The American Spectator : Has Obama Peaked?

Text Size

Has Obama Peaked?

By J.T. Young on 7.31.12 @ 6:08AM

His campaign must know that that’s a rhetorical question.

Democrats’ biggest concern isn’t the economy; it’s whether Obama has already peaked. There are numerous reasons to believe it’s true. If true, there are rapidly diminishing opportunities for the Administration to reverse it, and a growing list that could accelerate it.

Pick your poll: the presidential race is a toss-up. The latest Gallup tracking poll (taken 7/22-29, 3,050 registered voters, MOE +/- 2%) has the race tied at 46% apiece. It couldn’t get any tighter.

The race has been so tight for so long, that it is not news — until we factor in campaign spending. While the focus has been on Republicans’ advantage with Super PACs, the overlooked story is how much Obama has outspent Romney on campaign advertising.

The National Journal’s Hotline publication has been tabulating the race’s television ad buys. According to their latest calculation of 2012 advertising in thirteen swing states (CO, FL, IA, MI, MN, NV, NH, NM, NC, OH, PA, VA, and WI), Obama has outspent Romney almost three to one — $120 million to $43 million thus far. The advantage is not only deep but broad: Obama has outspent Romney in all eleven states where either campaign has spent.

When adding in spending by outside groups, the Democrats’ superiority seems to vanish. Democrats and their allies have spent $141 million, while Republicans and theirs have spent $203 million — outspending Democrats in all states.

However the cash’s quality is not equal. Democrats still hold a decided advantage for two reasons. First, Democrats have far greater control over their resources because a far greater proportion is under Obama’s direct control — not outside groups’. Second, under FEC rules, campaigns pay less for advertising airtime — so Obama’s campaign dollars go further than Republican Super PACs’.

Looking at the polls in this context, the worry should be clear: despite significantly outspending Romney, Obama has gotten no separation from him. Nor is it just Democratic spending that has assailed Romney. He weathered a long grueling primary, during which he was the constant target of all challengers.

Over this prolonged pummeling, Romney has not simply endured, he is even with the incumbent. Shouldn’t the incumbent Obama, who faced no primary and was able to save, focus, and control massively more resources, have opened up a lead? Has Obama taken his best shot, while Republicans are still waiting to throw theirs?

There are several indications that this is true. Presidential reelections are about the incumbent and elected incumbents overwhelmingly win — only Carter and Bush I have lost in the last 76 years. Because of this, winning incumbents increase their popular vote share from their initial election.

Never in U.S, history has a winning incumbent, in his initial reelection attempt, seen his popular vote percentage fall. However despite his spending and incumbency advantages, if current polls are correct Obama is unlikely to come close to reaching his 52.5% of the 2008 popular vote.

Second, in Obama’s 2008 victory, most neglected to notice his win was only an electoral vote landslide and against an opponent with numerous crippling disadvantages. McCain failed to unite Republicans, while carrying the burden of two wars and an economic downturn.

Even more unnoticed was Obama’s massive spending advantage. All told, McCain raised $350 million for his primary and general election campaigns, while Obama raised $745.7 million. And this huge advantage could be focused on close states — further increasing the spending disparity.

While Obama benefitted from a huge 2008 — and thus far in 2012 — spending advantage, it is disappearing now. Republican Super PACs have a 3-1 cash on hand advantage over the Democrats’. Romney also is closing the gap. In May, Romney outraised Obama $77 million to $60 million and in June, Republicans raised over $100 million.

Without his huge cash advantage and with the election just over three months away, there are a diminishing number of potentially positive variables for Obama. The Fed recently downgraded the economy’s projected performance and Congress’ stalemate eliminates the possibility for any great political victories. Abroad too, it is easier to see things getting worse — such as an economic collapse in Europe — than better.

The realization should be emerging that Obama was not really that strong in 2008, when he massively outspent a disadvantaged opponent. And he is even weaker now — despite an early and significant spending advantage — when he will be unable to financially overwhelm a stronger opponent. The questions Democrats must be asking is: Has Obama already peaked? And can he hold on just long enough?

About the Author

J.T. Young served in the Department of Treasury and the Office of Management and Budget from 2001 to 2004 and as a Congressional staff member from 1987 to 2000.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (123) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 6:48AM

I'm thinking that you're asking the Wrong Question.

Has he Peaked? Yeah, back in January 2008. The 21st of January, as I recall. That was the last day he could get away with just Running His Mouth.

I'm thinking that he's Valleyed. I mean, things have only gotten Worse since he became King, but then, that was always the Plan.

One must Tear Down before one can Transform. Think: Bathroom Makeover or Boob Job.

When this Creature was running, Businesses were excited. They were tired of Bush, and failed to realize that the Economy was suffering from the previous 2 years of Liberal Control over Both Houses of Congress. They blamed Bush, and they were Wishing for something different.

Careful what you wish for.

In came the most Transparent White Hating, Jew Hating, Business Hating, America Hating, Politician, that nobody wanted to Vette. His America Hating Ties were an open book. All anyone had to do was "Open one of his Books".

Pity.

4 years later, we're right where we were when The Magic Negro began. Only Worse.

"He Stabilized things."

He bailed out THE RICH. The Millionaires and the Billionaires. And, then he let it be known that he could "Take it Back" any time he wanted to.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 7:11AM

His Bailout gave him access to the Money. Now he needed some Muscle.

He Bailed out the Public Sector Unions with his Stimulus/Slush Fund. Apparently, these jobs were "Shovel Ready"

He bailed out the Auto Workers - Soviet Style - by sticking it up the Bondholder's Asses, and handing the Company over to his Goons.

