the recent surrender of the religious right to the moneyed right.

A recent New York Times article focused upon the efforts of Democrats in general, along with the Obama campaign specifically, at securing the 11 electoral votes of the 48^th state…Arizona.  Loyal readers of LiberalMoose will recall our discussion of same and its potential relevance.  As David Plouff pointed out in the Times’ piece, Arizona is going to become a regularly winnable state for the Dems…it’s just not clear if the transition can be completed by this cycle.   The economic turmoil still visiting the state due to the housing bubble may be a bit too much to overcome this time around.  But it is in play.

Nonetheless, as of right now, November appears promising.  Additionally, remember that many of the Romney votes AREN’T Romney votes…they’re just anti-Obama.  Many will decide that as much as they dislike Obama that a vote for Romney is simply undoable.  Sure, there will be supporters of the President who are impressed with Willard but that number surely seems likely to be smaller than those who find Mittens to be revolting.  Just ask a clear majority of the GOP primary electorate.

4)       A&Q

Bravo to Alex Evans for his answer that James Monroe is the only President other than Washington to win every state in an election.  The “Era of Good Feelings” in 1820 allowed Monroe to run for re-election WITHOUT AN OPPONENT!  After his victory, one elector from New Hampshire cast his vote for then-Secretary of State John Quincy Adams in order to preserve Washington’s status as the only unanimously elected President.

Speaking of the Electoral College, name the most recent President to receive electoral votes for President in at least 3 consecutive elections?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“According to this Crystal Ball I have here…”

 

A)     Which is more likely?

Polling is offering some clear messages regarding what Santorum insists “is the most important election in American history!”  Notwithstanding that Lincoln’s election in 1860 precipitated the “War of Northern Aggression” as I’ve heard it called in some of the more in-bred parts of our land, let’s allow that the choice between Obama and a Irish Setter-abusing robot is pretty significant.

First, although the public is pretty unhappy with their lot and even the rate of progress the Administration has achieved, Obama is ahead.  Pew has the President leading by 12%, Suffolk by 10% while McClatchy only 2%.  The data reveals both passionate admiration and revulsion toward Obama.  His overall approval has inched up as evidence mounts that the economy is rebounding.  Consumer confidence grows as the stock market persists in its seemingly inexorable climb.

Second, the electorate is not impressed with Willard and his tribe.  GOP favorability has literally collapsed making the “specter” of another Pelosi Speakership a very real possibility.  Romney has emerged a “half Hercules” as he’s slayed 6 of his labors(Michelle, Newt, Herman, Ron and Rick2).  Seriously…name a less impressive or qualified field in memory.  Stupefying! 

Looking forward…which is more likely?   The economy collapsing (again) AND Mittens becoming an effective candidate or continued economic progress along with an increasing clarity that Obama is leagues more suited to lead the nation than a wind-up, conviction-less, wedding cake-adorning plastic bride groom?   In my many discussions of the election with Republicans I have yet to meet even one voter who has expressed any form of excitement about Mittens.  Not one. 

Worse for Willard, at least a dozen GOP voters have told me they will not vote for a “cult member.” 

A large fraction of the “Romney vote” is nothing more than a default anti-Obama sentiment.  While the intensity of the antipathy is a serious problem for the White House, some of those current opponents are ultimately going to take a long, hard look at Willard and collectively take a pass…especially after Obama eviscerates him in the debates.  If a proponent of the Dark Ages can take Romney into extra innings, Obama may toss a complete game, shut out. 

Late March prediction…even with the sour national mood, the qualitative differential between Obama and Romney along with continuing good economic news will take what should be a close election and instead produce a comfortable win…6% margin in popular vote coupled with around 320 EVs.  And I may be hedging on the low side.

B)      The Quest for 51 (or Biden plus 50)

69.6969696969% (sorry Rick but that is the correct number) of the Senate seats up this year are held by Dems.  Coupled with the reality that we currently only hold 53 (and that includes the Sen. Quisling of Connecticut), this makes 2012 a daunting challenge for retaining “control.”  The term control has lost much meaning given the statesmanship of the charming Mr. McConnell and his “fillibusterphiles.” Such a wonderful notion that 41 senators can stop virtually anything!

