16 Reasons Why Hillary Clinton Will Win In 2016


Re-posted from The Daily Beast August 3, 2013  by 

As a lifelong Republican, I am not pleased with my own prediction—nothing would thrill me more than if a conservative were to win back the presidency. But my political reality instincts lead me to believe the following. (And I’ve been right before: in January 2011, I cowrote “12 Reasons Obama Wins in 2012.”)

Unless there is a radical change of circumstances within the Republican Party and its crop of presidential wannabes, or some unforeseen cataclysmic national event that dramatically alters the current economic and political landscape, or a serious deterioration in her health, Hillary has it locked up.

Here are 16 reasons why Hillary Clinton is poised to be elected the next president of the United States, in order of importance.

1. Madame President: A Great Social Movement in the Making

A great social movement to elect the first Madame President is gathering wind and will reach sustained hurricane strength on November 5, 2014—the day after the midterm elections and the “official start” of the 2016 presidential campaign.

Akin to the movement that elected the first African-American president in 2008, the “Madame President movement” will be propelled by the mainstream media, Hollywood, and social media. Together they will build momentum and coalitions across all platforms, while reveling in their awesome social and cultural significance. You will hear the “triumph of the ’60s feminist movement.” You will hear that you will be “voting to make history.” And you will hear that your vote will be used as a “hammer to break through the glass ceiling of the Oval Office.” Warning: Prepare for the onslaught, because it is coming your way.

2. The Media Is Ready to Crown a Queen

Hillary, the first female presidential nominee of a major party, will be anointed by the media, Hollywood, and pop culture—just as they anointed the junior senator from Illinois in 2008. The only difference between then and now is Obama was hailed as the messiah, and Hillary will be the queen ready to ascend to her royal throne. Already NBC has announced a Hillary miniseries set for air before the network has to steer clear of FCC equal-time regulations. (In other words, right before Clinton officially announces her candidacy for maximum ratings.)

3. Groupthink: It’s Her Time, and She Deserves It

Between now and 2016, listen as political pundits exclaim, “It’s her time,” or “She deserves it.”

Long-suffering Hillary, who was publicly humiliated by her cheating husband and then triumphed over adversity by being elected to the U.S. Senate in 2000. Long-suffering Hillary, who was defeated by her own party for the presidential nomination in 2008, and then further rejected by Obama to be his running mate.

Triumph came later when “Hillary the team player” became the globe-trotting secretary of State and despite a lack of any real accomplishment, eventually earned international respect and higher approval ratings than the team leader himself.

Therefore, because of her highs and lows, the “unholy alliance” of cultural and media forces truly believes that it’s her time, that she deserves it. This groupthink will make for a toxic punch of media bias that the Republican presidential candidate will be forced to drink on a daily basis.

4. Organization the Obama Way

Hillary’s campaign-in-waiting, the Ready for Hillary PAC, is readying itself to turn into her official campaign as soon as Madame General signs the battle order.

Some top-notch Obama campaign talent, Jeremy Bird and Mitch Stewart, have already been hired to build an organization similar to President Obama’s two nearly flawless, state-of-the-art campaigns. It would be nearly impossible for the Republican presidential candidate to quickly build and match what will then be a huge national campaign organization with a three-year head start. For even the Republican challenger, it would appear as if Hillary were the incumbent.

5.  Barrels of Money

For the 2012 presidential campaign, both candidates eventually raised a billion dollars. But Obama had the advantage of early money and put it to great use, negatively defining and attacking Romney throughout the spring of 2012.

Between now and 2016 Hillary could easily raise more than a billion dollars and much of it early. In fact, just this week it was announced that Ready for Hillary had raised over a million dollars in June 2013, without its candidate of course.

This early money will give Hillary the same advantage Obama had to smear whoever emerges as her likely opponent while the GOP primary season chugs along to its conclusion.

6. The Electoral College is Slanted Toward Hillary and the Democrats

Just how much of an advantage will the Electoral College offer Hillary in 2016?

Here are some startling facts:

In 2012 the final Electoral College results were 332 for Obama and 206 for Romney. If Romney had won the battleground states of Florida (29 votes), Ohio (18 votes), and Virginia (13 votes), Obama would still have been reelected but by a closer margin of 272 to 266.

Now, just because Obama won well over 300 electoral votes does not mean Hillary will repeat that achievement. However, the path to 270 is much easier for any Democrat candidate given current and future demographic growth and established voting patterns.

7. Hillary Will Have Either Symbolic or No Primary Opposition

The only reason why ambitious power players like New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo or Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley might challenge Hillary to a primary is to increase their own national name recognition with the goal of landing on Hillary’s VP shortlist. (The battle to top that shortlist will be the real Democratic primary of 2016.) Not having a real primary will be a tremendous advantage for Hillary, thus freeing her up to concentrate on the general-election battle while the Republicans are still battling each other.

Meanwhile, Vice President Biden will fall in line and become an avid campaigner and fundraiser for Hillary because he will obey his bosses’ orders—both of them.

8. The Hispanic Voting Bloc Is Hillary’s to Lose

In 2012 the Republican Party was shaken to the core after Romney lost Hispanic voters to Obama by a lopsided margin of 71 percent to 27 percent.

Now remember, the Ready for Hillary PAC has already hired some key Obama managers and field organizers who helped produce those outstanding results. Certainly part of their new job will be to ensure that the fast-growing Hispanic population continues to be a loyal Democratic voting block.

Additionally, Ready for Hillary will be “ready to register” all of those 50,000 Hispanic teenagers who will be turning 18 every month for the next two decades.