He "Re-Gifted" to his Big Donours, in the form of MILLION$ in Taxpayer Subsidies, for their Bogus Companies.

Life was good for George and Weezie. They had moved on up.

There was Gold, and Dinner Parties. Concerts at the White House, and Movie Stars under the Christmas Tree. They went on Multimillion $ Vacations, used Air Force One to pick up Pizza, and wore $600 Sneakers, while carrying a $3,000 Handbag, on their way to pick up a $5,000 Evening Gown, for the State of the Union, where they would proceed to remind the rest of us, on the importance of SHARED SACRIFICE.

That was then.

Now it's Now.

Unless you're Black, you understand that The 1st African American Dictator was a HUGE Mistake. Unless you look like him, and all you care about is the fact that he looks like you? You understand that 4 More Years of Attack the Rich/Get Even/Bottom Up Economy, is gonna result in a Rocket Sled Ride to Third World Status.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 7:29AM

"We've tried it our way, and it's worked."

Detroit, Oakland, Los Angeles, Chicago, Baltimore, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Flint, Philly, Gary, on and on and on and on.

Every week, there's News of another American DEMOCRAT Controlled City, seeking Bankruptcy Protection form the Debt they owe to Obama's Muscle.

California is almost a No Go Zone, like parts of Chicago. Michigan is Bulldozing their Cities, like the Soviets used to do, to make them go away. Illinois, the "Home State" of the Magic Negro (Hat Tip LA Times) is fast becoming a FAILED STATE. More reminiscent of someplace from a Post Apocalyptic Sci-Fi Movie, than a State inside a Superpower.

Those of us with straight hair, have seen enough.

Everything that should be Up is Down, and Vice Versa.

As long as he remains, Businesses will, not only Not Hire. They will not STAY HERE. There's no place to go, but Further Down.

That's a lotta Pig.

And, all the Money in the world, won't turn that Sow's Ear, in to a Silk Purse.

Jack in Wi| 7.31.12 @ 10:05AM

Everything the author says is true and more. None the less Romney will be luckey to win. He is a rotten candidate, who stands for nothing and who hasn't united the party. How he plays out the hand he was dealt will decide the election. I don't think he is much of a poker player.

Crassus| 7.31.12 @ 10:29AM

Yeah, like your boy RuPaul would be any better. GMAFB.

EdL| 7.31.12 @ 11:14PM

Lucky has no "e", and he will roll. Romney is the the likeable one, too.

Andrew P111| 8.1.12 @ 7:30AM

Romney was the only GOP contender with the financial resources to take on Obama. He is still a bad candidate and will be lucky to win. I think Obama's June and July ad spending was only designed to soften Romney up for attacks to come later. It was not designed to move the polls. Obama will use 3 lines of attack. (1) He will argue that success in business has nothing to do with macroeconomics, and that Romney will be a financial disaster for anyone who depends on government spending. (2) If the contained great depression gets unleashed again by events in Europe, he will scare the sheeple into accepting that they need the nanny state to survive, and (3) his "felon" meme will turn into an October Surprise when Eric Holder indicts Romney for tax evasion a week before the election.

MK48| 7.31.12 @ 10:27AM

TLP...........some of your best work.

Bless you brother

C'mon Man!| 7.31.12 @ 1:03PM

Boob Job, Obama's new name. George and Weezie - classic! Keep it up TLP!

Buck Ofama| 7.31.12 @ 5:18PM

And these also suitable monikers:

- O'Icarus
- Ovomit
- Oblowme

I'm surprised that I have never read the moniker, "O'Icarus". I coined it, but surely someone else must have thought of it.

spike59| 8.1.12 @ 6:17AM

and, in honor of his much-ballyhooed visit to Ireland, here's another: Shameless O'Blarney

MTB| 8.2.12 @ 2:25PM

Yep!

George Collins| 7.31.12 @ 9:56AM

That would be January 21, 2009.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 10:07AM

And, you would be right, Mr. Collins.

I would have hoped you would have gotten more from all that, than just a misplaced date.

Oh, well.

George Collins| 7.31.12 @ 1:11PM

I always learn something from your posts, TLP. You're very smart and insightful, and I know you love this country, but I can't stand your racist leanings.

I didn't mean to be picky about the date of Obama's ascendance to the throne, but isn't amazing how little time it's taken this cretin to foul up everything he touches?

January 20, 2013: President Romney and a Republican Senate and House, and the work begins.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 4:11PM

THE TRUTH is never Racist.

It's just THE TRUTH.

And, as we all know.

Sometimes, THE TRUTH HURTS.

Don't blame the Messenger.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 4:16PM

The MAGIC NEGRO quote, came from a Liberal Columnist at the LA Times.

I just quoted him.

vtwin| 7.31.12 @ 4:47PM

David Ehrenstein, but you didn’t get from him, you got it from Paul Shanklin, who wrote it for the racist Rush Limbaugh.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 5:14PM

You're right.

I got it from Rush Limbaugh, who QUOTED IT, from David Ehrenstein - LIBERAL COLUMNIST from the LA TIMES.

What's your point?

It ORIGINATED with the Liberal.

Get It?

Of course you do.

Even a POS, like you, can't argue with that FACT.

But, I'm sure you'll try, anyway.

Because you're a POS.

Right?

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 5:18PM

As to, Mr. Collins?

Blacks make up just over 12% of the Population, yet they Commit 56% of all of the Violent Crimes in this Country.