More Andean in silhouette than Appalachian, our challenges range from the unwinnable in North Dakota to the really tough in Nebraska to the pretty troubling in Missouri to the toss ups of New Mexico, Montana and Virginia, etc.

Better news has Field & Stream centerfold Elizabeth Warren with a good shot at Cosmo centerfold Scott Brown’s temporary hold of John and Edward Kennedy’s seat.  Shelley Berkeley is no worse than an even money bet against John Ensign’s replacement in Nevada. 

Which brings us to Maine.  Olympia Snowe had had enough.  Providing further evidence that 2012’s GOP is as modern as an alchemist’s astrolabe, Senator Snowe stepped aside, foregoing an easy re-election and handing her seat to Independent Angus King.  Yes, another Independent from New England.  While he has yet to clarify which party he’d caucus with, King is a bright progressive who’s endorsed Obama’s re-election.   Looks like we might have found a new playmate for Bernie Sanders.

For now, let’s go with…Dems at 52 seats including Sanders and King.

C)       A&Q

If our last question was intended to stump the very learned readership of LiberalMoose…we succeeded.  No guesses were offered although your author suspects other comments might have been muttered.

Here’s how we get to the correct answer:

1)       There have been 38 elected Presidents and 45 elected Vice Presidents.  Cleveland was the 22^nd and 24^th President but is just one person.  Tyler, Fillmore, A. Johnson, Arthur and Ford were never elected nor were VPs Rockefeller and Ford.  Therefore, the total is 83.

2)      Six Presidents served as Secretary of State (Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, JQ Adams, Van Buren and Buchanan).  83 times 6 equals 498.

3)      New York abstained during the consideration of the Declaration of Independence.  Accordingly, we add the 12 colonies to 498 bringing us to 510.

4)      Andrew Johnson was the 17^th President.  510 divided by 17 is 30.

5)      26 states filed litigation against Obamacare.  30 minus 26 is 4.

6)      Delaware has had more than the minimum of 3 electoral votes only once, during the 1810’s when it had 4 votes.

7)      And now the tough part for the Santorum voters out there, 4 divided by 4 is….1.

Whew.  If you’re still with me, here’s a more traditional offering.  Name the only President other than Washington to win every state?

 

 

 

 

The Great Unraveling Part 1

Does anyone remember a rational, responsible Republican Party?  Successful… not “robber Barons”, educated…not pimps for ignorance, aware of our history and traditions, forward-thinking, focused on today while cognizant of our aspirations.  The party of Eisenhower, Ford, GHW Bush, Dirksen and Baker.  Conservative for their time yet adherents to standards of truth, logic and science. 

While there are countless places we can go with the above, how about these recent hatchlings:

A)     Santorum Can’t Even Spell “T & A”

I’m starting to think Santorum just SEEMS really stupid but may have more going on.  He knows that simply denying people contraceptives only deals with the end result of the “crisis”.  One must get at the root cause…the basic, debasing and often web-based pestilence of pornography.  Yeah, that’s it.  If we deny people the right to view that which titillates and arouses, their interest in sex itself will go away…right?  Just like allowing states to ban condoms, IUDs and the “Pill” will make sex so scary and threatening that people will be forced to stop.   You know, like teenagers do all the time when “protection” isn’t around.

While “Pennsylvania’s Prince of Limited Government” continues his quest to save America from Americans, one has to ask about the political impact of his suggestion.  Just this week, polling showed Obama carrying women by 17% while losing men by 2%.  This gender gap has been around for many cycles but now is truly gaping.  Democrats as “mommy” and the GOP as “daddy” as Chris Matthews observed years ago.

So, if guys are your base and no one would question which gender views porn more frequently, what is Santorum’s strategory” (sorry, just had to)?  Seems awfully counter-intuitive to deny your voters that which they seek. 