9. The African-American and Asian Vote Is Also Hillary’s to Lose

The Republican Party was hardly surprised when Obama won the African-American vote by 93 percent to 6 percent in 2012. But they were surprised that he won the Asian American vote by a wide margin of 73 percent to 26 percent. Will Hillary resonate as well with both these two groups?

I can only take a wild guess about Asian-Americans’ attitude toward Hillary, but I do remember Bill Clinton being called America’s first black president well before we had one.

10. Bill Clinton Will Be a Tremendous Asset to Hillary

“Vote for the First Dude” is a bumper sticker waiting to happen.

During last summer’s Democratic National Convention, Bill Clinton convinced America to vote for President Obama in what was heralded as such an eloquent speech that it made Obama seem small by comparison.

At that moment, Democrats and their media allies experienced a tsunami of feel-good Clinton nostalgia that continues to this day, and “Hillary 2016” is the supreme beneficiary. Furthermore, from a pop culture/media perspective, her leaner, non-meat eating, more highly evolved, totally rebranded, well-respected charitable husband (of Clinton Global Initiative fame) will be one of Hillary’s greatest assets on the campaign trail.

The once deadly “Clinton fatigue” that plagued Hillary in 2008 now only lives in the minds of Republicans. And unless Elvis is reincarnated as a Republican, the GOP has no celebrity stars that even come close to “Bubba the Big Dog.” (Don’t even think about Clint Eastwood or his empty chair.)

11. Hillary Will Run for Either Obama’s Third Term or Bill Clinton’s

If Obama’s presidency tanks in its final years, than Team Clinton (with the help of the complicit media) could easily repackage herself to run for Bill Clinton’s “third term.” (Remember that his third term was won by Al Gore in 2000 and then stolen by that evil George W. Bush, or so goes the Democrat folklore.)

However, the trick for Hillary is to still utilize Obama’s ever-likable persona just enough to fire up his loyal base to serve her own purposes. This tactic will achieve success no matter how low Obama’s approval ratings go, because there are always Republicans to blame.

12. The Republicans Have a Weak Bench With Little Star Power

If the Democrats did not have Hillary, or she declines to run, then both parties would have weak benches.

In this hypothetical case, the campaign playing field would be roughly equal (except for that growing slant in the Electoral College). But the Democrats do have Hillary, and all signs point to her running, so that leaves only a weak GOP bench and the question, “How can any of the potential GOP candidates possibly win 270 electoral votes?”

13. The Long GOP Primary System Plays to Hillary’s Advantage

On May 30, 2012, Romney finally won enough delegates to win the Republican nomination. And during that month, Obama pummeled and defined Romney as a rich mean man of privilege who fired people like you so he could become even richer. Romney didn’t know what hit him and hardly responded. Some Republican political consultants believe May was the month when Romney lost the general election because he was too busy wrapping up the nomination and building a national campaign organization.

This is only one example of how the Republican primary traveling circus went on far too long, hurting the eventual winner, and was extremely debilitating to the image of the party in the eyes of the general electorate.

Now in 2016 (unless order suddenly comes from chaos), it looks like we are in for another long, heated, Republican primary season while Hillary assumes the Obama-like incumbent position, ready to pounce on whoever starts to emerge victorious.

14. Hillary Will Make the Case That She Is the Only Leader Who Can Bring Us Together

As the potential first woman president and commander in chief, Hillary must prove that she has the capacity for strong leadership and is not afraid to compromise with Republicans in order to solve the problems confronting this nation. And with friends throughout the media singing her praises, this task should be a no-brainer—even with the Benghazi clip of “What difference does it make?” being played nonstop by Republicans.

But the irony here is that by offering herself up as the strong leader that America desperately needs (like she did so well in 2008), she draws an obvious negative comparison with our current leader, who is sadly lacking in this skill set and whose blessings she wants out on the campaign trail.

My guess is the media will gloss over Obama’s lack of leadership while bolstering Hillary’s and they will both get what they want: Obama, a historic legacy and Hillary his office. Because with the media on your side, everything is possible!

15. Calling Hillary ‘Old’ Insults the Old Republican Base

Hillary was born in 1947, making her 66 years young. If elected president, she will turn 70 during her first year in office. But as we all know, 70 is the new 55, so this is not a problem. But the next time you hear a Republican say that Hillary is too old to run (as I do all the time) please have these facts handy:

In the 2012 election, voters over the age of 65 composed 16 percent of the electorate and voted for Romney over Obama by 56 percent to 44 percent—making this age group Romney’s most loyal voting block. Next most faithful were the 45- to 64-year-olds, who constituted 38 percent of the voters and supported Romney 51 percent to Obama’s 47 percent.

So how do these stats help Hillary?

The answer is today’s “old people” do not think of themselves as old but rather smarter, more disciplined, better educated, and more competent than the generations that followed. Romney won older voters because he appeared more competent and accomplished than Obama. Now it is Hillary who will wear the competent and accomplished label more often than black pantsuits.

In addition to the competence factor, older voters (especially aging baby-boom women), relate well to someone like Hillary identifying with her life journey and numerous family struggles. Therefore, old people will carefully listen to her message and give her the benefit of the doubt—since the concept of “it is her time and she deserves it” will have been drilled into old people’s brains by the mainstream media.

16. The GOP Has Weak Arguments Against Hillary

Recently, someone sent me a link with a video from the Stop Hillary.com PAC. The video portrayed her 2017 “inauguration.” The voice-over was Hillary taking the presidential oath of office while the following words were flashed on the screen: Whitewater, Vince Foster, Travelgate, Rose Law Firm, and Benghazi. Then as Hillary finishes the oath saying, “So help me God,” the words “So help us” flash on the screen.

