Putting in the amount of detail I wanted isn't working -- it's taking too long, but I'll update things as I can.
Obama 143 confirmed 94 likely 44 possible 281 total
Romney 159 confirmed 21 likely 55 possible 235 total
Popular Vote: Romney 50-48
8:16 update
Obama 143 confirmed 94 likely 44 possible 281 total
Romney 159 confirmed 21 likely 55 possible 235 total
Popular Vote: Romney 50-48
Liveblogging Election Night 2012 6:45 Update
Romney 82 confirmed 98 likely 55 possible 235 total
Popular Vote, Per CNN: Romney 51, Obama 47
Since the last post, CNN has called the following states:
Connecticut - Obama
District of Columbia - Obama
Delaware - Obama
Georgia - Romney
Illinois - Obama
Massachusetts - Obama
Maine - Obama
Maryland - Obama
Oklahoma - Romney
Rhode Island - Obama
Tennessee - Romney
Arkansas - Romney
Alabama - Romney
SENATE RACES
Angus King (I) Wins, as was expected. He is expected to caucus with the Democrats.
HOUSE RACES
No Races on the watch list called since last post
GOVERNORS RACES
Jack Markell (D) Won reelection, as was expected.
Liveblogging Election Night 2012: 5:51 PM update
Obama: 3 confirmed 234 likely 44 possible 281 total
Romney 33 confirmed 147 likely 55 possible 235 total
Since the last post, CNN has called the following states:
South Carolina - Romney
West Virginia - Romney
SENATE RACES
No Races Called since last post
HOUSE RACES
No Races called since last post
GOVERNORS RACES
No Races called since last post
LiveBlogging Election Night 2012 5:29 Update
Obama: 3 confirmed 234 likely 44 possible 281 total
Romney 19 confirmed 161 likely 55 possible 235 total
Since the last post, CNN has called the following states:
Kentucky - Romney
Indiana-Romney
Vermont-Obama
SENATE RACES
No races have been called since the last post
HOUSE RACES
No races have been called since the last post.
GOVERNORS RACES
In Vermont, Governor Peter Shumlin (D) has won reelection, as he was expected to.
4:50 PM Electoral base map
Tonight, I'm going to be using the mapping program from RealClearPolitics to visually show the electoral numbers. The base map is as follows:
This map shows Obama potentially up 281-235, with 22 votes in the toss-up category.
Throughout the night, as state are called, I'll be coloring states darker on the map. Also, I'll give numbers this way:
Obama: 0 Confirmed, 237 likely, 44 probable, 281 total
Romney: 0 Confirmed, 180 likely, 55 possible, 235 total
Confirmed is states that they have won, likely is the darker-blue numbers, possible is the light blue.
-Bob
My 2012 Election Projection Malarkey
I may not be quite as prolific at blogging as I once was, but I though that I'd share my Election Night predictions. I post them with this caveat: In the early days of this blog, I made my predictions about election day, and Jeff Bell told me that my predictions were "a bunch of [male bovine excrement]." Or, as Vice President Biden called it during the debate, Malarkey.
So, here's my pile of malarkey for today. Keep in mind that I would love to be wrong on a few of these:
Federal:
Obama/Biden 281 electoral votes. I admit, this is probably a little low, but I don't want to feel overconfident. Before today, i thought that Romney might win the popular vote, but now I have a gut feeling that Obama will pull out a narrow victory here, too. Under 1.5%.
The Democrats will hang on to the Senate 52-48. The House will remain in GOP hands.
Utah
Romney will get 72% of the vote here in Utah and win every county. Herbert and Hatch will win reelection with 62%.
Mia Love will be Representative Love by 2 points.
Utah Democrats will be further in the minority in the Legislature, losing 1 Senate seat and 1 House seat.
Ben McAdams will be Mayor McAdams by 2 points as well.
Millcreek will become a city.
Am I wrong? Probably, but the only way to see is to watch the results tonight. I've got 160 national races and a dozen or so local races to follow, and I'm live-blogging the results from the time the first polls close at 5 PM until the Utah Democratic Party kicks me out of the Sheraton Hotel. Follow on the blog, or I'll be posting links on Twitter and Facebook (with some additional coverage on these platforms).
What races are you interested in?
So, here's my pile of malarkey for today. Keep in mind that I would love to be wrong on a few of these:
Federal:
Obama/Biden 281 electoral votes. I admit, this is probably a little low, but I don't want to feel overconfident. Before today, i thought that Romney might win the popular vote, but now I have a gut feeling that Obama will pull out a narrow victory here, too. Under 1.5%.
The Democrats will hang on to the Senate 52-48. The House will remain in GOP hands.
Utah
Romney will get 72% of the vote here in Utah and win every county. Herbert and Hatch will win reelection with 62%.
Mia Love will be Representative Love by 2 points.
Utah Democrats will be further in the minority in the Legislature, losing 1 Senate seat and 1 House seat.
Ben McAdams will be Mayor McAdams by 2 points as well.
Millcreek will become a city.
Am I wrong? Probably, but the only way to see is to watch the results tonight. I've got 160 national races and a dozen or so local races to follow, and I'm live-blogging the results from the time the first polls close at 5 PM until the Utah Democratic Party kicks me out of the Sheraton Hotel. Follow on the blog, or I'll be posting links on Twitter and Facebook (with some additional coverage on these platforms).
What races are you interested in?
Republican Desperation in Salt Lake County
Look what I found driving in Holladay today:
Not only is this sign illegally placed, but it's also highly illegal as it has no indication of who paid for the signs.
Not only that, but it also smacks of desperation. Doesn't exactly sound like a campaign that's up 10 points, does it? (More on that in another post.)
In fact, it really is sad that the only thing Mark Crockett can campaign on is how "liberal" Ben McAdams is. I've gotten two mailers from Crockett the past few days telling me this.