Then it struck me…it’s what all we lefties accurately call Fox News… “The Angry White Guy Channel.”  In a classic Rovian move, what better way to motivate your base and perhaps even grow its numbers than to, you guessed it, make more angry white men?   Frustrated and forlorned,  what could be a better “vote nursery” than the regressive/innovative approach advocated by Little Ricky?  Brilliant!

B)      “Three Cheers for W!”

While his aide’s Etch-A-Sketch comments won the day for dominating the political news, Willard Mittens made some news directly.  Rather inexplicably, he’s decided to align with “The Decider” himself, the rarely-mentioned George W. Bush.  During a primary stop in Maryland, Mittens credited Bush for saving the country from another depression.   Really?  Didn’t the economy collapse during his term?  Didn’t Bush’s whole laissez-faire approach to regulation get revealed for the train wreck it is?

When not reinforcing Romney’s image as a flip-flopper who will say anything and EVERYTHING on every issue, his aides seem to have advised that 2012 voters yearn for a return to glory days of W.  Wow.  And we thought just Santorum/Bachmann/Perry/Cain were the low end of the intellectual spectrum of this year’s GOP crop.

Let’s highlight just some of the more notable contrasts of how Obama has done compared with what he inherited:

1)      Nearly 3% GDP growth versus a 6.3% contraction

2)      More than 200K new net jobs per month versus a loss of more than 700K

3)      A stock market which, depending on how you measure it, has doubled in a little more than 3 years.  Bush is the ONLY 8 year president to see the market decline during his tenure

4)      A stable dollar versus a collapsing currency

5)      Increasing public confidence versus a militia hoarding pork & beans in bomb shelters

Evidently Romney knows the economy is improving, so rather than saying things suck and the Muslim is to blame, he is now desperately trying to prevent Obama from taking his due.  Good luck there with that one Willard.  Hey, why not turn your campaign upside down, shake it from side to side and start with a new, blank screen?   At this point, you’ve got nothing to lose.

C)      A&Q

Many respondents intelligently suggested a general to answer our last question “name the only President never to have cast a vote, not even for himself?”  DDE and USG guesses abounded.  Once again, full credit is due Brian Dawson for immediately knowing that hapless Zachary Taylor, vanquisher of Santa Anna and hero of Buena Vista, “Old Rough & Ready” was never ready nor inclined to cast a ballot.

Tiring of Mr. Dawson’s string of successes, the Executive Council of the Central Committee of the Grand Exalted Commandant of LiberalMoose have decided on a different kind of question for today.  Anticipating moans and disdain, here goes:

1)      Add the total number of men elected president to those elected as vice president.

2)      Multiply that sum by the number of Presidents who also served as Secretary of State

3)      Take that product and add to it the number of states which voted in favor of the Declaration of Independence

4)      Divide that sum by Andrew Johnson’s presidential sequence number

5)      Subtract from that result the number of states which filed litigation against “Obamacare”

6)      Divide that total by the number of electoral votes Delaware had from 1810 to 1820 and you get the final correct answer of_______?

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Give Me That Old Time Religion”

A)     Dining last night with two of my favorite people, one a “recovering Mormon” as he describes it, my friend said “we Mormons are raised to tell the truth.  Isn’t it obvious that Romney is uncomfortable lying all the time?”  Bingo.  Nailed it.

Mittens tried to run to the left of Ted Kennedy in ’94.  He supported Roe v. Wade before calling for its demise.  He created the “individual mandate” on health insurance before attacking it as a disaster for the country.  Last fall, he said he would not get involved in Ohio’s anti-Union “Issue 2”.  He then said he was fully supportive of it.  These occurred within 3 hours of each other.  Perhaps the 61% to 39% defeat of Issue 2 suggests his morning position was preferable to the one he held that afternoon?   Well, it’s only Ohio.  Since he’ll be the first Mormon President he can also be the only Republican to win without Ohio…why not?