Along with the video, here is the mission statement of the Stop Hillary PAC:

Make sure Hillary Clinton never becomes president! America can’t survive another team back in the White House. In 2016, it will be too late to stop Hillary. we’ve got to hold her accountable right now. Stop Hillary PAC was created for one reason only—to save America from the destructive far-left, liberal cancer created by Bill and Hillary Clinton that’s trying to corrupt America. Stand with Stop Hillary PAC today to take a stand for America’s future and STOP Hillary dead in her tracks.

Now, does any thinking Republican actually believe that dredging up ’90s-era scandals is going to stop Hillary? (Benghazi is different, but unfortunately the mainstream media and general public have lost interest, and by 2016 it will have as much negative impact on her as Travelgate.)

If these arguments are the best the “Stop Hillary movement” can muster, then it is time for some new arguments.

And Finally…

Because of reasons No. 1 through 16, and in spite of the fact that Hillary is extremely polarizing and travels with a lot of baggage, she is still poised to win in 2016 because frankly, there is no one who can stop her. Unless, as stated at the beginning, there are unforeseen cataclysmic national events that dramatically alter the current economic and political landscape or Hillary has major health issues and drops out even before she gets in.

For the record, I am not in favor of any of the above options. The best I can hope for is that the presidential election campaign in 2016 will be fair, clean, and without the blatant media bias that tipped the scales for Obama in 2008 and 2012.

But since we are talking about Hillary as the first woman president, and a rekindled Clinton media love affair, good luck with all that!

Posted in Economic Crisis | Tagged , | Leave a comment

A Strong Social Movement to Elect the First Female President Spells Trouble for the GOP in 2016


Screen grab from Hillary Clinton's new web site.

Screen grab from Hillary Clinton’s new web site.

There were two great national social movements of the 20th century, Civil Rights and the Women’s Movement. (Also known as the Feminist Movement, Women’s Liberation and Women’s Lib.) As these movements gained momentum they contributed to the social upheaval that helped define the decade of the 1960s.

Now, in the 21st century both movements are still evolving and their cultural and societal effects are part of our daily life, but the success of the Civil Rights movement shines slightly brighter, as witnessed by the second inauguration of the first African-American President of the United States

Through Barack Obama, one of these two great social movements has reached the pinnacle of power twice. But in next few years, will the Women’s Movement, led by its representative-in-chief Hillary Clinton, make an all out attempt to achieve that same goal?  And will the “dominant media” be 1000% behind Clinton as the leader of the movement to help elect the first female President of the United States?

The answer to both questions is “yes” and “yes, definitely.”

For the record I am not, nor have I never been, a Hillary supporter, but as a baby-boomer Republican woman having come of age during the peak of “woman’s liberation,” I can not ignore what I foresee as an extremely ripe political movement on the horizon, even though its leader will not receive my vote.

All my political sensibilities point to a majority of American women of all ages, races, education levels and from all parts of this nation banding together to fuel a “Hillary in 2016” super-sized rocket on a trajectory straight to the White House.

However, the rocket ship stays on the launch pad if Hillary decides not to run in 2016 due to declining health or other unknown factors. But if launch is a go, than woe to any Republican male whether he is white, Hispanic, plus-sized or lean, who dares to be her opponent in 2016.

Having this opinion puts me in direct disagreement with writer Matt Lewis, who concludes in a piece which appeared in The Week  entitled, In Four Years We’ll Be Inaugurating Marco Rubio; “Watch out, Hillary. Come January 2017, America won’t be inaugurating its first female president. We’ll be inaugurating our first Latino commander-in-chief. “

But my contrary belief is that the movement to elect the first female president of the United States already has tons of industrial strength momentum and its own sense of historic urgency now seen almost daily on display throughout the mainstream media. Whereas, the movement to elect a Latino commander-in-chief will not be nearly as strong in 2016 as it will be say a decade or two from now.

For the remainder of 2013 and probably well into 2014, the major theme of all the Hillary coverage will be focused on the question, “Will she run?” But once that is answered in the affirmative, and deals are made to eliminate any Democratic primary opposition, you can expect blatant mainstream media bias on par with what occurred during the 2008 presidential campaign fueling the historic movement that elected the first African-American president.

Let us not forget how much the dominant media loves the triumph of a social movement whose members were formerly discriminated against. Certainly electing the first woman president in 2016 totally fits that bill. (And now, unlike in 2008, they really like her Bill again too!)

Another advantage Hillary will have in 2016, that first played out in the 2008 presidential election (and only to a slightly lesser extent in 2012), was the notion that if you dared not to support Obama, first as a candidate and then as an incumbent, you risked being labeled a “racist.”

This means heading towards 2016, do not be surprised when an eerily familiar mantra starts to unfold, labeling anyone not supporting Hillary for President a chauvinist, sexist or “anti-woman.”

Just watch how Hillary’s candidacy will ignite a whole new “War on Women”… but with a unique twist. For once the movement is totally underway a battle of name calling will be waged against any man (especially) or woman (most likely) who is not a foot soldier in Hillary’s army, marching in lock step towards conquering the Oval Office in the name of “Girl Power.”

As one prominent Republican campaign strategist told me during the 2008 McCain campaign, it is nearly impossible for any presidential candidate to be victorious if he or she is running against a social movement and Hillary in 2016 will most definitely be a social movement.

Ironically in 2008, Hillary was burned when she ran up against an even stronger social movement (at the time) with its goal to nominate the first African-American Democrat candidate.

But in 2016 all the stars will be aligned in her favor. This is because for great movements to be successful they must be perfectly timed and fueled by a desire to achieve something once almost unachievable or to compensate for past treatment now considered to be unjust. And the movement of Hillary in 2016 has all of the above.