Not only is the sign illegal and the campaign tactic desperate, but it's a flat out lie. Find me one person who honestly thinks Ben McAdams is as liberal as Rocky Anderson. In fact, I'd be willing to be that both men would scoff at the notion.
Anyway, however liberal Ben McAdams may be, he is willing to bring all sides together to find a common ground. The world of politics needs more Ben McAdamses. Salt Lake County needs Ben McAdams.
Not only is this sign illegally placed, but it's also highly illegal as it has no indication of who paid for the signs.
Not only that, but it also smacks of desperation. Doesn't exactly sound like a campaign that's up 10 points, does it? (More on that in another post.)
In fact, it really is sad that the only thing Mark Crockett can campaign on is how "liberal" Ben McAdams is. I've gotten two mailers from Crockett the past few days telling me this.
Not only is the sign illegal and the campaign tactic desperate, but it's a flat out lie. Find me one person who honestly thinks Ben McAdams is as liberal as Rocky Anderson. In fact, I'd be willing to be that both men would scoff at the notion.
Anyway, however liberal Ben McAdams may be, he is willing to bring all sides together to find a common ground. The world of politics needs more Ben McAdamses. Salt Lake County needs Ben McAdams.
Touchdown Romney, Game (not) Over
You see, Mitt needed a win. And knowing that he only needed a tie, Obama played not to lose, and lost. It was the political equivalent of a football team playing prevent defense. You send three linemen at the quarterback and drop the other 8 into coverage. Most of the time, playing prevent defense allows the quarterback time to throw, and receivers more time to shake the defenders, allowing the offense to march down the field. It's cost the University of Utah several games against BYU the past several years (and almost cost them this year's game).
It's bad to play prevent defense when you are up by less than a touchdown, but even worse when you are down 17 in the 4th. A stop makes it very difficult to win. Allowing a touchdown gives your opponent momentum and confidence. But, you're still up 10 points. The game isn't over. Do you run down the clock, hoping your prevent defense will last until election day? Or do you play your norm, moving the ball effectively and efficiently down the field, hoping to play just as much offense to run the clock to 0:00? Or, do you run wide-open aggressiveness, hoping you can stick the final nail in the coffin, but also hoping you don't throw an interception, allowing your opponent to have good field position.
I think a good place to start is by pointing out that It's easy to
We'll see what kind of coaches Team Obama has. I just hope it's not Kyle Wittingham.
-Bob
Mr Rogers to Mitt Romney: Don't cut PBS!
"Mom, do you know why I like Mr Rogers? Because he likes me just the way I am." -Bobby Aagard, circa 1985
I grew up on a healthy dose of PBS programming. Mr Rogers was a friend, and taught me that being different is OK, and that we should love others not for the clothes they wear, nor their toys, but for being themselves. I also learned valuable lessons in topics such as anger management.
But Mr Rogers was not my only early influence. I gained a love of books from Reading Rainbow, and was reading at nearly a 1st grade level entering Kindergarten thanks in part to Sesame Street.
Because of a series of life circumstances, I get to spend some time with my 5-year old nephew, who is about the same age as I was when I said the quote that leads this post. We sit down to watch TV together, and I look at the programs he watches and the lessons we learn from them. Dinosaur Train takes his love of dinosaurs and trains and turns it into a love of science. On a recent trip to the Utah Museum of Natural History, he referenced Dinosaur train, mostly in the parts of the museum that DON'T have dinosaurs. On Sid the Science Kid, he sees that he, like the characters, can channel their natural curiosity to learn new things. On The Cat in The Hat Knows a Lot About That, he learns lessons in observation. And, n our new favorite show, Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood, we learn some of those same life lessons that I learned from Mr Rogers.
I can't think of anything we learn from shows such as SpongeBob SquarePants and Phineas and Pherb other than what the latest toys and junk food are out there (seen during commercial breaks)).
Unfortunately, the only way to produce commercial programming is from the private sector getting some help from the Government via PBS. So, when Mitt Romney said in tonight's debate that he wanted to cut funding for PBS (which amounts to a very small portion of the federal budget), I took it personally.
But, this is not the first time funding for PBS has been threatened. In 1969, Congress was wanting to cut funding for PBS, and Mr Rogers went to Washington to testify. Instead of reading his prepared remarks, which he said the Congressmen had promised to read, he spoke briefly about his show, and the good it was doing in the world.
In the next Appropriation, PBS funding went from $9 Million to $22 Million.
So, Mr Romney, please find something else to cut, because this funding is doing a lot of good in the world.
-Bob
If Mitt Can't Name His Plane, No Wonder He Can't Stick to One Position
Multiple Choice Mitt sent out a new email offering the opportunity of a lifetime:
Ann likes to joke that the campaign plane should be called “Hair Force One.”
Personally, I don’t quite know what to call it, but I do know it’s crucial in getting this campaign’s message to every corner of the country. And with just 54 days left until the election, we will be putting it to good use.
I’m excited to invite two of my supporters to come on board the plane, and join me for a day on this important journey. I hope you’ll enter for a chance to fly with me.
I don’t know exactly what our itinerary will be, but if you’re one of the winners — I can tell you it will be exciting. And, who knows, maybe you and I will come up with a better name for the campaign plane.
Thanks for your support,
Mitt Romney
John McCain had the "Straight Talk Expess." Maybe Mitt can call his plane the "Stuck in a Roundabout Express."
Any other suggestions?
(h/t Wonkette)
Mitt Romney's 4 Positions on Embassy Attacks
A Timeline of events:
1) US embassy in Egypt releases statement condemning movie made by Americans mocking Islam. Statement is released to try to quell protest/riot in front of Embassy.
2) US Embassy in Libya is attacked during a similar protest. 4 people, including the Ambassador, are killed.
3) After the news of the attack, but before word of the deaths is released, Mitt Romney issues a statement. The statement reads, in part, "It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks."
4) The next morning, Mitt holds a press conference, where he admits that the statement he was referring to was the one from the embassy. He condemns the Obama Administration for standing by the statement.