The Romney story is an endless stream of flip flops, evasions and lies…poorly delivered.  He really is a turd of a candidate…and it’s showing.  His only “consistency” has been his inability to connect with either the ultra-right base of the GOP or any sizable chunk of Indy’s nationally.  The just don’t like him. www.whichmitt.com

Which brings us back to my friend’s observation.  Acknowledging my lack of knowledge of the Mormon faith, it does seem pretty dogmatic.  No one questions Willard’s fealty to same.  Hence the mix…a zealous Mormon violating his church’s fundamental teaching of truthfulness in an in-artful, fumbling, unpopular quest for power. 

And we just ain’t buying it.

B)      Sunni or Shiite?

In the sovereign states of Alabama and Mississippi, 86% and 88% of the GOP primary electorate respectively said either “yes” or “not sure” to the following question:  “Is Obama a Muslim?”  Yep, a higher percentage of voters believe Obama to be a Muslim than who’ve:

1)      Graduated high school (62%)

2)      Avoided obesity (65%…meaning 35% are obese…Mississippi is the fattest state)

3)      Secured health insurance (80%)

4)      Maintained full employment (84%)

Coincidences?  Maybe…but probably not.  Mississippi also has the lowest per capita income in the country.  These folks decry evolution, aren’t sure how to feed their families but they’re “certain” about Obama!

After St. Ignatius of Pennsylvania won both states last week…with Mormon Mittens coming in 3^rd…it was fun watching various Romney apologists argue the relevance of Willard losing the Deep South.  “Romney will obviously win Alabama and Mississippi against Obama so what difference does it make?” they proclaimed.   Well, yes and no.

True, Alabama and Mississippi constitute a certain 15 electoral votes for Romney.  But that’s not the point.  The kind of voters who routed Romney in these states also exist in, say, Virginia, Florida, Ohio, Arizona, Iowa, Colorado, Missouri, North Carolina and elsewhere.  They aren’t dominant in these swing states as they are in Dixie (hence the term “swing states”) but they’re still plentiful.  While the vast majority will support anyone over Barack Hussein, a very small number of these folks not voting for the Mormon would hand these electoral treasures to Obama.  And that’s the whole ballgame.

C)      Dominion Dominance?

In a state where his parents’ marriage was illegal when he was born, the only Confederate state Ford carried over Carter, Obama won the Dominion of Virginia and its tidy 13 EVs by 6.3%.  Latest from Quinnipiac polling has Obama with a 50% to 42% lead over Mittens and a 49% to 40% preference versus  the Sweater Vest. 

Interestingly, the same poll has former governor Democrat Tim Kaine leading former GOP Senator George Allen 47% to 44%.  So, precisely the same pool of voters have concluded:  a) they’ll readily take Obama over the GOP presidential slobs and b) not as sure regarding their next senator.  Yes, this means a relevant slice of Virginia’s electorate are voting Obama and Allen.  Great news for the White House.  More work to do for Tim Kaine.

D)     A&Q

William Henry Harrison was a former Minister to Colombia and, when elected, held the stepping stone office of Clerk of the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County, Ohio.  Brian Dawson and Bob McBarton may have strained phalangeal tendons responding as they immediately got that one right.

Today’s question:  Being an election year, we’re doing a whole lot of thinking about voting….perhaps ad nauseum.  Which president was so disinterested in voting, that he NEVER cast a ballot in his life, not even for himself?

 

 

 

 

Let’s Go to “College”

A)      Who is Gary Johnson (and why would anyone care)?

Should the election tighten, Gary Johnson has the potential of being Obama’s best friend and as politically relevant as TR in 1912 or Nader in 2000.  Huh?  Has the LiberalMoose gone “off the reservation?”

Gary Johnson was the Republican Governor of New Mexico from 1994 to 2002.  He had an unnoticed run for the GOP nod this year.  Angry with his lack of coverage and even respect, he abandoned his GOP run and has opted to become the Libertarian candidate. 

He will not receive even 3% of the national vote.  However, he may throw as many as 4 states amounting to 31 electoral votes into Obama’s column.  Easily enough to make the difference in November.  A total greater than either Virginia and North Carolina combined or Florida by itself.