Is that Racist?

Or are those the FBI Numbers?

I'm not piling on you.

I'm just trying to make a point.

George Collins| 7.31.12 @ 7:19PM

TLP, I would never consider it piling on.

Assuming your numbers on Blacks as a percentage of the population and violent crime rates are correct, it is a grave problem in our society. But I think that it is more of a socio-economic problem than a racial one. I think you will find that young poor whites, especially from the traditional South, are as prone to violence as young poor Blacks, who also, for the most part, trace their roots to that same geography.

Couple that with the great migration of Blacks to northern cities like Chicago, New York, and Detroit, all of which were run by white Democrat hooligans and you have a backdrop that helped foster an environment of poverty and hopelessness.

This is the same Kleptocracy that spawned our childish President and many of his handlers.

As to you TLP, I maintain that you are extremely bright and prescient, but you have a racist bent that gets you off track.

Having said that, I will channel the late Mr. Rodney King of Los Angeles, and ask, "Can't we all just beat Obama?"

Occam's Tool| 8.2.12 @ 12:13AM

The Liberal Welfare state has eviscerated the Black family and murdered Black men, all the time, every day.

TLP would like to see this reversed, so little Black kids would not be murdered in Drive-Bys.

For this, he is labelled "racist." He is NOT racist. He is against the destruction of the Black family and the murder of Black Children. How is that racist?

( Somewhat off topic, but supportive of Tim's point: I doubt, by the way, that any of the Black Pastors who came out against Gay marriage will vote against Obama.)

Brookschwarzenegro | 7.31.12 @ 12:41PM

"Has he Peaked? Yeah, back in January 2008. The 21st of January, as I recall"

Your recollection is bad-- it was 2009, not 2008.
Not too god at math, uh?

KennesawJack| 7.31.12 @ 2:10PM

No worse than you are at spelling.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 4:13PM

Thanks Jack.

Appleby| 7.31.12 @ 6:50AM

Didn't Jimmy Carter see his "popularity" slip significantly before he was defeated in a landslide by Mr. Reagan? Wasn't that supposed to be a "close" race up until five minutes after the polls closed, when Carter conceded? Or did it just seem as if Carter had been in office more than one term?

Brookschwarzenegro | 7.31.12 @ 12:42PM

"Or did it just seem as if Carter had been in office more than one term?"

One term too long..

chuck| 7.31.12 @ 7:29AM

Romney wins 40-45 states.

I think a great number of people are lying to themselves and the pollsters when they say they are voting for O'dip$hit. They don't want to come off as "raaaaaascist". But when the time comes, they know that to vote for the idiot again means the final destruction of everything that makes this country great.

Al Adab| 7.31.12 @ 9:39AM

Romney will be fortunate to get 271 electoral votes. In '08 the count was 365 to 173. Where do you see Romney gaining thosde 100 votes. One state, IN has gone over but that leaves FL, NC, VA and Ohio as the states which will decide the election. Romney needs tyo win all four to get close.

RCV| 7.31.12 @ 11:31AM

I think you're right, Al Adab. It's hard to see how Romney can pull together an electoral majority, even if he wins the popular vote nationwide. I'm increasingly convinced we may see a reversal of the Gore/Bush popular/electoral slit this fall.

vtwin| 7.31.12 @ 3:46PM

With over 8% unemployment the advantage should be with the Republicans, but as Newt Gingrich pointed out Romney is “the worst GOP candidate” to put up against Obama because Romney is seen as part and parcel of the greedy Wall Street crowd that done got us into this economic mess.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 4:18PM

He doesn't need to be The Best Candidate.

He just needs to be The UN OBAMA.

vtwin| 7.31.12 @ 4:29PM

The American people are disappointed in the state of the American economy, for which the majority correctly blame Bush, is Obama Achilles heel heading into this election, but they like Obama. So, “just” being the un-Obama isn’t going to get it done.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 6:14PM

Your Boy PROMISED TO FIX IT.

He ran on the Promise, that he could FIX IT.

He got Everything he wanted, in his first Two Years.

He's been President of The United States, for almost FOUR YEARS.

The Buck Stops with HIM.

Everything we're going through, is because of HIM.

Grow Up!

"If this isn't fixed in three years. Then this will be a ONE TERM PROPOSITION."

I couldn'ta said it better, myself.

MTB| 8.2.12 @ 3:25PM

Bush's blame for the economic collapse is negligible; he made some decisions that I didn't particularly favor, but he would never have been in that position if it weren't for the 2008-2010 dem majority in both Houses of Congress and their mandated subprime mortgages to the banks and lenders. Specifically, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and Franklin Raines are the architects of the 2008 collapse, and Obozo and the dems together have further eviscerated it. Oblameo and as many dems as possible have simply got to go in Nov.

Occam's Tool| 8.2.12 @ 12:16AM

RCV: As I recall, people were opposed to another great Massachusetts product when he fought Joe Louis---the gauche Rocky Marciano. The outcome is, of course, obvious, if you realize that Marciano NEVER lost, and won 43 of 49 by knockout.

This one is not going to be that close. Bummer's going down.

Fast and Curious| 7.31.12 @ 11:39AM

Romney will win in VA. Trust me. Other than university towns and half of NOVA he has absolutely nothing.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 4:21PM

Virginia, Wisconsin, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Iowa, the Dakotas, Florida, Ohio, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania.

Mark My Words.

vtwin| 7.31.12 @ 4:38PM

Obama: Wisconsin, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Iowa, and Pennsylvania.

