Election Reconciliation

(en) results of the U.S. presidential election...

U.S. presidential election 2000

Well…at the time of this posting we’re a little over 1 day from an election some have called the most important election in our time; some have called the most important ever. Based on what we know and what we guess the election race between Republican Mitt Romney and Democratic President Barack Obama is a virtual tie.

Who ultimately wins comes down to who wins a majority of Electoral Votes in 11 states that polls and/or history say are the only ones of the 50 where any doubt exists over who will win. They are (in alphabetical order):

Colorado- 9 electoral votes

Florida- 29

Iowa- 6

Michigan- 16

Nevada- 6

New Hampshire- 4

North Carolina- 15

Ohio- 18

Pennsylvania- 20

Virginia- 13

Wisconsin- 10

Some pundits have said Minnesota, and Oregon are up for grabs. But barring Romney sweeping the Eastern Time zone swing states (and he might) and getting a lot of voter momentum that doesn’t seem likely.

President Obama and Mitt Romney Different Word...

President Obama and Mitt Romney Different Words, Different Visions

Based on polls, history, common sense, 6th sense, and admittedly some wishful thinking this is where I currently see things going among the swing states:

Romney definitely wins: North Carolina, Florida, Virginia, and Colorado.

Obama definitely wins: Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Iowa.

Romney PROBABLY and HOPEFULLY wins: New Hampshire and Wisconsin.

Obama PROBABLY wins: Ohio

The result: Romney wins 271 to Obama 267.

I won’t call the popular vote. It could go either way.

If I’m wrong I’m wrong on either Wisconsin or Ohio or possibly Pennsylvania.

What I’ve learned in this year-long election contest is that Democrats think Republicans are crazy to vote for Romney. They also think Republicans are mean, heartless, lacking in compassion, greedy and longing for the 1950s. They really believe this, and all my efforts to convince my friends otherwise has not changed their thinking.

Republicans think Democrats are absolutely loony for voting for Obama. They also think Democrats are stupid, and lazy, and greedy and stupid and lazy…and oh ya…hypocritical. And most importantly tyrannical. I don’t think most of the Republican claims about Democrats are true. But I do think some of those thoughts are true of some Democrats.

Sadly, the conclusion I come to is that regardless of who wins this country is and will remain seriously divided. These days even natural disasters cause political blame and argument. Hurricane Sandy brought debate from both sides about New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s gracious and patriotic commentary and treatment of President Obama. Conservatives felt he went way over the top in his praise. Democrats accused him of hypocrisy and based his civility strictly on Christie’s selfish desire for Federal Funds to be  “gifted” to New Jersey. All I can say to both sides is PUUUUHHHHLEEEEZZZZ! Get over yourselves.

And before anyone thinks this is a one time or recent thing just think back to the most recent national emergencies of such size and scope. Hurricane Katrina was political from the moment it hit the shore in August 2005. Democrats…many of them not only accused President George W. Bush of incompetence but of actual racism. REALLY? REALLY? And the financial meltdown of 2008 was purely political and remains so much so to this day that it prevents real and fair decisions from being made. Four years later has the Obama Administration prosecuted any of Wall Street’s big mega-bankers for their complicity in the theft of billions of dollars? Uh…that would be NO. Is that Bush’s fault too? Uh…that would be NO. See…it goes on and on.

Though I didn’t vote for him and I didn’t have confidence in him I wrote several complimentary and encouraging blogs about President Obama following his election win in 2008. I was heartened by the election of America’s first black President and naively felt that our nation’s never-ending battle over race might finally be drawing to a close. I was wrong.

What has happened since George W. Bush was elected in the closest election in U.S. history in 2000 is that Red state‘s have become redder and blue states have become bluer. This election was fought in the narrowest geographic scope in history. Aside from the occasional fund-raiser neither candidate campaigned outside the eleven states mentioned.

The togetherness and American patriotism we ALL felt following the evil vicious attacks of 9-11  is now a distant memory. Efforts of civility on my part and the part of others have been bitch-slapped by the opposition. Faux offense over every little and possible conceived slight is displayed by both sides, such that too many of us stop listening to each other.

What is saddest of all is who is to blame for all this division. It’s our elected leaders and only our elected leaders. Sure we can lower our heads in shame for pulling the lever and putting them in office. But ultimately our leaders are supposed to lead.