5) 20 seconds later, Romney sets a personal record for flip flopping, condemning the administration for distancing themselves from the statement.
6) Does interview with ABC where he says that white house agrees with him that the statement was bad.
7) In same interview, condemns movie made by Americans mocking Islam. "I think the whole film is a terrible idea. I think him making it, promoting it showing it is disrespectful to people of other faiths. I don't think that should happen. I think people should have the common courtesy and judgment- the good judgment- not to be- not to offend other peoples' faiths. It's a very bad thing, I think, this guy's doing."
Lost, well, let's recap the positions:
-Supporting statement condemning movie is bad.
-Not supporting statement condemning movie is bad.
-Not supporting statement condemning movie is good.
-Supporting statement condemning movie is good.
Several of my Republican friends have posted columns declaring Romney right on this issue. Well, if you hold one hand behind my back, ask me to guess how many fingers you are holding up, and give me 5 guesses, I'll probably be right.
It must be hard being a Republican and remembering what position you hold this minute.
-Bob
1) US embassy in Egypt releases statement condemning movie made by Americans mocking Islam. Statement is released to try to quell protest/riot in front of Embassy.
2) US Embassy in Libya is attacked during a similar protest. 4 people, including the Ambassador, are killed.
3) After the news of the attack, but before word of the deaths is released, Mitt Romney issues a statement. The statement reads, in part, "It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks."
4) The next morning, Mitt holds a press conference, where he admits that the statement he was referring to was the one from the embassy. He condemns the Obama Administration for standing by the statement.
5) 20 seconds later, Romney sets a personal record for flip flopping, condemning the administration for distancing themselves from the statement.
6) Does interview with ABC where he says that white house agrees with him that the statement was bad.
7) In same interview, condemns movie made by Americans mocking Islam. "I think the whole film is a terrible idea. I think him making it, promoting it showing it is disrespectful to people of other faiths. I don't think that should happen. I think people should have the common courtesy and judgment- the good judgment- not to be- not to offend other peoples' faiths. It's a very bad thing, I think, this guy's doing."
Lost, well, let's recap the positions:
-Supporting statement condemning movie is bad.
-Not supporting statement condemning movie is bad.
-Not supporting statement condemning movie is good.
-Supporting statement condemning movie is good.
Several of my Republican friends have posted columns declaring Romney right on this issue. Well, if you hold one hand behind my back, ask me to guess how many fingers you are holding up, and give me 5 guesses, I'll probably be right.
It must be hard being a Republican and remembering what position you hold this minute.
-Bob
Mitt Romney's 20-second flip flop
1:55 mark -- condemns Administration for "standing by" the Embassy's statement.
2:15 mark -- condemns Administration for "distancing" themselves from the Embassy's statement.
Wow, 20 seconds from flip to flop.
And, the best part was why he said distancing yourself from the statement was bad: because it sends an inconsistent message to the world.
Like contradicting yourself in the matter of 20 seconds.
11
Some continue to use the phrase "Never Forget" in reference to 9/11.
I don't know that I could ever forget. When I see the images of one tower on fire, I remember standing in my kitchen with my sister, seeing it on TV. Most times that I stop near the LDS Seminary Building across the street from Olympus High, I remember hearing the second plane hit live on KSL Radio (who was broadcasting a New York station). When I drive through a stretch of 4700 South, I hear President Bush speaking from Florida. In fact, most of the time I hear that speech, I remember driving that stretch of road. Pulling into the SLCC parking lot, I remember the call for all off-duty FDNY and NYPD to head toward the Trade Center come over the NYC Airwaves via KSL. That call haunts me when I see images of the towers fall. War crossed my mind the moment I saw the Pentagon on fire.
So, no, I will never forget.
But, I think it's important to remember. To remember Americans standing together; to remember people looking out for their neighbor. To keep our friends and family close.
I happened to watch most of the events of 9/11 with two of my best friends. One of them had a cousin who was a Congressional intern. Because none of us had cell phones, he was calling his mom from a pay phone. I remember people coming and giving him change to make those calls -- complete strangers who were also watching with us. I remember someone buying me a Coke if I saved his seat, and how even that simple gesture touched my heart.
I pause this morning to remember, but I also plan to move on. I'll spend the afternoon with my nephew. He's five, still to young to understand. One day, he'll understand that things happen. And hopefully then, our loved ones will all be safe.
I don't know that I could ever forget. When I see the images of one tower on fire, I remember standing in my kitchen with my sister, seeing it on TV. Most times that I stop near the LDS Seminary Building across the street from Olympus High, I remember hearing the second plane hit live on KSL Radio (who was broadcasting a New York station). When I drive through a stretch of 4700 South, I hear President Bush speaking from Florida. In fact, most of the time I hear that speech, I remember driving that stretch of road. Pulling into the SLCC parking lot, I remember the call for all off-duty FDNY and NYPD to head toward the Trade Center come over the NYC Airwaves via KSL. That call haunts me when I see images of the towers fall. War crossed my mind the moment I saw the Pentagon on fire.
So, no, I will never forget.
But, I think it's important to remember. To remember Americans standing together; to remember people looking out for their neighbor. To keep our friends and family close.
I happened to watch most of the events of 9/11 with two of my best friends. One of them had a cousin who was a Congressional intern. Because none of us had cell phones, he was calling his mom from a pay phone. I remember people coming and giving him change to make those calls -- complete strangers who were also watching with us. I remember someone buying me a Coke if I saved his seat, and how even that simple gesture touched my heart.
I pause this morning to remember, but I also plan to move on. I'll spend the afternoon with my nephew. He's five, still to young to understand. One day, he'll understand that things happen. And hopefully then, our loved ones will all be safe.
My Letter to NBC Regarding the Closing Ceremony Debacle
Dear NBC-
I often start my days with the Today Show, and end them watching the late local news on my local NBC affiliate. Some of my all-time favorite shows have been on NBC. I enjoyed most of the last two weeks watching the Olympics. I even defended your choice to time-delay the Olympics.