Romney: the Dakotas, North Carolina, and West Virginia

Tossup: Virginia, Ohio, and Florida.

...And Ohio listed as a tossup is being generous.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 6:16PM

You keep thinking that.

George Collins| 7.31.12 @ 7:22PM

You are delusional. You sound like an MSNBC stooge 6 weeks before the 2010 Congressional blow-out.

Cobalt| 7.31.12 @ 11:43AM

No way in Hell Obama carries North Carolina in 2012.

Colorado will probably go back to the Republican side, like it has in eight of the last nine elections.

Virginia might be close, because of the government workers in northern Virginia; many of whom like the idea of a big government.

Watch Ohio and Florida, because that's where the battle might be won or lost.

Pennsylvania might go for Romney, and that would be something.

KennesawJack| 7.31.12 @ 2:14PM

I agree with Al. The electoral map looks like a very difficult row to hoe for Romney. I pray he wins but, absent an upset in one of the mid-Western states, I don't see how. Never in my life have I hoped to be proven wrong more than on this.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 4:22PM

I disagree.

PEOPLE WANT JOBS!

Period.

Trust Me.

KennesawJack| 7.31.12 @ 7:12PM

I do.

WinstonSmith| 7.31.12 @ 3:53PM

In the following states (among others), the incumbent is ominously polling

WinstonSmith| 7.31.12 @ 3:56PM

In the following states (among others) the incumbent is ominously polling less than 50% among likely voters: FL, VA, NC, IA, OH (with Ohio the closest). If Romney pulls ahead when the undecided decide, his electoral vote will be 272. Quite feasible.

UFCaveman| 7.31.12 @ 11:22PM

Here is the part where the Obama supporters I see posting here are getting it all wrong, this is what very few people are willing to talk about. It is not a matter of support for Democrats this fall, it will be matter of voter turnout. I personally know of many Liberals who do like Obama, but do not support the job he is doing, though they would never cast a vote for Romney they wont be casting a vote for Obama neither. Of course his hard core supporters will always be out in force for him, but it will not be enough for an Obama victory this fall. This is the same thing that happened to the Republicans back in 2006, when they lost the house and the senate, it was not for a lack a support it was from a lack of turnout.

Unless Obama manages to pull a rabbit out of his butt before the election, and the unemployment numbers stay high, we will see a very Reagan like landslide victory for Romney this fall.

vtwin| 7.31.12 @ 3:58PM

Al, even if Romney wins all four, OH, NC, FL, and VA, Romney still loses by 2 electoral votes.

Americanpatriot| 7.31.12 @ 5:16PM

Romney will win some blue states this time. States like Pennsylvania for example.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 6:17PM

You're wasting your breath.

Trinacria| 7.31.12 @ 6:25PM

I think you're right, AA; though I must say I find some encouragement in the fact that even a ham fisted, directionless, and ill-prepared candidate like McCain could garner 173 electoral votes. I don't know if a well financed, well messaged candidate, coupled with an unambiguous disaster of an incumbant will translate to an additional 98 electoral votes, but it certainly doesn't seem out of reach.

MK48| 7.31.12 @ 10:33AM

Isn't it funny when clinton was in office and everyone knew they had made a mistake and voted for him.......you would ask them who voted for clinton ......answer...........chrickets.

It's funny do chrickets chirp during the day too.......

Appleby| 7.31.12 @ 11:58AM

Same with Lyndon Johnson. Two years after his election, nobody would admit voting for him.

WillyP | 8.1.12 @ 7:11PM

I'll admit voting for Obama... in the primary. I didn't like Hillary, mainly her voice was so ingratiating. Yes, that was the extent of my knowledge of politics. Prior to 2008, I mostly voted Democrat, being mostly politically agnostic. By the time of the general election, I had wised up a bit and decided to stay home. Strangely enough it was largely my bleeding heart liberal sister's posting nonsensical crap on Facebook that forced me to start doing my own research into politics. Particularly the Walker episode when I found this site and realized my own personal views were mostly conservative, not liberal. Surprise, surprise!

vtwin| 7.31.12 @ 4:55PM

Bullsh*t, Clinton approval at the end off his second term 73% and today Clinton polls at 66%.

1998:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/116.....inton.aspx

Today:
http://www.thejournal.ie/still.....5-Jul2012/

vtwin| 7.31.12 @ 5:02PM

…and Clinton will be prominently featured at the Democratic convention in Raleigh, nominating Obama, but you will not see Bush or his Dick, Cheney in Tampa.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 6:23PM

Good.

Let the RAPIST speak for you.

The guy who lost his Law Liscence because he gave "False and Misleading Testimony to a Federal Grand Jury" in a Case involving him with Pulling His Pants Down, in front of a woman that he just met, in a Hotel Room.

A guy who Groped another woman, in the Oval Office, when she came to him for HELP, as her Husband lay DYING.

A Pathological Lying, Serial Misogenyst, who soaked his Cigars in a Fat Intern, in a room off the Oval Office.