I’m tired. Really really tired. I’ve done all I can to civilly and honestly pursued those who disagree that my point of view was correct. They’ve done likewise to me. In the end I wonder if any good came of it. If Romney wins and does much (he won’t do all) of what he says I suppose perhaps the answer is “yes”. I just hope another 9-11 or WWII or even Civil War doesn’t have to transpire in order to bring us together again as Americans. I think Mitt Romney can and will be transformative…but he won’t stand a chance if the opposition continues to not listen and instead paints him and his supporters as evil, greedy…etc. In Obama’s case…we already know THAT’S true.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

Related articles

November 4, 2012
Categories: National Politics . Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , . Author: Michael Schuett . Comments: 2 Comments

1 Week to go. Here’s What I Expect.

Barack Obama rode an incredible wave of celebrity adoration into the White House in 2008 and while its clear to many of us that he has proven himself unworthy to lead this country further he still remains a celebrity with a “can do no wrong” label stuck on him by his many devoted fans. I think of Lindsay Lohan’s continuing celebrity in spite of repeated brushes with the law. I think of Britney Spears shaving her head, possibly neglecting or mistreating her kids, and her drug and alcohol failings. And I think of Mel Gibson simply losing his mind. Like all of these “celebrities” Obama has proven undeserving of our total and unquestioning affection. Given yet another chance could he rebound ala Robert Downey Jr. and resurrect his image? My guess is No. But his “fans” think yes. And to me, that’s the saddest part of this story. He doesn’t so-much have followers, he has “fans” which is short for “fanatics”. I don’t want a President whose a celebrity. I want a leader.

I have never been enamored with celebrity. And I’ve absolutely NEVER understood celebrity worship. These feelings and sense that they’re not much different from you and me precedes the era in my life when I was constantly in front of nationally known and revered celebrities. As a reporter in the late 80s and early 90s I had my share of celebrity exposure. Having married the daughter of a very prominent Washington State politician and Washington Husky football star I came across even more. All this exposure did was confirm my lifetime sense that these individuals are seldom worthy of the “worship” Obama has been the recipient of.

So what’s going to happen next week? Let’s start with what’s simple before we get into the more complicated.

270 Electoral Votes are needed by either candidate in order to secure the Presidency.

Senator John McCain carried 21 states against Obama in 2008. Not one of those states will go for Obama this time around. Due to census re-apportionment those states now carry 180 electoral votes.

Obama barely took Indiana in 2008. He won’t this time. Polls clearly show Indian’s 2010 strong shift to the right was not a fluke. Indiana’s 11 votes will be Romney’s. Romney’s electoral total- 191.

So-called swing states Virginia and North Carolina also went strongly Tea Party and strongly Republican in 2010 and the latest polls show Romney with a narrow lead in each. Romney get’s them. They’re worth 28 electoral votes. Romney’s electoral total- 219.

Florida is also a swing state but recent polls going back more than one month have consistently shown Romney in the lead. Florida went for Bush in 2000 and 2004. It’ll add to Romney’s total. 29 more. Romney’s electoral total- 248 

With all these East Coast state’s (Virginia, Florida, North Carolina et al) falling to Romney and closing polls while state’s further west remain open to voting, that will have an undeniable benefit for Romney. And he’ll need it because of the remaining eight swing states Obama narrowly leads or is tied in the polls in 7 of them. Colorado and its 9 electoral votes is the only one I’m really confident putting in the Romney column. Romney’s electoral total- 257.

The remaining state’s in play are Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada. Nevada went for Bush in 2000 and 2004. I’m confident the many Mormons in Nevada as well as the momentum from East Coast voting will push Nevada into the Romney column. That’s six more. Romney’s electoral total- 263.

That leaves five midwestern states plus New Hampshire to determine the Presidency of the United States. They total 74 Electoral Votes. Pennsylvania and Michigan have each voted for the Democrat in 2000, 2004, and 2008. It’s really incredible that they are in play at all. But barring something unforeseen I predict they’ll be in the Obama column (though if Romney gets either it’s over. Romney wins).

Wisconsin also voted Democrat in 2000, 2004, and 2008. But the cheese-heads also elected a Republican Governor and legislature in 2010 and then re-elected the Governor in an even more lopsided re-call vote last year. And THEN Wisconsin’s Paul Ryan was named Mitt Romney’s running mate. Polls show Obama leading but Romney within the margin of error. Of the four remaining states in question (New Hampshire, Iowa, Ohio and Wisconsin) the Badger State is the one most likely to go for Romney. I think they will. Romney wins. Romney’s electoral vote count- 273. 

Iowa and New Hampshire have gone Democrat 2 of the last 3 Presidential Elections and polls very narrowly favor Obama in each. Ohio has gone Republican in 2 of the last 3 elections. And Obama only won it with 52% of the vote in 2008. Political pundit and former Bill Clinton election Master-mind Dick Morris is strongly asserting Ohio will go for Romney. But if I’m right, that will just be icing on the cake.