Additionally, successful movements like Obama’s quest for the presidency in 2008 must first have the full faith and backing of the dominant media and once that is achieved, all the “plain folks” usually just fall in line.

(See gay marriage and gay rights as the most recent example of such a movement).

Furthermore, Hillary Clinton in 2016 will have even more of an advantage than did Senator Obama at the beginning of his movement.

Her favorability is already extremely high at 67% and she does not have to be introduced to the American people, as was the case in 2008 with a little known newly minted Senator from Illinois.

Even if Hillary’s popularity somewhat diminishes (which it will), Republicans with an eye for 2016 must not be in denial that they will be up against a historic movement with the largest, most powerful voting block that abandoned them by a margin of more than 10% in 2012.  (Exit polls indicate 55% of women voted for Obama and 44% for Romney, with women comprising 53% of the entire electorate.)

However, the dominant media, in concert with the growing power of American women will form a tour de force that, in my opinion, no male Republican presidential candidates currently on the 2016 horizon can expect to overcome.

It is my sincere hope that the 2016 GOP candidate will find a way to win the White House anyway. But if Hillary is the Democrat nominee she will be more than a presidential candidate. Hillary Rodham Clinton will represent a “triumph” of the women’s movement similar to the “triumph” of the Civil Rights movement which twice helped elect Barack Obama.

And, as we have just seen in 2008 and 2012, running against a social movement is made even more difficult when the dominant media is totally supportive of the movement and will do everything in its power to forge a “happy ending.”

Re-posted from RedState.com

 

 

 

 

Posted in 2016 Presidential race, Hillary Clinton 2016 | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

“Media Malpractice” The “Like-A-Lot- Affair” Between Obama and the Media – 2012 Sequel


 Re-posted from PJ Media

Recently Politico ran a piece entitled, “To GOP, Blatant Bias in Vetting“, written by two of its top writers, Jim VanderHei and Mike Allen.

The article began with an example of how The New York Times on Sunday, May 27, dedicated prime front page space to a hit piece on Mitt Romney’s wife Ann.

The piece zeroed in on Mrs. Romney’s love of dressage horse- riding that elitist sport only reserved for rich people like Ann Romney.

Politico then compared the high profile placement of the Ann Romney piece with the New York Times’ third-rate coverage – buried on A- 15, of the young Barack Obama’s penchant for dope-smoking revealed by David Maraniss in his new book, Barack Obama: The Story.

From Politico:

No wonder Republicans are livid with the early coverage of the 2012 general election campaign. To them, reporters are scaring up stories to undermine the introduction of Mitt Romney to the general election audience – and once again downplaying ones that could hurt the president.

Now that Politico has raised serious questions about biased presidential campaign coverage against Governor Mitt Romney and his family, one wonders if this entire campaign will be a repeat of the well-documented 2008 love affair between the media and then candidate, Senator Obama.

The totally “in the tank” coverage, even spoofed on Saturday Night Live was credited with elevating a candidate with the thinnest resume in our nation’s history to the highest office in the land. That was the mainstream media’s agenda then and it looks like those same “powers that be” are going for a redux in 2012.

The Politico piece quotes Ari Fleischer, the former press secretary to President Bush,…”The love affair of 2008 may no longer be a love affair, but it’s a like-a-lot affair. There’s no equivalency for the right.”

Except to document what happened…

Back in 2009, filmmaker John Ziegler produced a two-hour documentary entitled

  Media Malpractice – How Obama Got Elected and Palin Was Targeted.

The film, now available on Netflix and Hulu, is recommended viewing, but I warn you, it is difficult to watch if you happen to be a freedom loving American.

Ziegler’s documentary storyline told through news footage and headlines resembles Soviet-era style Russian propaganda. It shows step by step, how voters were systematically brainwashed by the media so voters would feel good about electing a leader who had barely served two years as a United States Senator and for most of those two years spent his time running for president.

So I asked John Ziegler to comment on the Politico piece and this was his email reply:

“Only in the bizarro world of mainstream media could an obviously biased news source do a story on vetting bias and not even really mention the abject lack of vetting by the press of Barack Obama, which forms the sound basis of GOP anger over the way Romney is being treated by comparison. If it all wasn’t so serious it really would be hilarious. Even when they seem to “get it,” they really don’t.”

The good news for John Ziegler is if the current mainstream media’s “like-a-lot-affair” with President Obama continues, and he is reelected, Ziegler will have more than enough material for another two hour documentary.

In that case may I suggest the title: Media Malpractice — The Sequel of Doom.

Because if President Obama is reelected, many Americans, myself included, believe he would continue our totally unsustainable collision course with increasing government debt that will accelerate our decline as a superpower.

Can you imagine if the New York Times were to explore that premise on their Sunday front page a week before the November election?

No, instead watch for a derogatory front page feature on Mormons.

Posted in 2012 Presidential Race, Barack Obama, Decline of America, Economic Crisis, John Ziegler, Media Malpractice, Mitt Romney, Politics | Leave a comment

Senator Rob Portman Will Be Romney’s VP According to GOP Insiders


Obviously since my last post in November much has changed!                                              (Yes, I know I need to re-post my pieces here more often.)                                             Governor Bob McDonnell ran into some problems with “women issues” legislation and his VP star has dramatically faded as a result. So now in late May here we are….

Breaking News May 30, 2012:                                                                                                  Senator Portman in Israel to meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu.

Is this a strong signal that Portman has been tapped to be Romney’s VP?

Re-posted from PJ Media

These days one of the favorite games among political junkies is prognosticating about who will be Romney’s Vice Presidential running mate. An important criterion for selection, the “incredibly boring white guy”  factor previously has been examined by this writer and others.