Good Luck with that.

junkyard infidel| 8.1.12 @ 12:51AM

As usual vtwink, your profound ignorance is on display. The convention is in Charlotte, NC. Guess you were fantasizing about Bush's dick, eh !

spike59| 8.1.12 @ 6:14AM

i'm sure Clinton will have a FINE time in Raleigh, picking up overweight harelipped clerks at 7-11, while the convention is going on in CHARLOTTE

Andrew P111| 8.1.12 @ 7:35AM

They are not lying and it has nothing to do with race for most voters. If you depend on government benefits or wages received by public employee unions, you will vote for Obama. If you depend on non-DOD government spending you will vote for Obama. And if you want perpetual bailouts to keep the stock market up you will vote for Obama.

janelasdedeus| 7.31.12 @ 7:45AM

Bush I and Carter lost because the growth rate of the GNP in the election year was less than 3%. So did Hoover. Every other incumbent who ran in the last 100 years managed to juice the economy in the year prior to the election just enough so that the GNP growth rate exceeded 3%... even FDR during the depression. Poor Obama suffered a little premature stimulous ej*c*l*t**n in 2009 and simply can't get it (the GNP) this year.

Andrew P111| 8.1.12 @ 7:39AM

That is because he didn't game things well. His stimulus was poorly conceived. He cared more about achieving the Socialist dream of socialized medicine more than the cared about reelection. If Obozo hadn't lost the House in 2010, he would have been able to juice up GDP with stimulus right now.

Mimi | 7.31.12 @ 8:02AM

It matters naught the current President's RACE !
There are many millions of Black Americans that love their country, are patriotic and would serve this Nation and vote in the best man for the job !
As Tim pointed out above....The first MAJOR incident, ....handing over the the auto company to the unions and robbing the share holders...If that would have stopped Obama in his tracks, and he was held accountable, he would have been gone long ago. We have stood by and watched the country go down and down....so much chaos and damage.....NOW THE PEOPLE must act...all people BLACK and WHITE alike....for justice sake and for posterity.

Trinacria| 7.31.12 @ 1:38PM

With all due respect, Mimi, your position on this issue is simply untenable. The June unemployment rate among blacks was 14.4%, and unemployment among black youths is approaching 50%. The rate is nearly twice that of Caucasians and, importantly, nearly twice the highest rate under the previous administration. Despite this devastating (and, frankly, disgraceful) situation, polls continue to consistently indicate that 95% of blacks support Obama. The conclusion is inescapable - race DOES matter! In fact, based on these figures, it matters so much that it trumps self interest, as polls clearly demonstrate that blacks are willing to support Obama even to their detriment. The tragic irony is that in their attempt to advance the concept of diversity, they've abandoned it's foundational principle and acted en masse to support a stikingly inadequate candidate whose epic failure has done irrevocable harm to their cause.

Kwan| 7.31.12 @ 1:56PM

Perhaps our black citizens would subconsciously prefer to live in one of those African Dictatorships like Idi Amin's Uganda or Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe. Even though they would be living in poverty and misery under the continued leadership of Idi Obama at least one of their own would be in charge. This of course is illogical thinking on steroids.

Trinacria| 7.31.12 @ 3:11PM

The clear difference here is that the citizens of Uganda and Zimbabwe were the victims of an oppressive regime which was forced upon them; our African-American bretheren, by contrast, were complicit in the enthronement of their oppressor. The former deserve our pity, the latter our contempt.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 4:24PM

Exactly.

You get it.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 4:25PM

He could Slit their Mother's Throat, and they would vote for him.

KennesawJack| 7.31.12 @ 7:15PM

He could screw their mothers before he slit her throat and they would still vote for him.

WinstonSmith| 7.31.12 @ 4:05PM

Barack Obama was billed as the first "post-racial president". Does anyone believe that today? Could a white man with the same ideology, vacate resume & highly suspect past associates ever even be nominated by a major party? You know the answer.

TLP| 7.31.12 @ 6:26PM

Could a White Man who sat in a Racist Church for 20 MINUTES, let alone, 20 YEARS, survive one day, in the Media?

I think we all know the answer to that one.

spike59| 8.1.12 @ 6:12AM

of course, he didn't quite live up to his billing; this is the most race-conscious administration i've ever seen

Andrew P111| 8.1.12 @ 7:44AM

Why should Obama do anything about black youth unemployment when they are too poor to make contributions to his campaign, and he has their votes in the bag no matter what? Obama gives all his attention to his high-maintenance donors that need regular care and feeding like banksters, unions, enviros, wall street, managed health care companies, etc...

Von Mises Jr| 7.31.12 @ 8:02AM

Obama was swept into office with a financial crises and crippled economy. It was caused by the sub-prime crises that were engineered through FDR's Fannie Mae (1938), Freddie Mac (1970) to package the Fannie Mae loans, Carter's CRA, Clinton's redlining and Chucky Cheese Schumer's Indymac panic. Most people were too stupid to understand they were electing the standard bearer of this catastrophe.
But what goes around comes around. Many may not understand that the current financial and monetary cliff, the continued sub-prime crises and the horrid GDP growth and unemployment are also caused by Obama's statist policies. But they know that the economy sucks. And that is all they need to know to give Obama his pink slip.

Al Adab| 7.31.12 @ 9:41AM

The economic factors in play here are unknown or misunderstood by most voters. We keep focusing on what government should "do" instead of how we can rebuild a solid functioning, free market economy. As long as we believe the social-welfare state is the answer we fail.

JimH| 7.31.12 @ 8:10AM

BO jumped the shark on the way to Stockholm to pick up his Nobel.

Anthony| 7.31.12 @ 9:22AM

If Romney doesn't win this election in a 60%-40% landslide, and the Rs don't take back the Senate and keep the House with a greater margin, then the great American experiment is indeed finished.
It will mean that way too many Americans and illegal aliens have drunk the left's entitlement mentality and have fallen completely for the lure of Socialism.
If that's the case, it's time to get back to our roots as a nation.
No way in Hell will the hands- out crowd dictate to the hands- on crowd. Over my dead cold body, and theirs.

loulou| 7.31.12 @ 10:29AM

We don't need just Rs. We need conservative, constitution-respecting Rs who have ballz. Rinos and spineless compromisers will only prolong the misery.