Romney’s win will have a positive influence out West where last-minute voters will help elect Rob McKenna to the Washington Governor’s post, becoming the first Republican in more than 30 years to lead our state. McKenna got 59% of the vote in 2008 when he was re-elected Attorney General. And since his destruction of Jay Inslee in the Gubernatorial debates he will slide home safely with this election too.

What I really believe is that something is yet to happen that will decide this race for the Presidency. I believe the eight swing state’s are so close that some news event, some revelation, or some major gaffe will bring victory or defeat to Romney or Obama. I definitely think more is going to come out about Benghazi. I would not be surprised in the least if Obama conducts a military strike in Libya with the claim of securing justice for the murderous perpetrators of the attacks in Benghazi. Perhaps hurricane Sandy will be so devastating as to cast an incredible shadow over Obama. If there are other October surprises out there I don’t know. But that’s why they’re called surprises.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

October 29, 2012
Categories: National Politics, Washington State . Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Author: Michael Schuett . Comments: 2 Comments

Obama didn’t Say What he Said-The Jedi Mind Trick

Alec Guinness as Obi-Wan Kenobi

Obi-Wan Kenobi 

 

I’ve been closely paying attention to national politics for 25 years. And I’ve made a habit of studying it even longer. And I’ve never seen or read of the phenomena now afflicting nearly half of all Americans. But I have seen it before… in the movies. It’s called the Jedi Mind Trick, made famous by  Obi Wan Kenobi in the original Star Wars. President Barack Obama has seemingly been a good student. The Force is strong with this one.

 

The Jedi Mind Trick- “These aren’t the droids you’re looking for…” can be seen at the 3:18 point in this video from Star Wars.

 

 

In the most recent example of Obama not saying what he said we are all being led to believe he and his Administration didn’t repeatedly, with considerable effort, try to steer the blame for the Benghazi, Libya Al Qaida terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate and the murder of our Ambassador and three others on a previously unknown YouTube 13 minute video.

 

“These are not the droids you’re looking for.”

 

The Jedi Mind Trick is so forceful in Obama he managed to get a respected national media journalist to back his lie in front of the world in a Presidential Debate. Obama says he called the attacks a terrorist attack. He even says “read the transcripts”. And moderator Candy Crowley tells opponent Mitt Romney in fact that he did call it a terrorist attack the day after, in his Rose Garden comments. But a full viewing of the video shows even THAT is a lie.

 

 

Clearly Obama says “acts of terror” at the 4:18 point of the above video. But equally clear is that he was speaking generally about numerous “acts of terror”. But even the minutia of this discussion is part of the Jedi trick. The simple minds that fall for it fail to recognize that Obama may have said “acts of terror” on September 12, one day after the murders in Benghazi but in the same video before saying “acts of terror” Obama says, “Since our founding the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths, we reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.” What is he talking about? While not mentioning the video one only needs know what happened in the following two weeks to understand what he was setting up.

 

In this video Obama’s lies are shown in chronological order:

 

 

This isn’t the first time Obama hasn’t said what he’s said. In the now infamous “You didn’t build that.” speech Democrats say repeatedly that the President was taken out of context. They say he wasn’t denigrating business owners in his remarks.

 

 

Being generous Obama may have been referencing roads and bridges with the comment “You didn’t build that”. But there is no denying the snarky defamatory tone and nature of the entire speech. He was undeniably saying to business owners “You didn’t build that”, even if those exact words were referencing a more specific point within his overall point.

 

“You didn’t build that” was denied time and time again from Obama’s Jedi Mind Trick affected defenders. But, there it is on the video for all people with an IQ above the length of a yardstick to see, hear and understand. This man doesn’t like business owners or the initiative they show.

 

In 2008 candidate Barack Obama had his Romney “47%” moment when he said his opponents “cling to guns or to religion” as a way of explaining their opposition.

 

 

But as offensive as this comment is, we seldom heard about it. Jedi Mind trick at work again.

 

“You don’t need to see his identification”

 

Obama attends the church of Pastor Jeremiah Wright for twenty years. He is close friends and political allie of admitted terrorist Bill Ayers. These are just a few of the associations Obama has and had that would have disqualified ANY other candidate for City Council, let alone President. Jedi Mind Trick.

 

He is given the Nobel Peace Prize months into office in 2009 having done NOTHING to warrant such an honor. Jedi Mind trick.