Now, there seems to be a consensus among inside GOP political operatives as to who will share the bumper sticker with Romney within that group of potential VP nominees who exemplify that distinguishing “boring” characteristic.

That person is Ohio Senator Rob Portman.

Sensing an opinion wave for Portman within the last month, I asked a prominent GOP Super Pac insider (name withheld by request) why Portman is the “chosen one” and this was the email response I received:

He could bring Ohio!!! And he is very experienced and he won’t spend $100,000 on clothes in two months!  The goal this cycle is “safe, not sorry. But win Ohio!”

Packed within that email are several discussion points alluding to the GOP’s 2008 VP candidate, (which are sure to be elaborated upon in the comment section of this post).

Notwithstanding a negative or positive opinion of the GOP’s 2008 VP candidate, Sarah Palin has significantly impacted the decision-making selection process of the GOP’s 2012 VP candidate and it now looks like Senator Rob Portman will be the ultimate beneficiary.

Another veteran insider of past GOP presidential campaigns responded to my email which posed the question “Why Portman?” with this list of reasons:

He’s fabulous.

Would actually be a great VP.  

Not an ideologue.

Ohio.

Understands jobs and global economy as U.S. Trade Representative not OMB.

“Not OMB” is worth discussing for this is a touchy Portman resume item that Team Obama is sure to exploit as a negative talking point after Portman is officially nominated.

From May, 2006 until June, 2007 Rob Portman served as President George W. Bush’s Director of the Office of Management and Budget. (OMB)

When asked about the potential for President Obama and the Democrats to “denigrate” his OMB service, Portman was ready with an answer, as recently reported in a comprehensive piece in Real Clear Politics (RCP) entitled, “Does Portman Have the Edge in VP Sweepstakes?

He told the Cincinnati Enquirer last month: “I was there for just over a year and I put out one budget … [which] was actually a balanced budget. And not even over 10 years but over five years and I’m proud of that.” He conceded, “Frankly it was a battle within the White House to get the White House and everybody on board with that . . . but imagine that, a balanced budget.”

So Rob Portman’s defense of his one year as OMB Director includes a small salvo aimed at the Bush White House for rejecting his “pathway to balancing the budget in five years”. Now, by comparison, President Obama’s budget deficits are projected to be $977 billion in 2013 making President Bush’s $161 billion deficit in 2007 look like chump change.

This means Portman has plenty of cover when the Obama campaign unleashes their wild attack dogs in the last two months of the general election and there is no doubt that Portman will successfully defend himself and his record at OMB.

Portman’s first post in President Bush’s second term was as the United States Trade Representative. He worked in that position for one year before President Bush promoted him to OMB Director in mid- 2006.

To further understand the depth of experience that Senator Portman brings to the Romney ticket, it is important to note that before serving two years in the Bush Administration, Portman had a distinguished congressional career which spanned 12 years from May, 1993 until May, 2005.

Representing Ohio’s 2nd congressional district, Portman built a reputation for bi-partisanship, writing numerous pieces of legislation that were signed into law by President Clinton; but you can count on this part of his career to be completely ignored by Team Obama.

Instead, get ready to read how Portman was “Bush’s guy” who helped drive the economy into a ditch and you can almost hear Obama asking voters the question, “and this is the guy you want to let back into the White House?”

Well, the voters of Ohio had no problem sending Portman back to Washington after serving in Bush’s White House. In fact, when Portman ran for his current senate seat in 2010 he defeated his Democrat opponent, garnering 57% of the vote to Lee Fisher’s 39%.

Now in the midst of the 2012 election cycle when Romney is in search of a “boring white guy” how could any guy who won an important state’s senate race by 18% points possibly be that boring?

In response to the boring accusation which supposedly helps Portman’s chances, here is an entertaining piece to the contrary which appeared recently on Buzz Feed entitled  “15 Genuinely Interesting Things About Rob Portman.”

He’s hunts! He canoes! He bikes! He fishes! He speaks Spanish!  (The latter could be a big benefit to Romney with a voting block that he needs to attract.)

So, maybe he’s not that boring after all.

Consider Portman’s resume of 12 years as a Congressman with stints as International Trade Representative, OMB Director, a US Senator since January 2011 an Ohio political power player who is credited with helping Romney win the Ohio primary over Rick Santorum — and you have someone who is extremely well qualified to be the GOP vice-presidential candidate.

Now many signs are pointing in Portman’s direction except this one.

Currently Intrade has Senator Portman’s chances of being selected as Romney’s VP rated at only 22%. (But Portman’s chances are increasing by the minute.)

Portman’s closest Intrade competitor is Florida Senator Marco Rubio. At the moment Rubio’s chances that he will be Romney’s VP are rated at 24%.

This tight VP race raging at Intrade suggests that the general betting public is not yet up to speed on what many Washington GOP insiders and members of the media are saying about Portman’s real chances.

All politics aside, the primary job of the Vice-President is to step in and take over as President of the United States if called upon — and for that role Senator Portman is well suited.

In fact, Mark McKinnon, now a political media personality, who served as media strategist for President Bush in 2000 and 2004, wrote in an email responding to my question “Why Portman”, “The guy was truly made for the job.”

Compare that description to the now deceased Osama bin Laden’s stinging critique of Vice-President Joe Biden, calling him “utterly unprepared” to be President of the United States.

This description came to light on captured documents while bin Laden planned/dreamed of targeting planes carrying President Obama and General Petraeus so our nation would be plunged into crisis under Biden’s leadership.

In the end the contest between “the guy truly made for the job” vs. the one called “utterly unprepared” will not be the determining factor in whether Obama or Romney is victorious in November.