Current polling has him taking 20% of the vote in New Mexico…not surprising as he was an 8 year governor.  Nearly all of that support comes from voters who would likely prefer any GOP candidate over Obama.  With him in the race, very purple New Mexico becomes Rhode Island-like deep blue. New Mexico’s  5 electoral votes for Obama without lifting a finger (or spending much time/capital).  Thank you Gary!

While 20% showings will not occur elsewhere, it is easy to see Johnson attracting 2% to 4% in Arizona, Nevada and Colorado…nearby states with similar political philosophies.  He could be a nice place to land for social conservatives who, while not attracted to libertarianism, simply want a conservative other than Willard Mittens to vote for.  Arizona has 11, Colorado  9 and Nevada 6 electoral votes. 

Again, thank you Gary!  We’ll see.

B)      Happy Hundredth Birthday Arizona

Valentine’s Day 2012 saw the centennial celebration of Arizona’s admission to the Union.  The last of the 48 contiguous states to join, it certainly will not be last in the hearts of Obama and whichever sleazoid the Republicans finally choose.  Why?  Please see previous paragraph…11 electoral votes.  Not sure if the President sent a full dozen roses to the state on Valentine’s day or just 11?  Probably the traditional offering so as to not look too obvious.

Arizona is a changing place.  Large increases in Hispanic population have begun to shift the balance of power away from the mineral extracting and retirement groups which have dominated here for decades.  Certainly a more red state than blue (one would never say pink), it nonetheless voted for Bill Clinton over Bob Dole in 1996.  Not coincidentally, the only other state Clinton won in ’96 that had eluded him in ’92 was…Florida.  Gee, what do these states have in common?  If you’re guessing growing Hispanic populations and lots of retirees…you’re a winner!   They also have among the worst housing markets in the nation.   Could help…could hurt.

Dole had opposed Medicare and was proud of it.  All the current GOP knuckle-draggers support the Paul Ryan budget which eviscerates the whole concept of Medicare.  Said budget allowed the Dems to pick up Dole’s late running mate Jack Kemp’s old House seat in Buffalo last year during a special…an area that had been represented by a Republican all but eight years since the Civil War!

Many believe that had McCain not been the nominee in 2008, Arizona would have joined Nevada, Colorado and New Mexico in supporting Obama.  Even with crotchety Uncle John leading the ticket, Obama received 45% of the vote here.

Why all this fuss about 11 electoral votes?  Well, if one assumes the John Kerry states are going to go for Obama and even delete New Hampshire’s 4, the President begins with a base of 242.  Add in Gary Johnson’s freebie in New Mexico, you reach 247.  Now, include Arizona’s 11 and you move to 258.

With 258 in hand, the presidency can be obtained MANY, MANY WAYS.  Nevada plus Iowa does it.  Colorado plus New Hampshire.  Just Virginia.  Just North Carolina.  Just Missouri.  Just Ohio.  Just Florida.

Therefore kids, Arizona is huge.  It is essentially a “must win” for the bad guys.  If we can find a way to pick it up…let’s find some Veuve Clicquot.

The answer to the last question…the five 20^th Century presidents who were known by names other than their birth names are:  Thomas Woodrow Wilson, John Calvin Coolidge, David Dwight Eisenhower, William Jefferson Blythe and Leslie Lynch King, Jr.  aka Gerald R. Ford.  Points are awarded to Paula Zagrecki, Brian Dawson and my mother Sydney May for excellent responses which named most of the five.

Today’s  question:  Which President served as Minister to Colombia and, when elected, was the Clerk of the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County, Ohio?

Where Do We Go From Here?

(Author’s note:  Treated to lunch in the Members’ Dining Room of the US House inside the Capitol today…pretty heady stuff for a unapologetic political nerd!)

A)      Is Governing Possible?

As the GOP continues its 50-plus episode Soap “Lemmings R Us”, let’s consider the opportunity that MAY be coming together.

Paleocons George Will and Charles Krauthammer forecast that the White House may be out of reach for the Neanderthals.  Suggesting a focus on maintaining the House and trying to retake the Senate, they’re simply stating what has seemed obvious for some time.   Previous postings in LiberalMoose have speculated on if/when the Republicans in Congress will decide it’s time to save themselves and cut Manchurian Mittens/Rick Torquemada loose.  That time may be upon us.