However, what I witnessed tonight has made me and my family extremely upset. You decided to interrupt your coverage of the Olympic Closing Ceremonies to show us a preview of one of your new fall shows.
I find this not only in extremely poor taste, but an insult to the Olympics and to your viewers. My sister, who didn't watch any of the Olympics, re-arranged her work schedule tonight just to watch the Olympic Closing Ceremony with our family.
It makes me sad to think that I can't trust NBC to provide excellent coverage of any event again. Whether it's an awards show or the Super Bowl, how do I know you won't interrupt the program to preview a new show?
Bad move, NBC. You've lost a loyal viewer.
-Bob Aagard
Salt Lake City, Utah
Paul Ryan supports Ayn Rand's Morality. Ayn Rand's Morality is not Mormonism's Morality
This Morning, Mitt Romney named Paul Ryan to be his Vice President Nominee.
When the news broke while I was watching the Olympics, I was excited. I may have cheered just a little.
You see, there has always been a certain "Greed is Good" mentality to the Romney campaign -- the more money you make, the better person you are.
And then, just to confirm this, he nominates Paul Ryan to be VP.
Paul Ryan once said "“Rand more than anyone else did a fantastic job of explaining the morality of capitalism, the morality of individualism… It’s that kind of thinking, that kind of writing that is sorely needed right now.”" Don't believe me? Well, he said it in a video he posted on his Facebook account.
And, well, there's this video, which takes Ryan's comments and intersperses them with Ayn Rand's:
And, another awesome quote from Ayn Rand: “Each man must live as an end in himself and follow his own rational self-interest.”
For more info on how Christians must distance themselves from Ayn Rand, follow this link.
So, how does this doctrine of individuality mesh with the doctrine of Mormonism? Well, not very well.
When the news broke while I was watching the Olympics, I was excited. I may have cheered just a little.
You see, there has always been a certain "Greed is Good" mentality to the Romney campaign -- the more money you make, the better person you are.
And then, just to confirm this, he nominates Paul Ryan to be VP.
Paul Ryan once said "“Rand more than anyone else did a fantastic job of explaining the morality of capitalism, the morality of individualism… It’s that kind of thinking, that kind of writing that is sorely needed right now.”" Don't believe me? Well, he said it in a video he posted on his Facebook account.
And, well, there's this video, which takes Ryan's comments and intersperses them with Ayn Rand's:
And, another awesome quote from Ayn Rand: “Each man must live as an end in himself and follow his own rational self-interest.”
For more info on how Christians must distance themselves from Ayn Rand, follow this link.
So, how does this doctrine of individuality mesh with the doctrine of Mormonism? Well, not very well.
"We live in perilous times when many believe we are not accountable to God and that we do not have personal responsibility or stewardship for ourselves or others. Many in the world are focused on self-gratification, put themselves first, and love pleasure more than they love righteousness. They do not believe they are their brother’s keeper. In the Church, however, we believe that these stewardships are a sacred trust." -Elder Quentin L Cook, Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, October 2009
I believe the Savior is telling us that unless we lose ourselves in service to others, there is little purpose to our own lives. Those who live only for themselves eventually shrivel up and figuratively lose their lives, while those who lose themselves in service to others grow and flourish—and in effect save their lives. -President Thomas S Monson, October 2009
Man’s greatest happiness comes from losing himself for the good of others. -President David O McKay, October 1963
Satan’s position is the opposite. He sponsors self-interest, raw and unrefined by any other consideration. One of his most effective tools is the temptation to take unfair advantage in order to get gain. It has been so from the beginning. -Elder Dallin H Oaks, October 1986
FOX News Poll Bad For Romney
Fox News, that bastion of liberal media, released a new poll today.
And, well that poll looks bad. It's bad for Mitt Romney.
The poll was conducted by live telephone calls on both cell phones and land line phones August 5-7. All respondents were registered voters. Margin of error is 3 points.
Romney 40%
Obama 49%
Other 2%
Would Vote 2%
Don't Know 8%
So, what you have is Obama with a 9-point lead over Romney. In their July 15-17 poll, that number was 45-41 Obama, so he's increasing his lead.
One thing that made me nervous was that respondents were asked how interested about the election they were. Of those who were "Extremely Interested" (42% of the sample), The Romney-Obama race was tied at 48-48. However, in the previous poll, Romney led extremely interested voters 53-42. So, Romney is losing ground with those extremely interested.
On Favorable/Unfavorable ratings for the candidates, we see Obama is more favorable than Romney
Obama 54% Favorable 42% Unfavorable
Romney 46% Favorable 45% Unfavorable
And, according to this poll, Obama has a 49% approval rating (46% disapprove). President Obama has hovered between 42-49% since he hit 55% approval in May 2011 (just after the bin Laden kill). While it's tough to win as an incumbent with an approval rating below 50%, It seems kike many of those who don't approve of Obama still won't vote for Mitt.
Regardless of how you would vote, how comfortable would you be with Mitt Romney as President?
Extremely Comfortable 8%
Very Comfortable 18%
Somewhat Comfortable 33%
Not at All comfortable 38%
Don't Know 3%
And, they asked the 71% that would be somewhat or not very comfortable with a President Romney what the main reason they felt that way. And, the answers they gave showed us where Romney fails:
His positions on the issues 17%
Phony/Dishonest 9%
Out of Touch 8%
Republican/Conservative 7%
For the Rich 7%
Everything 6%
His Wealth/He's rich 5%
Changes his positions/Flip flops 5%
Don't know enough about him 5%
Business Background/experience 4%
No Substance 3%
Too Conservative 2%
Religion/Mormonism 2%
Arrogant 2%
No Charisma 1%
Not Conservative enough 1%
Too close to Bush/Same as Bush 1%
Other 6%
Don't know 9%
So, most of the answers given are about Mitt the man, and it's hard to reintroduce yourself to the American people. It can be done, but it's hard. Especially when people have an opinion that you are an out of touch, dishonest rich politician in it for yourself.