However, according to my sources Senator Rob Portman is the one most likely to be standing on stage at the Vice-Presidential debate this fall.

So reserve your seat now because a Biden vs. Portman match-up will be anything but boring.

Posted in 2012 Presidential Race, Barack Obama, Bob McDonnell, Mitt Romney, Politics, Presidential Election 2012, Republican Politics, Senator Rob Portman | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A Romney/McDonnell 2012 Presidential Ticket Is (Practically) a Done Deal


Re-posted from PJMedia November 11, 2011

It’s a done deal! It’s a slam dunk! You can just about start printing the bumper stickers for the 2012 Republican presidential ticket. For as a result of this week’s GOP debate and a Virginia legislative election, the Romney/McDonnell ticket has been solidified.

Mitt Romney, the inevitable Republican presidential nominee, has become even more so as a result of Rick Perry’s debate implosion (Otherwise known as the “56 second brain freeze” that rocked the world.)

Romney looks and sounds presidential and is by default going to be the last man standing after Cain-mania settles down. This is not exactly pleasing to the conservative base, but there is “hope and change” coming for conservatives on the 2012 ticket and his name is Governor Bob McDonnell of Virginia.

Governor McDonnell took a well-deserved victory lap this past week after helping the Republican Party of Virginia win control of both the Virginia General Assembly and Virginia Senate. This huge legislative victory, won with tea party support, catapults McDonnell right into Romney’s number two slot.

But for McDonnell, these favorable Virginia election results are only the cherry on top of the sundae. There are five other important reasons why McDonnell will be Romney’s running mate, served up for coronation at the 2012 Republican nominating convention in Tampa.

1. Governor Bob McDonnell is a conservative who conservatives trust.

McDonnell can make a Romney-topped ticket more palatable to the tea party/conservative base. The base currently does not trust Romney but with McDonnell as his VP, McDonnell can help “sell” Romney and soften the blow for conservatives nationally, while not scaring away moderate voters.

2. Virginia is a must-win-back state for the GOP.

Obama won Virginia in 2008 by 7 percentage points, but with Governor McDonnell’s high approval rating of  62% Romney can count on him to return Virginia into the red column where it had been for forty years since 1968.

Obama will throw everything he has at Virginia but McDonnell will triumph. Already, Tuesday’s Virginia election results are considered a bad omen for Obama nationally.

3. Obama/Kaine vs. McDonnell/Allen

The race for the open U.S. Senate seat created by Democrat Jim Webb stepping down will be one of the most watched, vicious, and expensive Senate races in 2012.  But not only will it be a political fight to the finish but very personal as well.

The dynamic revolves around former Virginia Governor Tim Kaine who, as governor in 2008, was one of Senator Obama’s earliest supporters and was widely credited with helping Obama turn Virginia from red to blue.

Now, Virginia governors can only serve one 4 year term, and Kaine’s term was ending in January of 2010. So after Obama was elected president, Obama thanked Kaine for his early support by appointing him to be chairman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in early 2009 while Kaine was still governor of Virginia.

Then, in the Virginia gubernatorial election in November of 2009, Republican Attorney General Bob McDonnell won a resounding 59% of the vote  a 17.5% point margin of victory against Democrat Creigh Deeds to whom both Obama and Kaine (as DNC head and incumbent VA governor) threw much campaign funding and personal support.  McDonnell’s victory was a total embarrassment to Obama and Kaine.

Moving ahead to the 2012 election cycle, Kaine has left the DNC to run for the US Senate in Virginia against former US Senator and former Virginia Governor George Allen, who was defeated in 2006 by Jim Webb.

On Friday, November 11th a few days after his state legislative victories, Governor McDonnell endorsed George Allen, who has primary tea party opposition.

There are high hopes that George Allen will win that highly contested Virginia Senate seat, especially if the VP candidate is Governor Bob McDonnell.

President Obama, of course, will be supporting Kaine one thousand percent for two reasons. First, Obama is counting on Kaine to keep the Virginia Senate seat in the Democrat column. Second, Obama is expecting Kaine to have coat-tails going up the ballot, helping him to win Virginia again.

This all sets up an Obama/Kaine vs. McDonnell/Allen WWF style “death match.”

For not only is Virginia and its 13 electoral votes a grand prize in the race for the White House, but Republican control of the US Senate also hangs in the balance.

This Virginia Senate race is the third practical political reason why a Romney/ McDonnell ticket will be appearing on your ballot in 2012.

4. McDonnell is chairman of the Republican Governors Association (RGA).

The Bob McDonnell for VP stars aligned even more perfectly when Texas Governor Rick Perry resigned as chairman of the RGA to run for president, and Governor McDonnell was then tapped as chairman.

McDonnell chairing the RGA is highly significant for individual state and national media exposure as well as fundraising.

There is no better post for McDonnell to hold to help Romney more than RGA chairman and this is even before Romney chooses McDonnell as his running mate.

5. Romney thinks very highly of McDonnell.

That is an understatement in that Romney has called Governor McDonnell one of the ¨great leaders of the Republican Party.”  Romney has also said, “I say nice things about Governor McDonnell every time I have a chance.”

McDonnell, meanwhile, has said that he would like to see a former governor in the White House. (Wink, wink, I don’t think he is talking about Perry.)

Additionally, McDonnell has not been shy when asked about being considered for the number two position.

Furthermore, McDonnell would personally and politically complement Romney and not overshadow him in some ways like Palin did to McCain in 2008.

Romney/McDonnell could be a marriage made in political heaven — a win-win for the “establishment wing” of the Republican Party with the “conservative wing” placing a respectable second.

The next step would be for McDonnell to officially announce his support for a presidential candidate, something McDonnell said he would do after the Virginia legislative election this past Tuesday. Gee, I wonder whom McDonnell will endorse?