 

Those afflicted by the Obama Jedi mastery say Benghazi attack was properly called an “Act of terror” by Obama and they ignore his comments on the Letterman Show, The View, and at the United Nations a full 2 weeks after. They now say, “Well…we don’t know the reason behind why he would say that. There are national security issues at stake.”

 

“You can go about your business.”

 

“Move along. Move along.”

 

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

October 22, 2012
Categories: National Politics . Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Author: Michael Schuett . Comments: 2 Comments

Understanding the Democrats

English: Number of self-identified Democrats v...

Number of self-identified Democrats vs. self-identified Republicans, per state, according to Gallup, January-June 2010

 

 

 

Every survey I’ve seen in the past decade or two indicates that most women consider themselves Democrats politically. Likewise, every survey I’ve seen in the past couple decades indicates that most men consider themselves Republicans, politically. Nobody should make the huge leap to argue that I am saying all women are Democrats and all men are Republican, or that Democratic men are somehow less manly. But I know some will. It’s inevitable.

 

Still, I do think some psychologic conclusions can be reached through these facts that will allow us to understand each other a little bit better where we disagree. And if you understand your political opponent more I’d like to think you are more likely to be able to find common ground.

 

Women crave security. Men crave independence. There. I’m done. These two statements sum up why Democrats and Republicans fight so much. If you don’t quite get it…allow me to explain.

 

In spite of Women’s Liberation, increasing freedom and less male dominance in the past 40-50 years woman still through nurture and nature have a strong desire for security. They don’t want to be fearful. They are averse to risk. Financial security is far more important to women than it is to men. The security of affection is stronger in women. A warm blanket to snuggle under on the couch while watching TV is cliche`. Knowing this, is it any wonder more women identify with the Democratic party? The Dems are the ones who want to provide you with everything you could possibly need, including…these days…cell phones.

 

Romney

Mitt Romney 

 

Also, with this in mind, it’s not surprising that President Barack Obama has been leading in polls over Mitt Romney among all women, (…at least until recently. More on this in a moment.) while Romney has been leading Obama among married women. Married women have far more security in their personal lives and have less of a need for security from the government. The converse can be said of single women.

 

English: Barack Obama delivers a speech at the...

Barack Obama 

 

If women crave security, what is it that most men desire? Men desire independence. Men don’t want to be told what to do. Men want to be men. I realize that I’m falling back on cliche` for some of this. But ultimately I only know what I know and no more. It’s instructive to realize that the more things change, the more they stay the same. Men and women are different, no matter how much Democrats want to insinuate that they aren’t. And men are more comfortable with risk than are women. Let’s face it, some men crave risk more than they crave independence  And at least since the time of Ronald Reagan and possibly as far back as Barry Goldwater the Republicans have rallied under the banner of less government and more freedom (also known as “risk” in many aspects of life) and independence. For men, it’s as if the GOP were some tall, leggy blonde in a tight sweater constantly winking at them. It’s too hard to resist the lure of freedom and independence…and risk.

 

So what’s wrong with women and Democrats seeking security while men and Republicans seek independence? Can’t we co-exist under such dissimilar desires? The answer is no because if you desire security then you desire someone giving you that security; because to provide that security yourself would require independence, and risk. And if you only get security from someone else, you give up some independence. When you’re single as a man or woman you have freedom. You can have drinks, dinner or sleep with whoever you want. When your married you can’t…or at least shouldn’t. Being single you have more independence. Being married you have more security. It’s the same in politics or government. So by desiring security through government Democrats are telling Republicans, and most men, to relinquish some independence. They’re telling single men to strap on the old ball and chain. Something men and Republicans are reluctant to do. It’s not in our DNA.

 

As it turns out President Obama is beginning to lose the argument for security. In polls released today by USA Today Romney has moved up into a tie with President Obama among women in the ten swing states that will determine our nation’s next President.

 

Romney and Obama tied amongst women 3 weeks before election.

 

It appears our nation’s women are beginning to understand that a better job, and better economy provide better security than can Obama’s government. Certainly, I agree.

 

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

 

Call us for effective, affordable marketing

 

Related articles

 

October 15, 2012
Categories: National Politics . Tags: , , , , , , , , , , . Author: Michael Schuett . Comments: Comments Off on Understanding the Democrats

A History Lesson on the Republican Party.

Loved this video and proud to have it on my blog.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

If you liked this blog please share it. Thank you.

February 1, 2012
Categories: National Politics . Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , . Author: Michael Schuett . Comments: Comments Off on A History Lesson on the Republican Party.

« Previous Page — Previous page Next page — Next Page »

  • Calendar

    • January 2026
      M T W T F S S
       1234
      567891011
      12131415161718
      19202122232425
      262728293031  

  • Search