Let's look at Obama on the same question:
Extremely Comfortable 21%
Very Comfortable 20%
Somewhat comfortable 22%
Not at all Comfortable 37%
Don't know 1%
Of the 59% of people who were somewhat or not at all comfortable with a second term for President Obama, they gave these reasons why:
Performance as President: 25%
Unemployment/Jobs/No economic recovery 15%
His positions on the issues 14%
Everything 9%
Health Care plan 6%
Big Government spending 5%
Socialist policies 4%
Phony/Dishonest 4%
Changes his positions/Flip flops 3%
Democrat/Liberal 2%
Taxes 2%
No substance/just a celebrity 1%
Arrogant 1%
Against business -
His background/race -
Other 5%
Don't know 4%
But, here's the kicker question, the question that has to have Team Mitt shaking in their shoes:
If Barack Obama is re-elected as president, which of the following best describes your feelings?
42% The country's going down the drain and I am dreading what is going to happen in the next four years.
18% The country's improving every day and I look forward to another four years.
7% neither
3% Don't know
And, well that poll looks bad. It's bad for Mitt Romney.
The poll was conducted by live telephone calls on both cell phones and land line phones August 5-7. All respondents were registered voters. Margin of error is 3 points.
Romney 40%
Obama 49%
Other 2%
Would Vote 2%
Don't Know 8%
So, what you have is Obama with a 9-point lead over Romney. In their July 15-17 poll, that number was 45-41 Obama, so he's increasing his lead.
One thing that made me nervous was that respondents were asked how interested about the election they were. Of those who were "Extremely Interested" (42% of the sample), The Romney-Obama race was tied at 48-48. However, in the previous poll, Romney led extremely interested voters 53-42. So, Romney is losing ground with those extremely interested.
On Favorable/Unfavorable ratings for the candidates, we see Obama is more favorable than Romney
Obama 54% Favorable 42% Unfavorable
Romney 46% Favorable 45% Unfavorable
And, according to this poll, Obama has a 49% approval rating (46% disapprove). President Obama has hovered between 42-49% since he hit 55% approval in May 2011 (just after the bin Laden kill). While it's tough to win as an incumbent with an approval rating below 50%, It seems kike many of those who don't approve of Obama still won't vote for Mitt.
Regardless of how you would vote, how comfortable would you be with Mitt Romney as President?
Extremely Comfortable 8%
Very Comfortable 18%
Somewhat Comfortable 33%
Not at All comfortable 38%
Don't Know 3%
And, they asked the 71% that would be somewhat or not very comfortable with a President Romney what the main reason they felt that way. And, the answers they gave showed us where Romney fails:
His positions on the issues 17%
Phony/Dishonest 9%
Out of Touch 8%
Republican/Conservative 7%
For the Rich 7%
Everything 6%
His Wealth/He's rich 5%
Changes his positions/Flip flops 5%
Don't know enough about him 5%
Business Background/experience 4%
No Substance 3%
Too Conservative 2%
Religion/Mormonism 2%
Arrogant 2%
No Charisma 1%
Not Conservative enough 1%
Too close to Bush/Same as Bush 1%
Other 6%
Don't know 9%
So, most of the answers given are about Mitt the man, and it's hard to reintroduce yourself to the American people. It can be done, but it's hard. Especially when people have an opinion that you are an out of touch, dishonest rich politician in it for yourself.
Let's look at Obama on the same question:
Extremely Comfortable 21%
Very Comfortable 20%
Somewhat comfortable 22%
Not at all Comfortable 37%
Don't know 1%
Of the 59% of people who were somewhat or not at all comfortable with a second term for President Obama, they gave these reasons why:
Performance as President: 25%
Unemployment/Jobs/No economic recovery 15%
His positions on the issues 14%
Everything 9%
Health Care plan 6%
Big Government spending 5%
Socialist policies 4%
Phony/Dishonest 4%
Changes his positions/Flip flops 3%
Democrat/Liberal 2%
Taxes 2%
No substance/just a celebrity 1%
Arrogant 1%
Against business -
His background/race -
Other 5%
Don't know 4%
But, here's the kicker question, the question that has to have Team Mitt shaking in their shoes:
If Barack Obama is re-elected as president, which of the following best describes your feelings?
42% The country's going down the drain and I am dreading what is going to happen in the next four years.
18% The country's improving every day and I look forward to another four years.
7% neither
3% Don't know
Romney Roundup 7/26: Illegal Legal Guns From The Soviet Union That We Built By Ourselves With Help From The Government
This is the first in an irregular series where I will post a bunch of unrelated stories about Mitt Romney, and a snarky comment about them.
Talking Points Memo: "Romney Camp Once Again Warns Of ‘Soviet’ Threat"'
Maybe they are using the history books found in some Utah classrooms.....
HuffPost: "Mitt Romney: 'Many' Of Aurora Shooting Suspect's Weapons Were Illegal"
Typical Republican, making up his own reality....
Think Progress: "Romney’s ‘We Did Build This’ Events Feature Businesses Built With Government Subsidies And Contracts"
Talking Points Memo: "Romney Camp Once Again Warns Of ‘Soviet’ Threat"'
A foreign policy adviser to Mitt Romney’s campaign warned against policies that would aid “the Soviet Union” Wednesday, making him at least the third person from Team Romney — including Romney himself — to refer to a country that hasn’t existed since 1991 in the course of attacking President Obama’s foreign policy.
Maybe they are using the history books found in some Utah classrooms.....
HuffPost: "Mitt Romney: 'Many' Of Aurora Shooting Suspect's Weapons Were Illegal"
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on Wednesday said many of the weapons obtained by the shooting suspect in Colorado were obtained illegally and that changing laws won't prevent gun-related tragedies.
But the firearms that authorities allege James Holmes used to kill 12 people in Aurora, Colo., were obtained legally.