The task ahead is monumental.

Alej| 7.31.12 @ 6:33PM

You got it, Anthony... if push comes to shove, and the parasites end up steering the ship, Uncle Mao's "ism," that political power comes out of the barrel of a rifle, will, unfortunately, come into play.

Thomas Jefferson said so as well, in several different ways.

Skippy| 7.31.12 @ 6:36PM

Stock up now.
And practice, practice, practice.

squalis| 7.31.12 @ 9:26AM

I fear it is easy to underestimate the stupidity of a significant percentage of the electorate, maybe even a majority. This is what worries me.

Marco2| 7.31.12 @ 9:35AM

Re California, I recently heard that if it comes to an unprecedented national bailout, that could be conditioned on a reversion to territorial status and a complete reorganization including potential readmission, if desireable, as more than one state. Sounds good, any truth to it?

RCV| 7.31.12 @ 11:32AM

No.

Al Adab| 7.31.12 @ 11:45AM

Let us hope not. The addition of four new Leftist Senators would be disasterous.

KennesawJack| 7.31.12 @ 7:16PM

Al, that assumes readmission. Not sure I'd count on that.

Drunken Sailor| 7.31.12 @ 10:04AM

This should be good. Awaiting the Liberal troll reaction.

But yes, I do agree and think he has peaked.

Even in the polls as a incumbent = hot water

Polls skewed in his favor and still only even = getting hotter

Economy not improving = steaming hot

Decreased Democrat voter Enthusiasm and Increased Republican Enthusiasm = Boiling voter discontent.

In 100 days he should be well done.

mahuna| 7.31.12 @ 10:16AM

I don't believe that money buys votes. McCain lost because he was simply awful on campaign. In reaction to Bush's White House briefing on the economic disaster, McCain came out clueless.

Obama is now in the same boat. In 2008, Obama could promise the moon and voters could believe him. In 2012, he's stuck, like Jimmy Carter, trying to explain why 4 years of failure at the helm of the ship of state qualifies him for another 4 years of steering into the shoals and hurricanes.

Romney can easily lose the election by continuing to appear weak and distant. If the voters decide that they don't like Romney, the total amount of money he wastes on commercials isn't going to matter.

Oh, you also completely ignore the fact that The Press gives Obama free airtime every single day by covering his routine activities in the best possible tones. This has to be worth at least $100 million USD. Especially since The Press denounces everything that Romney does in the worst possible tones.

spike59| 8.1.12 @ 6:10AM

I don't believe that money buys votes.
------------------------------------------------
but the 3-1 dollar advantage didn't hurt ObaMao one bit...i do agree, however, with your take on McCain as a candidate; he was simply satisfied with winning the nomination and not offending anyone (on the Left)

Who Knows?| 7.31.12 @ 10:53AM

Ever heard of the grace of suffering?

Or the brilliant function of pain?

We each, as Narcissus, try to live normal lives, pursuing happiness AND fleeing all forms of unhappiness. However, into each “home” a little darkness must come.

There is also a learning curve, as well as a consciousness one. Some people need to hit their finger with a hammer only once to “get the lesson”, and change their act. Others, those with a case of the slows, those with a forgetful demeanor, require repetitive slams.

Obama got around 52% of the vote in 2008.

Since he started swinging his “hammer”, does an awake person REALLY think he’s going to get over 50% in 2012? Granted, many Americans are slow and forgetful, but come on!

With Romney, empowered by hundreds of millions of $, himself hammering home the Obama results, it seems to me that enough sensitive people will become aware of the pain brought by The One, and CHANGE their vote. Hey, four years is enough time for a lot of people to fly up their learning curve, as well as their consciousness one.

I was blind, but now I see the light!

There’s no doubt there’s a whole lot of pain and suffering going around, especially in economic terms.

Will the education of Americans to the truth set them free?

Trinacria| 7.31.12 @ 1:47PM

The problem, WK, is that he doesn't NEED 50%. It all comes down to a handful of states - FL, OH, VA, WI, CO and perhaps one or two others.

Who Knows?| 7.31.12 @ 5:36PM

Well, okay.

I was writing generally. There is always leakage, what with third party candidates.

However, given there’s no Perot or John Anderson on the horizon, I’ll amend my 50% to 49%.

Essentially, my point is that BHO won’t get a majority of votes, and it won’t be like in 2000, when Bush had fewer votes but won the Electoral College.

Besides the possibility that Obama has peaked, it’s starting to look like Romney has bottomed, and even begun to ramp up. One going down & the other going up?

I’ll be conservative---Obama will be LUCKY to get the same percentage as McCain.

Of course, in the bad old states, like Pennsylvania, and Illinois, voting fraud could ruin my guess.

Trinacria| 7.31.12 @ 6:10PM

That's not the point. Presidents aren't elected based on the popular vote; indeed, a candidate can be elected with fewer popular votes than his competitor. A candidate needs 271 electoral votes to win - that's it. If Obama only gets 40% of the vote (vs., say, 50% for Romney), yet collects 271 electoral votes by winning states like CA, NY, PA, NJ, FL, OH, and VA - guess what? Four more years of reign for His Royal Majesty, Defender of the Hoops, Keeper of the Greens, Protector of the Benevolent Kingdom of the Welfare State.