And when McDonnell does utter the name “Mitt Romney,” it’s time to start up the presses for the yard signs and bumper stickers. For on that day, the 2012 GOP presidential ticket will be non-officially inked but officially ready to do battle.

Posted in 2012 Presidential Race, Barack Obama, Bob McDonnell, Decline of America, Economic Crisis, Mitt Romney, Politics, Presidential Election 2012, Republican Politics | Leave a comment

PJMedia Exclusive: A Talk with Congressman Allen West


“I’m not going to tailor my message. ‘Politicians’ tailor their message.”
Congressman Allen West FL -22

by  Myra Adams
October 6, 2011 – 12:00 am

Q. You have been representing Florida’s 22nd Congressional District for nine months now. Is there anything about Congress or being a congressman that has totally shocked or surprised you?

A. What has shocked me most of all is how easily facts seem to disappear when you cross the Potomac River. It seems on Capitol Hill the goal is to distort the facts, and as a result, the truth is in short supply.

Q. You have claimed to be “the modern day Harriet Tubman” for your commitment to leading African Americans away from the “plantation” of the Democratic Party, as she led slaves from the plantation to the underground railroad. Are you making any progress?

A. The first step in making progress is building awareness — making sure the African American community knows there is a way out of poverty and despair. The same way Harriet Tubman showed a path forward, my goal is to do the same. Government dependency does not create wealth.

But it’s not a message limited by race. The route all Americans have taken to advancement and prosperity is by embracing our constitutional principles of individualism and self-determination.

Q. Is it even possible to make substantial progress in this area since most African Americans and the Democrats are glued together as political allies?

A. It is certainly a challenge. The liberal progressive policies of the modern Democrat Party, while well-intentioned, have done great damage to African American families and their economic progress over the last five decades since passage of the Civil Rights Act.

Unemployment in the African American community stands at 16.7%, food stamp enrollment is up, and nearly three-quarters of all black children do not live with their biological fathers.

The policies since the War on Poverty have been a failure. Welfare programs devised by the left to aid single mothers have instead worked perversely to incentivize more young women to have children out of wedlock.

High minimum wages advocated by labor unions — from whom Democrats receive tremendous financial support — mean employers are less apt to hire unskilled African American youths — or any youths for that matter.

For the left, “spending on education” generally means job protection and preserving benefits for school administrators and teachers unions, rather than actually improving education for students in public schools, where African American students can build a foundation for economic advancement.

Even environmental policies have hurt the economic progress of African Americans. In cities such as San Francisco, severe building restrictions drive real estate prices through the roof, making neighborhoods where they once lived unaffordable.

Q. You have already threatened to quit the Congressional Black Caucus over what you called “racially motivated rhetoric” by members aimed at the tea party, but decided to remain a member. What future behavior by Congressional Black Caucus members would cause you to say “enough is enough” and force you to quit the caucus?

A. The Congressional Black Caucus needs to have an open dialogue and more than one viewpoint. After all, it is the Congressional Black Caucus, not the Progressive Black Caucus. Today there is a voice of constitutional conservatism in the CBC, and I will do my best to make sure that is a permanent voice. My goal is for that voice to grow. I have never been a quitter, and I do not plan to be one now.

Q. Have you received any backlash from African American voters in your district (approximately 5.6% of voters) when they heard about how you are trying to lead them from away from the “plantation” of the Democratic Party?

A. Nope.

Q. Though you won in 2010 in a mid-term election, your congressional district was won by Gore (51%), Kerry (51%), and Obama (52%) in the last three presidential elections. What is your strategy for convincing the majority of Democrat-leaning voters in your district who did not show up to vote in the 2010 mid-term election but will likely show up to vote in 2012?

A. Simply telling the truth. If voters want more of the same failed economic policies we have seen in the last three years, with unemployment at 9.1%, a deficit projected to be approximately $1.5 trillion this year, a national debt that has skyrocketed to more than $14.2 trillion, hundreds of regulations being handed down by unelected czars which are strangling our small business job creators, then they should get out and vote for the Democrat candidates.

However, I believe the American people and the constituents of South Florida know our ship of state is on the wrong course. They feel America’s better days are behind us. But if they want to get this ship back on course, if they want our country’s future to be better for their children and grandchildren, they must elect constitutional conservatives who will reverse the very dangerous direction in which this country is currently being led.

Q. As you are well aware, the national Democratic Party is targeting you for defeat. How does it feel to have a huge target on your back?

A. I’m a soldier. If you want to motivate a soldier, tell him you want a fight. When you pick a fight with a soldier, we love it … and you’ll get defeated.

Q. It has been speculated that you are most likely to face former West Palm Beach Mayor Lois Frankel as your Democrat opponent in 2012. Currently on Ms. Frankel’s campaign web site is a fundraising banner that states:

Stop Allen West and his radical backers. Contribute now!

What is your plan to counter her argument that you are too radical for your district? Especially when you seem to have a knack for making news headlines that could be perceived by Democrats and independents as “too radical.”

A. Tell me what is too radical about limiting the growth of the federal government. Tell me what is too radical about reducing out-of-control spending and restoring fiscal responsibility. Tell me what is too radical about setting the conditions for businesses to grow, thrive, create jobs, and help our communities prosper. Tell me what is too radical about protecting our way of life. What I find shocking is that so many on the left think it’s “too radical” to return to the constitutional principles on which our great nation was founded.

Q. Take a look at Lois Frankel’s campaign site. What are the most misleading or inaccurate items about you that she has posted on the site?