What would this mean?  Potentially quite a bit.

First, Obama and House Republicans do have something in common…a desire to get re-elected.  While hardly a revelation, neither side can take a happy November for granted.  Obama is “responsible” at a time when the public is really unhappy and the GOP literally has the worst numbers in the history of Congressional polling.

The public claims they want partisanship put aside and real governing to occur.  Progress is sorely needed on any number of fronts.  Depending on the final product of any “grand bargain” that might be reached, vote-rich rewards could result from thoughtful compromise. 

Scores of freshmen Republicans have tenuous holds on seats which Democrats represented 15 months ago.  Paul Ryan’s Medicare provisions could well spell doom for Republican control.  Democrats now enjoy a 5% generic advantage relative to Congressional control and it’s increasing.

Time to reverse course?  Maybe.

Potential Problems…not wishing arthritis, I refuse to type them all.  However, Nancy Pelosi’s and Steny Hoyer’s interests would not be served by such an arrangement.  They’d surely prefer current trends to continue.  They see a credible chance at retaking the House so why allow the GOP caucus to suddenly behave like post-pubescents? 

Yet, a unique assemblage of scared Republicans, results-starved progressives and both of the remaining moderates in the House could align with Obama and tackle a couple of the dozens of looming challenges facing the country.  Senate Dems and their burden of defending 23/33 seats want progress too…less so with Senate Republicans who share Pelosi’s unquenchable thirst.  Plus, Mitch McConnell is such an ass.

 

 

B)      “Super” Tuesday

Today’s blog is written before any of March 6^th’s results are in.  However, it can be said with certitude, clairvoyance and courage…NO ONE CARES!

Not really true but let’s be honest here, aren’t we all simply sick of this cast of clowns?  None of them will become President…they’ve nothing of value to add…and they’re a major embarrassment for our country. 

Abraham Lincoln was the first president born outside of the original 13 colonies.  A Kentuckian by birth, he was from “the west” of his day.

Today’s question:  The 20^th Century saw 5 presidents who were known by names other than their birth names.  They are….?

2012’s Pathetic GOP Race — Part II

Michigan adores Mittens!  Whoopee!

We now know that Romney’s 6 to 1 financial advantage, deep hometown roots and overwhelming organizational advantages translate into a 3% victory margin against a slobbering, drooling advocate for the Inquisition who lost his home state by 18% 6 years ago.  Is it any wonder that Obama leads by 16% in Willard’s birthplace?  A little research needs to be done to find out the worst performance of a nominee in their birthplace…we may be setting a record this time.

Romney’s “Michigan firewall” became more of a threat than a safe harbor.  Yet, he muscled his way through and approaches Super Tuesday still standing.  But kids it’s still the same old Willard.  Witness please his handling of the Blunt Amendment.  Midday on March 1^st, he unequivocally stated he opposed the Blunt Amendment.  Later that same day, his campaign made clear that he actually unequivocally supported Blunt although it had been defeated in the Senate earlier in the day.

Remember that Blunt would allow ANY entity to deny health care coverage to ANY degree for ANY reason.  What thinking policy maker would support such garbage?  Sorry, I should stay on the subject of the GOP primary.  With Romney’s obvious weakness having been the real story of this entire cycle, he simply can’t take and then adhere to a rational position when facing an electorate as uninformed and ugly as today’s Republican primary voters.

It gets worse.  His Holiness Pope Rush I has decided that women who seek contraceptive care are “sluts” and “prostitutes” which, accordingly, affords the public with a right to view their sexual activity on You Tube.  Pretty hard to find the words to adequately describe how repulsive Limbaugh and his views are.

So repulsive and outrageous that the 4 GOP candidates issued the following rebukes:

Romney…”          “

Santorum…”        “

Gingrich…”         “

Paul…”       “

Cowed by Rush’s influence, they prefer allowing the acknowledged mouthpiece of their party to attack women of all ages and marital status than incur his possible wrath.  They’re disgusting.  Sadder, so are many of the voters they seek affirmation from.