Typical Republican, making up his own reality....
Think Progress: "Romney’s ‘We Did Build This’ Events Feature Businesses Built With Government Subsidies And Contracts"
Today, the Romney campaign is hosting an entire series of campaign events based on President Obama’s misinterpreted commentabout small businesses. While Obama’s full speech made a “no man is an island” argument, the Romney campaign has seized on the quote, “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that” as evidence of Obama’s disdain for small business owners.
Romney, ignoring the fact that he has echoed this same sentiment on multiple occasions, organized 24 “We Did Build This” events in the battleground states of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Virginia, Ohio, Iowa, Florida, Missouri, North Carolina, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and Nevada. At each event, local business owners are speaking about their self-sufficiency in running a business and how government is hindering their growth.
But, like the New Hampshire business owner showcased in Romney’s attack ad on the issue, many of these business owners have received significant support from the government, a ThinkProgress analysis finds.
Nothing like pointing out that your opponent was right. Thanks, Mitt!
You Can't Fight Obesity Sitting In McDonald's
You can't fight obesity eating at McDonald's. You can't teach people how to use a computer through an online course. And you can't fight for more financial disclosure from political groups by hiding your own donors.
During the primary, there was a PAC who had sent out a mailer attacking a candidate. The mailer went to a relatively small number of households, but it got a lot of play on the news. Now, because the guy who runs the PAC was a Democrat, and it was a Republican primary, the narrative from the candidate getting attacked was "My opponent has liberal PACs that want him to win, so you must vote for me." That candidate won the Primary, and since this is Utah, will likely win the general election (unless the accusations from the PAC are true, which I doubt). And, since the winning candidate comes in to the right of Gayle Ruzika, and the losing candidate was much better qualified to be in the office and would do a better job for all Utahns, Utah lost because of this PAC.
When the person running the PAC was interviewed on TV about the allegations, he was asked who his donors were. His response was that he wouldn't release his donors till he had to. I Tweeted something about how B.S. this was, and got a response from the PAC owner. He said that he had to file in the next week anyway, so it's water under the bridge. I responded that it made him no different than the Republican PACs that hide behind loose reporting requirements. I also go angry Tweets and emails from Democratic friends who rail about secret organizations. Because apparently, the only way to have more open dialog is to talk behind closed doors.
And, that is what worries me about organizations like the Alliance for a Better Utah, because they won't tell us where their money is coming from. They claim that they are funded mostly by small donations, but won't show us the money, so to speak.
This week, ABU is railing against ALEC for being this evil, super-secret organization. Now, even though I disagree with just about all of what ALEC tires to push through, I at least know where a lot of their money comes from. Unlike the "not evil, not super secret" organization ABU.
The ends do not justify the means. Playing by the rules doesn't work when the rules are broken.
-Bob
Mitt Romney: Frequent, Flagrant, Brazen Liar
Interesting bit from the Guardian about Mitt Romney's dishonesty. Some highlights:
The author then talks about the bit in Romney's book about President Obama going around the world to "apologize" for America, which in the real world never happened.
As a song we used to sing in Primary says "When you tell one lie, it leads to another..."
And, in conclusion, a paragraph I wish I had written, because it so well sums up my feelings about Mitt:
Quite simply, the United States has never been witness to a presidential candidate, in modern American history, who lies as frequently, as flagrantly and as brazenly as Mitt Romney.
Now, in general, those of us in the pundit class are really not supposed to accuse politicians of lying – they mislead, they embellish, they mischaracterize, etc. Indeed, there is natural tendency for nominally objective reporters, in particular, to stay away from loaded terms such as lying. Which is precisely why Romney's repeated lies are so effective. In fact, lying is really the only appropriate word to use here, because, well, Romney lies a lot. But that's a criticism you're only likely to hear from partisans.
The author then talks about the bit in Romney's book about President Obama going around the world to "apologize" for America, which in the real world never happened.
He then goes on to list several more Romney lies about the economy, stimulus, auto bailout, Obamacare. But then we get down to the "Brass tax" of it all:
President Obama never went around the world and apologized for America – and yet, even after multiple news organizations have pointed out this is a "pants on fire" lie, Romney keeps making it. Indeed, the "Obama apology tour", along with the president bowing down to the King of Saudi Arabia, are practically the lodestars of the GOP's criticism of Obama's foreign policy performance (the Saudi thing isn't true either).
The lying from the Romney campaign is so out-of-control that Steve Benen, a blogger and producer for the Rachel Maddow show compiles a weekly list of "Mitt's Mendacity" that is chockfull of new untruths. Benen appears unlikely to run out of material any time soon, particularly since Romney persists in repeating the same lies over and over, even after they've been debunked.
This is perhaps the most interesting and disturbing element of Romney's tireless obfuscation: that even when corrected, it has little impact on the presumptive GOP nominee's behavior. This is happening at a time when fact-checking operations in major media outlets have increased significantly, yet that appears to have no effect on the Romney campaign.
What is the proper response when, even after it's pointed out that the candidate is not telling the truth, he keeps doing it? Romney actually has a telling rejoinder for this. When a reporter challenged his oft-stated assertion that President Obama had made the economy worse (factually, not correct), he denied ever saying it in the first place. It's a lie on top of a lie.
As a song we used to sing in Primary says "When you tell one lie, it leads to another..."
And, in conclusion, a paragraph I wish I had written, because it so well sums up my feelings about Mitt:
Romney is charting new and untraveled waters in American politics. In the process, he is cynically eroding the fragile sense of trust that exists between voters and politicians. It's almost enough to make one pine for the days when Sarah Palin lied about "the Bridge to Nowhere".
Republicans: Let's fight the individual mandate by electing the guy who passed an individual mandate
Sometimes, Republican logic is so illogical.
If You're Posting on the Governor's Facebook Page, Make Sure You Spell Correctly....