A. I don’t care what she says about me. What I find misleading is how she characterizes her business-as-usual progressive “tax and spend” policies as better for our congressional district and our nation, when they have clearly failed the American people. I see no ideas there, just typical liberal character assassination politics … which will fail, just as their policies have.

Q. According to the respected  Cook Political Report you are included on the list of top ten Republicans vulnerable for defeat because of redistricting. If your new district does end up including more Democrat or independent leaning voters and as a result you would have to tailor your message to appeal to them or face a certain defeat, on which major issues of the day could you consider compromise in order to win re-election?

A. I’m not going to tailor my message. “Politicians” tailor their message. My message is simple, and remains consistent. We must return to our constitutional principles of limited government and the defense of our citizens and their freedoms. At the end of the day, I believe people are looking for leaders who are principled, pragmatic, passionate, and patriotic. Americans no longer want retread career politicians looking for their next gig.

Q. You are a terrific speaker, an American patriot, a true conservative, a bold leader, and a “rising star” on the national political scene. As a result, money will pour in from outside your congressional district to aid in what will be, by all accounts, a tough re-election campaign.

Are you concerned that your Democrat opponent will use your national “rising star” status and all the outside funding against you? How will you counter the argument, sure to be used, that you are more interested in being a national conservative leader than in representing your Florida district?

A. I’m running for reelection in to the United States House of Representatives. I’m glad my message resonates on a national scale. I am glad people are listening and support this message of limited constitutional government. The constituents of the congressional district recognize this country needs a course correction in 2012 and Americans around the nation realize we need to support strong leaders to Washington, D.C., to address our nation’s most pressing issues. The people in this district like having a national leader, not a liberal puppet.

Q. Many Americans believe that our nation’s best days are behind us? Do you?

A.  Absolutely not — I believe in the American spirit. I believe that America is a shining city on a hill. I believe our nation is a lighthouse which sends out a beacon of light around the world illuminating the principles of liberty, justice, and freedom. We have faced challenges from the Depression, to Pearl Harbor, to September 11, and what we learned is that even in the darkest moments in our history, we are able to see a light at the end of the tunnel and have reemerged stronger as a nation and as a people.

Q. As a former military officer, who is your favorite American military hero?

A. Without question, General George S. Patton.

Q. Who is your political role model currently serving in elective office?

A. It’s only been nine months since I was sworn in, so you’re not going to get my admiration in such a short amount of time. However, there are a number of individuals, including senior members, whose advice I value.

Congressman West, thank you for your time. Many PJM readers and residents of your district look forward to watching you fight for your first re-election bid in a newly drawn district. We wish you well.

 
Myra Adams is a media producer, writer, and political observer who served on the McCain Ad Council during the 2008 McCain campaign, and on the 2004 Bush campaign creative team. Her columns have appeared on Pajamas Media, The Daily Caller and as a co-writer on The Daily Beast. Myra’s web site TheJesusStore.com contributes all profits to Christian charity.

Posted in 2012 Presidential Race, Allen West, Barack Obama, Decline of America, Economic Crisis, Politics, Republican Politics | Leave a comment

The First Lady – From Target Marketing to Ultra Ritzy Dining in One Weekend


Re-posted from Pajamas Media

As the world knows by now, First Lady Michelle Obama did a little shopping with jus’ plain folks at Target in Alexandria, Virginia, where a AP reporter just happened to be around to chronicle the event for the planet.

This also happens to be my Target store, (lovingly referred to in these parts as TarzhAY) As  a video producer, I was once tasked with shooting racks of bathing suits for a national weight loss product infomercial at this same Target – and can personally attest that video taping only commenced after numerous phone calls were made and permission was officially granted by Target management.

The point is stores like Target are very persnickety about photography, still or moving, taken inside their stores to be used for non- Target commercial purposes. (And, yes, I would classify Mrs. Obama’s husband’s re-election campaign as a non- Target commercial purpose.”)

So it appears the First Lady’s desire to shop for cheap Chinese goods along side her lowly subjects was fully planned and executed for promotional purposes with a product sell date of November 6, 2012.

Now that’s what’s called Target marketing!

But here is the yin to the yang.

The next evening, the Obamas celebrated their 19th wedding anniversary in my neighborhood of Old Town, Alexandria, just a few miles from Target, at a little dining establishment called Restaurant Eve.

The restaurant’s web site states the following: The 34 seat Chef’s Tasting Room is Chef Armstrong’s culinary showcase. Here, Armstrong features a five, seven and nine-course prix-fixe tasting menu, priced at $120, $135, and $150 respectively.

Whoa…now that’s a meal symbolizing  “America has gone soft,” with wildly expensive delicate little forkfuls of gourmet this and that, highlighted with Garden Basil from the restaurant’s own organic garden.

Whatever happened to huge slabs of rare prime rib oozing blood juices?  THAT was the celebratory meal that made America hard.

Knowing my ‘hood as I do, I can state with great certainty that Friday afternoon shoppers at Alexandria’s “TarzhAY” do not normally find themselves dining Saturday night at Restaurant Eve. Rather, Chipotle right up the street is more likely and no doubt, a future target marketing opportunity for Mrs. Obama.

The fact that these two fine establishments were back to back on the First Lady’s weekend calendar is one of those Obama-nations where only Alexandria residents can truly appreciate the irony.

Celebrating an anniversary at Restaurant Eve (where the tab usually equals one month’s rent on a small apartment) is well within the reach of the first couple’s personal budget. And I would not be writing this snarky little piece if Michelle the Commoner hadn’t pulled that “I feel your pain” shopping stunt at Target the day before.

Posted in 2012 Presidential Race, Barack Obama, Decline of America, Politics, poverty, Presidential Election 2012, Republican Politics | Tagged | Leave a comment