Andrew P111| 8.1.12 @ 7:51AM

There is no national spoiler, but there is one in Virginia. Disgruntled Republican Virgil Goode is on the ballot as an Independent, and in a very close race he could throw the state to Obama. So could the Democrat's efforts to register dogs and cats by mail to vote.

Kwan| 7.31.12 @ 11:17AM

In 2008 the country didn't elect a President it elected a community organizer who saw his mission as achieving social and economic justice for the underclass. A President of the United States must be concerned about what is in the best interest of all the people not just one group. As a result we have a President who believes that the whole country from top to bottom must be dismantled and reconstructed as a Socialist People's Republic, in order to "guarantee" equal results for the underclass. The result of this misguided ideology is the mess that the country currently finds itself in. So what about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness you ask. Forgetaboutit. Until January 20th that is when the nation puts da community organizer in its rear view mirror and goes about the business of cleaning up the mess of 4 years of mismanagement.

vigilant| 7.31.12 @ 11:37AM

I strongly suspect the upcoming election won't be politics as we've always known them in this country. Trying to predict outcomes based on the way things have played out in the past presumes that nothing has changed. But it has, in profound ways. We are farther down the rabbit hole than most people realize, as their heads have been in the sand for so long, or maybe they have an understandable but naive faith that the good guys will always win. (Ultimately, they will, but not necessarily in the political arena.) That doesn't mean that the core of right-thinking patriots should ever give up the fight, but the rules have changed. I don't believe that this psychologically/ideologically disordered puppet and the powers behind him have any intention of giving up what they've accomplished so far, no matter what the majority of people say they want, by votes or any other way. Has he, ever once, indicated any regard for the will of the people? We've been given the warning shot. Stay calm and carry on. Semper fi.

RJ| 7.31.12 @ 1:59PM

The 2012 campaign certainly has much different dynamics than the 2008 campaign and other than the power of incumbency, none of the differences favor Obama.

However, for Obama's supporters, he is similar to John F. Kennedy in that their image of him overpowers reality. I remember a German admitting to me that the Russians did not and would not build the Berlin Wall against Eisenhower, but that he still preferred Kennedy because of the speech that he gave at the wall. I still find it amazing, but liberals often hold on to their dream despite the reality. I just wish that their political objectives did not include compelling the rest of us to a life of doom just so they can keep on day-dreaming. As Bastiat said in "The Law" - "I do not dispute their right to invent social combinations, to advertise them, to advocate them and to try them upon themselves, at their own expense and risk. But I do dispute their right to impose these plans upon us by law – by force – to compel us to pay for them with our taxes."

TrueBlue | 7.31.12 @ 2:48PM

Also, Romney himself is not allowed to spend money on adds against Obama until after the convention when he is formally made the Rs nominee, so all you get right now are the Super PACs, interviews, and campaign stops (have to avoid the MSMs chopping block). Hopefully his campaign is taking notes on all the things they need to answer and has the ads ready for release shortly afterwards.

Anyone But Obama| 7.31.12 @ 3:04PM

How can anyone vote for this guy? Are you stupid? Have you been drinking koolaid? Are Dumbacrats holding guns to your head? What is wrong with you?

He's a lair. That's not conspiracy or rumors, it's a fact, proved over and over with his own words.

He said Jerusalem was the capital of Israel and always would be. It's not out of context, he said it plain and clear in 2008. Now it's not. Is this a lie or not?

He said Obamacare was not a tax. His owns words on video all over the place. Supreme Court says it IS a tax. Another lie.

He says eniors would not have to pay tax if they make under $50,000. Never happened. Once again, his own words and another lies.

He said he wasn't going to have a dirty campaign, doesn't believe in it. You see what's going on, I don't have to tell you. Owns words and another blatant lie.

He's using a fake Social Security card. Someone else was issued it first and is dead. By the way, this is a felony. He hasn't denied it or even come up with an explanation.

There are hundreds of them so how on earth can you vote for someone who is a confirmed liar?

Our country is in deep trouble and it's going to get worse if he gets 4 more years. You will be kicking yourself if that happens, I guarantee it. He fooled us once, don't let him do it again.

PLEASE, for your children's and their children's sake.

moderateGuy| 7.31.12 @ 3:21PM

I know it would be hard to quantify, but you need also to include the endless free advertising pro-Obama gets from the MSM "news" and opinion pieces. That must be worth billions of dollars.

vtwin| 7.31.12 @ 4:03PM

What about the "endless free advertising" Romney gets from pro-Romney FOX "news?"

Boar Hunter| 7.31.12 @ 4:46PM

Did the umbilical cord get wrapped around your neck?

Warrior| 7.31.12 @ 5:44PM

More like moonshine in the test tube/petrie dish.

Alej| 7.31.12 @ 9:16PM

Did your winning sperm take a break swimming after it passed mommy's tonsils?

spike59| 8.1.12 @ 7:14AM

so, Fox is equal to NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, PBS, NPR, MSDNC (or whatever they're calling the Titanic Network these days) and virtually every major newpaper in the country?

Americanpatriot| 7.31.12 @ 5:10PM

Never in the last decade have we had a president so arrogant, narcissistic, condescending, or so full of mendacity. The I won statement he made should have rung alarms right off the bat to most people. This sick man is living in a twilight world unable to see the carnage around him from his policies or perhaps, as some say, this has been his plan all along, to destroy our nation. In any rate, it is very apparant he does not love America and two, that he hates anyone who does not agree with him.

Buck Ofama| 7.31.12 @ 5:12PM

The truly disgusting part is that USSA politics is based solely on money. Most voters are too ignorant, lazy, or stupid to understand what's at stake.