Fortunately, Republican leaders in numerous State Houses are above the fray….or, maybe not.  While their Federal friends attempt to eliminate contraception coverage (inevitably leading to more unwanted pregnancies) governors in Virginia, Pennsylvania etc. support “inserting their states” into the nether regions of pregnant women.  Mandatory ultrasounds upon women who seek to exercise their freedom of choice are the REAL RESULT of 2010’s Tea Party victories.  If voters thought the GOP believed in personal liberty and opposed government intervention, guess again.  What is more intervening than forcing a woman to open her legs to the state?  Rape is now approved public policy. 

One has to wonder what is going on here?   Based on overwhelming polling data, there is no way any of this crap will help them in November.   So, what’s up?  Is this an organized, systemically implemented plan or merely ad hominem assaults undertaken by random thugs?  It’s so out of the main stream and evidently counter-productive that it makes zero sense.  Yet, they keep at it.

No explanation here.  Anyone?

James Buchanan is the answer to our last question as to which President was the most recent to have served as Secretary of State.  Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Quincy Adams and Van Buren, five out of six in our early days, all served as Secretary of State.

Today’s question:  Name the first President born outside of the original 13 colonies?  The first true “westerner” of his day?

Us and Them — Part II

A)      Santorum and Romney Agree

Writing from my cruise ship the afternoon of Michigan and Arizona, not yet knowing the results.  Enjoying the trip, adding Dominica to my country list…yet, kinda stunned.

In a previous entry, I unkindly referred to Rick Santorum as an imbecile.   In light of the past 24 hours, I fear my comments were euphemistic.  More relevant is that Santorum and his campaign obviously have concluded that a plurality in today’s and Super Tuesday’s mega primaries can be achieved by appealing to the “Great Unwashed”.  Apparently they think that GOP primary voters are a bunch of imbeciles or worse.

So we have a leading candidate for the GOP nomination arguing that President Obama’s efforts to help students afford college and his encouragement that American’s undertake at least one year of post high-school education makes Obama a “snob”.   Santorum furthers his eloquence by conjuring up the image that Obama wishes to “remake” students into robotic replicas of him via the indoctrination which inevitably occurs on college campuses.  We should cut Ricky a little slack though as this “Manchurian Armageddon” he fears could well have been caused by spending sooooooooo much time with Willard Mittens.

The point here is simple…in the death struggle underway today and next Tuesday Santorum’s goal is to appeal to the stupid.  “I’m a dip shit, just like all of you good people and damned proud of it” might as well be a quote although I can’t precisely remember Santorum saying these words.  Wow.

Lest we forget Swiss Bank Account #35762897.  In the final day of campaigning in his “home” state, Mittens pledges he wont “set my hair on fire just to drive up my polling numbers”.  Say again?  Is it possible that the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination just stated that Republican primary voters would be positively impressed by his becoming a carnival side show performer?   Mittens knows his party’s base is pretty basic.

B)     “Hey you over there, can we chat a minute?”

When interpreting a poll, you look at how differing subgroups respond to questions.  The electoral universe is spliced, segmented and sorted.    This brings us to what should prove to be a hugely important question going forward…where do the educated and rational  Republicans go?  I don’t just mean in 2012…when do they migrate away from the shameful morass that is the GOP of the 21^st Century?  This subgroup MUST be up for grabs.

Your author has had the great fortune to work with and befriend numerous smart, caring and forward-thinking Republicans.  These are professional people, very successful financially yet committed to the overall advancement of the nation.  They have not chosen the path of inward retreat.  Rather, they’re actively engaged.

At the start of this cycle…say last summer…they wanted to talk about how Obama was going to lose.  That’s pretty much all they wanted to discuss as when I would ask the provocative question “who’s your candidate” they would go back to assaulting Obama.  They passionately felt he had taken the country in the wrong direction notwithstanding the litany of measurable improvements that have occurred since 1/20/09.  It was surprising the degree to which they didn’t seem to even want to hear about the stock market, GDP, job growth, etc.