I realize it's not nice to make fun of how other people spell, but if you are in charge of posting for the Governor, make sure you spell correctly. Especially if the thing you are spelling is the name of a county:
And, how reassuring that Twitter has all of the information I need about "Senpete County" I bet it even has info about Sanpete County, too. And the other 28 Counties as well, if only we knew how to find it.
-Bob
Mr Secret Government is running for Auditor?
John Dougalll, who sponsored HB477 in 2011, is running for State Auditor.
Don't remember HB477?
John Dougall is running a very Memetastic campaign on Facebook and the radio. However, I don't think Utah wants an auditor that believes in government secrecy. Government needs to done out in the open.
DON'T vote for John Dougall.
Why Does Mike Winder Keep Bringing Up Richard Burwash?
So, for a long time, West Valley City Mayor Mike Winder wrote articles for the Deseret News (and other news organizations) under the name Richard Burwash. These articles were about the positive things going on in West Valley City. They were written under a pen name because the DNews didn't think it was a good idea for a sitting mayor to write articles for their web site.
When the story broke last fall, people were up in arms. Mike Winder apologized, but he got fired from his full-time job as a PR guy.
It was a huge embarrassment for Mayor Winder, and usually candidates stay away from embarrassing things.
But not Mayor Winder. Instead of discussing why he'd be best for Salt Lake County, he's posting pictures of Richard Burwash signs on Facebook.
And bringing Burwash up in debates:
And then, later in the debate, he was asked specifically about Burwash. Usually, when you are trying to downplay something, you compare it to something minor. Like toilet papering.
But, not Mike Winder:
Now, either Mike Winder doesn't think DUI are a big deal, or he has a strange sense of the world.
Either way, he's not fit to be mayor of anything, because he can't be trusted.
-Bob
(P.S. - If you aren't following Daniel Burton on Twitter, you should. Even though he is a Republican, he has some great commentary, especially as he is live-blogging debates. He's also just a good guy.)
I Got National Props!
I logged on to Blogger to write a post when I saw this stat graphic:
What caused the spike in stats?
Well, It turns out that national blog Crooks and Liars featured my post on Mitt's Religion Flip-Flop on their blog roundup:
Yeah, I feel special. Especially when you factor some stats from this post:
-My number one all-time (since Google Analytics started calculating in April 2006) visits in a day was June 9 2012.
-The number six all-time source of traffic to my blog is now Crooks and Liars. 100% of the visits have been in the last week. One of the sites above it is no longer in service. Another probably hasn't sent traffic to me in a long time. Another is Google.
-The number six all-time most read post is the one referenced by Crooks and Liars. Only one other post in the top 10 was written since the 2008 election, and that was in 2009.
So, yes, I'm feeling the love. Go to the link, read the post (and watch the video), and share it with friends. Especially your friends who are voting for Romney because he's Mormon.
-Bob
Well, It turns out that national blog Crooks and Liars featured my post on Mitt's Religion Flip-Flop on their blog roundup:
-My number one all-time (since Google Analytics started calculating in April 2006) visits in a day was June 9 2012.
-The number six all-time source of traffic to my blog is now Crooks and Liars. 100% of the visits have been in the last week. One of the sites above it is no longer in service. Another probably hasn't sent traffic to me in a long time. Another is Google.
-The number six all-time most read post is the one referenced by Crooks and Liars. Only one other post in the top 10 was written since the 2008 election, and that was in 2009.
So, yes, I'm feeling the love. Go to the link, read the post (and watch the video), and share it with friends. Especially your friends who are voting for Romney because he's Mormon.
-Bob
Mitt Romney's Religion flip-flop
One of they key tenets of the LDS Church is that in 1820, God appeared to Joseph Smith. In fact, what differentiates Mormonism form other religions is the fact that we believe that God has spoken to, and through prophets from Joseph Smith and Brigham Young to Gordon B Hinckley and Thomas S Monson.
In fact, we also believe that there are other General Authorities that speak with God. We also believe in personal revelation -- the concept that God can speak to us to guide us in our lives.
So why, in 2007, did Mitt Romney tell a Boston TV station in 2007 that he didn't think God had spoken to anyone since Moses?
Surely Missionary Mitt taught the first vision to people in France. He probably even taught them about living prophets on the earth today speaking with God.
So, does Mitt Romney really believe that God hasn't spoken to anyone since Moses?
Or is he willing to lie about ANYTHING to become President, even his religion?
I think the answer is clear.
In fact, we also believe that there are other General Authorities that speak with God. We also believe in personal revelation -- the concept that God can speak to us to guide us in our lives.
So why, in 2007, did Mitt Romney tell a Boston TV station in 2007 that he didn't think God had spoken to anyone since Moses?
Surely Missionary Mitt taught the first vision to people in France. He probably even taught them about living prophets on the earth today speaking with God.
So, does Mitt Romney really believe that God hasn't spoken to anyone since Moses?
Or is he willing to lie about ANYTHING to become President, even his religion?
I think the answer is clear.
Why I Vote in Republican Primaries
I vote in Republican Primaries.I have voted in every Republican Primary election since 2000 (when I first registered to vote) with one exception: 2010, when there was a Democratic Primary. Had I known that Jim Matheson would win that primary by a 2-1 margin, I would have voted in that Republican Primary as well.
So, what is a center-left Democrat like me doing voting in Republican Primaries?
Simple. I believe that any election that I, as a taxpayer, is an election I should vote in.
And let's face it, the primary election will probably decide the eventual office holder. It's really the only chance I get to have a say in who my elected leaders are.
I know many Republicans who accuse me of voting for the easiest candidate to beat. It's a fair accusation, especially because I know many Democrats who registered as Republican just to vote in this year's primary for a candidate they see as "more beatable." However, I always vote for the "most tolerable" candidate. In other words, I vote for the candidate that I feel most represents my views between the two. Because again, the winners June 27 will probably win in November.
I am a registered Independent. My parents are only registered as Republicans because they didn't fill out the form to change back to Independent two years ago. They consider themselves very independent (they are much more conservative than me), and see being forced to declare a party affiliation as a horrible thing, because they want to vote, but don't want to call themselves "Republican."