We must RID the white house of the commie rat vermin infestation ASAP.

Trinacria| 7.31.12 @ 6:37PM

Agree with your second and third comments; take issue with the first. Politics is (and always has been) based on money. That's an unambiguous fact. Won't change. Can't change. Two options - bitch about the fact that politics is based on money or be the guy with the money. Your call. Me? I rather favor the latter...

Who Knows?| 7.31.12 @ 6:15PM

Here’s why Romney is going to win, most likely in a landslide---

Given---Obama is self-defined as “black”, even though he’s half white.

Contention---Polls are NOT necessarily good indicators of the future.

Proof---David Dinkins and Tom Bradley. These two blacks, mayors of NYC & LA, respectively, polled better than what they ended up with.

The PC law of averages is screaming!

Therefore---all the polls that say around 50% or so CLAIM they will vote for Obama are polluted by LIARS.

My guess is that at least 2 out of 50 putative BHO supporters are “being nice” to the “poor black guy”. That’s what historically seems to have been the case with Dinkins & Bradley.

Ergo---Obama’s REAL level of support is more like 46%, at BEST.

Conclusion---Romney 54% Obama 45% in a landslide.

Andrew P111| 8.1.12 @ 7:56AM

The polls (especially Rasmussen's) were spot on in 2008. There is no evidence that the Bradley Effect applies to Obama.

George Collins| 7.31.12 @ 9:59PM

Excellent commentary Who.

It's Dinkins in 1993 all over again. I remember the breathless news anchors in NY postulating that Giuliani could never win. A Republican, and a prosecutor, and one who had angered Wall Street for arresting the insiders at Kidder Peabody...and Stinkin' Dinkins went home from Gracie Mansion with his tail between his legs.

James Q. Wilson in a Ferragamo suit.

Romney is the Stormin' Mormon!

Craigpurcell| 7.31.12 @ 10:12PM

Selling soap? Romney and the GOP think its just about dollars.

spike59| 8.3.12 @ 5:59AM

for the RECORD number of Americans on food stamps, and the number of Americans on the 'wrong end' of the LOWEST job participation rate since the Great Depression, it IS about dollars-those come from JOBS; Romney and the GOP are unapologetic about their emphasis on overcoming the horrors of ObaMaonomics

ObaMao and the Dems think it's just about skin color, class warfare, and pretty speeches read from the teleprompter

DTGO| 7.31.12 @ 10:39PM

Mr. Young,

I do not think that the polls are all that accurate in this race for the same reason that they were not accurate in Wisconsin when Walker blew away the opposition on election night after weeks of too close to call polling.
The respondents did not want to tell the questioner the truth about how they intended to vote. No one in the Democrat party wants to be the one to challenge the first black president. There are a sizable number of people who do not want tell a pollster that he is not goin to vote the first black president.
I think that the hand writing has been on the wall since 2010.
No one wants to point it out for fear of being called a racist.

EdL| 7.31.12 @ 11:09PM

Since the polls are HEAVILY skewed to the left, the fact that they have been "even" for so long means Romney is ahead, probably WAY ahead.

Kingofthenet| 8.1.12 @ 4:09AM

Yeah, it's close TILL the Debates, than you see a MASTER at work, and a Whelp, Guess who is who?

spike59| 8.1.12 @ 7:16AM

by MASTER, you mean the child who got schooled by Shrillary in Philly in 2008, and whined for weeks afterwards that the moderators were 'un-fayurrrrrrrrr?' THAT 'Master?'

Stick| 8.1.12 @ 2:15PM

Will Obama be using sign language again? I know that endeared him to many Dems, just wondering if it will charm the Independents?

Kingofthenet| 8.1.12 @ 4:31AM

the President is gonna HURT Willard bad....He is gonna Eviscerate him, Mitt WISHES he had the stones of Mc Cain. he is gonna go down so bad....

spike59| 8.1.12 @ 7:19AM

you're joking, right? 1st, no teleprompter for ObaMao, and 2nd, he will be playing defense (of his inexcuable record) throughout the debates...he'll end up whining and babbling and smirking while Mitt cuts him down to size calmly and coldly, point by point...as for McCain's 'stones', he left them behind in a hut in N. Vietnam; it's the last time he actually demonstrated any use for them

threeleafclover| 8.2.12 @ 3:14AM

Obama, these days recalls the saying, "He's got a winning smile - - right in the middle of a loser's face" except the smile is more waning than winning.

What we need right now across this country is every small business owner to have the guts of Ray Gaster of Savannah Georgia and his "Obama Can Kiss My Ass" message - and below he says "I'm Ray Gaster and I approve this message" , with his phone number. Not afraid his sentiment will affect business, not afraid someone will key his car. Not afraid!

threeleafclover| 8.2.12 @ 3:55AM

A friend of mine had an aneurysm, stroke and brain surgery around the time of Obama's campaign in 2008. She said to me, "I don't remember much of anything but Jeremiah Wright, but how could Obama have been elected with all we know about him?" I said, "White Guilt and a compliant media."

MTB| 8.2.12 @ 2:22PM

Tied at 46%, after he's all but admitted he's at best a Socialist and at worst a dyed-in-the-wool Communist? It shouldn't even be that close. He should be polling in the teens or tens. Normally, America can survive a bad two-term president, but I don't think we can survive a president hell-bent on literally destroying the country or, as he put it, "fundamentally transforming America." If we are to survive as a country, Obama and as many dems as possible simply must be voted out of office.