Lately…I’m just hearing crickets.  Nothing from these friends…not a word.  And it’s probably not just that they know that 2012 isn’t shaping up as they hoped. 

They’re embarrassed.   They should be.  The 21^st Century’s GOP is rapidly dragging American politics into the 18^th Century.   They know that sentient, literate people are increasingly out of place in today’s GOP.  In fact, they’re derided.   The candidates in this race, both current and the dearly departed, constitute the worst assemblage in memory.

The GOP’s tactical decision to largely abandon the country club and head to the wrestling match has won some elections.  It also set in place a dynamic which has not yet seen its full impact.  A massive wedge exists and is expanding between these “values” voters and the traditional, moneyed and learned class. 

 Many have already abandoned the GOP and are now Independents.  Others, especially the ladies,  have made the full leap.  “We’ll keep the light on for ya…”

 

The answer to our last question of when was the longest stretch in presidential elections when neither the incumbent president nor vice-president were on the ballot is the 4 election period inclusive of 1844 thru 1856.  Interestingly, over a 16 year period, the nation had a vice-president for less than 6 years.   WH Harrison and Taylor died.  Polk had had enough and neither Fillmore nor Pierce were re-electable.

Today’s question:  In the early days of the republic, a major stepping stone to the presidency was the office of Secretary of State.  Who was the most recent President to have served as Secretary of State?

Us and Them — Part 1

Hoping that Pink Floyd will not litigate use of this title, I’ve selected it because in three simple words, it defines the challenge that permeates American politics and governance.

In his momentous 2004 keynote address in Boston, Illinois State Senator Barack Obama first shared with us his oft-repeated phrase “we are not a collection of red states and blue states…we are and always will be the United States of America.”  Exhilarating, aspirational and very American…but true?

Summarizing some of the most evident differences:

Us…

1)       Demographically diverse

2)      Urban & suburban

3)      Educated, professional

4)      Less religious and more aware

5)      Financially better off

Them…

1)      White & male

2)      “Exurban” & rural

3)      Less educated

4)      Church-going, God-fearing

5)      Lower income

A few other intriguing differences that are less discussed.  Red states are more violent, fatter, die sooner, have higher divorce rates and are….happier.  Yeah, not kidding.

We believe in an activist society which engages, changes and presumably improves.  Accordingly, the state plays an essential role as a vehicle well suited to advance the lot of many.

They distrust change, adhere to mythology, are comforted by paternalism and, most importantly, see the state as a threat to their liberty and way of life.

So…how does one lead a nation so fundamentally split?  How do you move a legislative agenda where Senate rules allow 41 votes to dictate to the other 59 as well as the entire nation?  How do you even begin a discussion about something as essential and complicated as health care when the two sides are predisposed to alternative conclusions from the very start?

2008 until present…we passionately elect and are led by someone who personifies our value that America should be a meritocracy ruled by her most talented and is a nation which can advance beyond the worst elements of its past.  They see (partially because they are repeatedly told) that this same leader is a Kenyan, a closeted Muslim and supports a socialist agenda antagonistic to the whole doctrine of American freedom.  Could things be more polarized?  Is it a gulf or more of an abyss?

The voters support the concept of a collegial, cooperative and mutually respectful government by large margins.  Yet, they often choose not only a divided power structure but reward the most extreme elements of both parties.

Obama reaches out to the GOP on everything from deficit reduction to dealing with the economic crisis to the 2010 health care bill.  He gets essentially zero support from them and is assaulted on the left for being soft while wasting precious time.

More to come…

The answer to the last question:  when was the first time that both major parties’ presidential candidates were sitting members of the US Senate?   Senator Barack Obama versus Senator John  McCain in 2008 is literally the first time this ever occurred.  In fact, the only two previous sitting Senators elected to the White House were JFK and the never-remembered Warren Gamaliel Harding.  “Harding Fan Club Members” are the most appreciative of W’s recent administration because…J

Today’s question:   Name the longest stretch of presidential elections where neither the incumbent president nor vice-president were on the ballot?