As we get closer to election day, I will share with you who I'm voting for and why. I realize that my "endorsement" is a negative in a Republican primary, but I want to declare why I vote for the people I vote for. It also helps me quantify my decision.
-Bob
Mitt Romney Bully Story Is An Issue Because He's Still A Bully
By now, you've probably heard about how Mitt Romney allegedly bullied a kid in high school. Mitt's "denial" was that he did some crazy things in high school, doesn't remember this incident, and besides, he didn't know the kid was gay.
First, gay kids aren't the only ones who get bullied. As a straight kid who got bullied a lot, I know.
Second, by saying he didn't know the kid was gay, but doesn't remember this incident leads me to think that maybe he did bully the kid. Maybe not to the extreme portrayed in the post, but by his own admission, he wasn't exactly an angel.
So, why does it matter? Well, because Mitt hasn't really grown out of it. As Paul Begala wrote:
Or, there's any time a reporter or someone else calls him out on his "evolving" stances on issues. You see, Mitt Romney is consistent on issues. His current stance is the stance he's always had, regardless of what evidence you have to the contrary. Mitt has always been at war with Oceania. He gets upset when you ask him why he used to be at war with Eurasia.
First, gay kids aren't the only ones who get bullied. As a straight kid who got bullied a lot, I know.
Second, by saying he didn't know the kid was gay, but doesn't remember this incident leads me to think that maybe he did bully the kid. Maybe not to the extreme portrayed in the post, but by his own admission, he wasn't exactly an angel.
So, why does it matter? Well, because Mitt hasn't really grown out of it. As Paul Begala wrote:
One can draw a straight line from the young man who pinned down a terrified teenager and walked a blind man into a closed door, to the adult who put the family dog in a kennel and strapped it to the roof of the car, to the businessman who laid off hundreds of people, cancelled their health benefits, and paid himself millions while their company went bankrupt. And the line continues: the governor who slashed education and raised fees on the middle class, and the possible president who would use his power to cut taxes on his fellow millionaires while pushing for the gradual demise of traditional Medicare.
Then there is the aura of someone who acts as if the rules don't apply to him.The Post reported that the abused boy was ultimately expelled from Cranbrook—for smoking a cigarette. Really. The victim got expelled for smoking a cigarette, but Mitt faced no sanctions for maliciously victimizing a vulnerable student and a teacher. It's good to be a prince. Maybe that's why Romney felt entitled to take a $10 million bailout for Bain, but opposed President Obama's bailout of the auto industry. He thinks there's one set of rules for the privileged, and another for the rest of us.
There is also the story of his arrest for disorderly conduct. He had gone to launch his boat in a lake. There was a park ranger there who told him not to launch the boat because the registration had been painted over. Mitt launched anyway, because it's only a $50 fine. That "I'll do what I want" attitude is common among bullies.
Character matters in politics. People's character often doesn't change in their lives. If Mitt could provide any examples that his character has changed, I'd give him credit. Unfortunately, evidence shows that he hasn't changed.
My View on Marriage
The gentleman on the left is my third-great-grandfather John R Winder. Born in England in 1821, he became the manager of a shoe store in Liverpool. After joining the LDS Church in Liverpool, he arrived in Utah on October 10, 1853, exactly 99 years before his great-great granddaughter (and my mother) was born.
While in Utah, he engaged in several business ventures, including Winder Dairy, which still exists today (as Winder Farms). Winder led the Nauvoo Legion against Johnson's Army in the Utah War, and served as Chairman of the "People's Party" while seeking to establish a two-party system of politics in Utah. He also served as a delegate to serveral state Constitutional Conventions.
Winder was called to be the Second Counselor of the Presiding Bishopric of the Church in 1887. As Second Counselor, he oversaw the completion of the interior of the Salt Lake Temple. He was called to be the First Counselor in the First Presidency in 1901, a position he held until his death in 1910.
John Winder married Ellen Walters in 1845 in England. He Married Tilda Jensen (my Third-Great Grandmother) in the President's Office in Salt Lake City in 1855. In 1857, he married Elizabeth Parker in the Endowment House in Salt Lake City. In 1893, he married Maria Burnham.
That's right, John R Winder practiced marriage that went beyond "one man one woman." When the government banned plural marriage in 1887, they were in the wrong. Any attempts since then to define marriage are equally as wrong.
I believe that marriage is a religious ordinance. As a religious ordinance, it is between men and women. Much like I believe that baptism, another religious ordinance, is to be done by immersion, and the baptism should only be performed on people older than 8. Should the State of Utah pass a constitutional amendment banning the baptism of infants, so as to preserve the sanctity of traditional baptism? Should Massachusetts ban immersion?
And, if we are to regulate marriage, how far do we go? I'm just waiting for Alabama to pass a law further "protecting traditional marriage" by ensuring that marriage for eternity (as practiced by Mormons) is banned. After all, the tradition is "til death do we part" is it not?
The "Sanctity" of Marriage
If my friend John has been in a committed relationship for 9 years. There is a lot more "sanctity" in that relationship than in my friend Sam's 18 month marriage. Or my friend Tim's 8 month marriage. Newt Gingrich has married two people who previously held the title of "mistress" before they were his wife. Sorry, but "marriage," as it stands now, really means nothing.
But, if Gay Marriage were legal, The Church would have to perform gay marriages.
Well, that part is a complete lie. A Baptist marrying a Catholic is legal, but it doesn't mean they are legally allowed to be married in the Temple. In fact, I have many good friends who are both LDS that were not allowed to get married in the Temple. So, to say the Church would have to start performing Gay Marriages is, well, being dishonest.
I'm confused, what is your position?
Well, marriage should be a religious institution, unregulated by the Government. However, it has also become a civil contract entered into by two people and endorsed by government. And, as a civil contract, it should be open to any two adults who want to enter into the contract.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
