"Unreal Crowd" in Manchester, NH for Romney Rally (UPDATED)

Click image below for enlargification:

Ann Romney for First Lady

Close Election ... or Blowout?

Based on poll results, it looks like this will be a close election. But it doesn't feel that way:

• 30,000+ RALLY FOR ROMNEY IN PENNSYLVANIA

• RYAN ROCKS MINNESOTA

• Amazing photos: ‘Unreal’ crowd packs Romney rally in Bucks County, Pa.

• CNN Poll: Romney Beating Obama Among Independents By 22 Points

• George Will Predicts Romney Blowout

How is it that Romney is polling so strongly with independents and expanding into Democrat strongholds like Minnesota and Michigan -- and yet he's barely tied with Obama?

My gut tells me that the ‘Chick-fil-A Revolution’ might be viewed again as a harbinger for the results of tomorrow's election.

(And is it time to revisit the Bradley Effect?)

Mitt Romney for President

I will be voting for Mitt Romney on Tuesday, November 6. I've been waiting for this day for over 4 years.

Via The Blogfather, this is a quote that could have come from someone who read my mind:

“Romney was not my first, second, or third choice, but I will crawl over ground glass to vote for him.”

Brad Smith provides wary voters a number of thoughtful reasons to vote for Mitt Romney:

Here’s why I like Mitt:

1. ...Romney has pledged to repeal Obamacare. It is one of his most visible pledges, and therefore – even if one doesn’t trust Romney (I do, although I’m not sure he can get repeal done) – it will be one of the hardest for him to break or ignore. And he has vowed to use Obama’s own weapon – executive branch waivers – to effectively stop implementation of the Act immediately.

So let’s be skeptical. Let’s assume there is only a 10 or 20 percent chance Romney carries through on this promise (I think the odds are much higher, but I’m being cautious and skeptical here). What are the odds of repeal if Obama is re-elected? Zero. Zilch. Nada. None. Nothing. If repeal of Obamacare is truly important – and I think it is – I will not pass up the most (or only) realistic chance to get it done.

2.Taxes. Mitt Romney has expressed a desire for sensible tax reform that most libertarians support – lower rates with a broader base. We’d like to see overall taxes decline, but in the face of massive deficits, with a public unwilling to stand for major cuts in entitlements, that’s probably not a realistic option. But Mitt Romney and his running mate Paul Ryan have promised to try. Barack Obama, on the other hand, has expressed again and again his desire and determination to raise income tax rates, and, at times, even to do so solely for the purpose of redistributing income. And to add insult to injury, Obama’s Orwellian language about “asking” some “to pay a little bit more” grates every time one hears it...

Romney is clearly the superior candidate.
 
3. Entitlements and Spending. Republicans have never had a lot of success in reforming, letting alone ending, entitlements. Often – particularly under G.W. Bush – they have played a key role in expanding them. On the other hand, Republicans scored a huge success in the 1990s in ending welfare as an entitlement, and Obama is now attempting to undo this success through the regulatory process.

Beyond the possibility of repealing the massive entitlement of Obamacare if Romney is elected, Romney’s running mate, Paul Ryan, has been a congressional leader in attempting to reform entitlements. No, he is not the Randian that the Democrats wish to make him out to be, much as many libertarians wish he were. But let’s be clear. No politician is going to be elected President in the near future on a pledge to abolish the entitlement state.

The Romney/Ryan plan for entitlement reform is the closest thing we have to a meaningful first step at reform – indeed, it is meaningful reform. There may never come a time when a majority of Americans are prepared for more radical reform, let alone an end to entitlements. If this is the reform we can get, it is necessary and good, and consistent with libertarian values. If an end to entitlements is one’s goal, successful, incremental reforms are probably a necessary step toward reshaping Americans’ mindset.
 
Obama currently stands as the single biggest obstacle to any consideration of entitlement reform. Romney and Ryan have taken on the issue in as strong a manner as any presidential ticket since Barry Goldwater in 1964...

6. Other Domestic Issues...

a. Immigration. Obama offers a bit more liberal immigration policy in principle, but Romney is more likely to gain concrete results for easier access for skilled workers. Broadly, I think Romney is much more likely to look for policies fostering assimilation...

b. Gun Control. Advantage Romney.

c. School Choice. Advantage Romney...

e. ...the protections of the First Amendment for religious groups has helped to support a major counterweight to state power. Religious freedom matters, and Romney is an easy choice...

i. Free Speech. Give Romney, with his opposition to campaign finance (i.e. political speech) regulation and “hate speech” codes, a huge edge over Obama. Obama has even used government regulation to attempt to silence corporations opposing elements of the Obama agenda, including the provision of true information about his health care plan.

6. The Courts... In the next four years, one side or the other could lock up a working majority on the Supreme Court for two decades. I have no doubt that Romney’s appointees will be MUCH better than Obama’s. Indeed, how could I not – in 2008, I was a member of Romney’s advisory committee on the Constitution and the Courts, a group that included other libertarians such as Michelle Boardman. I have confidence that Romney will appoint judges who see the constitution as a document that limits government power...

7. Foreign Policy.  ...Obama’s demonstrated incompetence and Romney's better understanding of the nature of radical Islam still gives an advantage to Romney. ...as we have seen Obama’s incompetence in dealing with the world, I’m more comfortable with Romney. Elsewhere, however, I think Romney’s advantage is more substantial.

...We will not see President Romney cuddling up to populist dictators such as Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, or undermining democracy in Honduras, where Obama sanctioned the government for upholding its constitution against efforts by left-wing former President Manuel Zelaya to unconstitutionally retain power. Obama has also frayed our relationship with Canada, in part through his obstinate opposition to the Keystone Pipeline, which Romney supports...

Read the rest.

I'll close with a compelling message from Bill Whittle. (hat tip: Proof Positive)


Obama and his radical agenda need to go now. There's only way to ensure that Obama will start packing his backs on the 6th. Vote Romney.

*image credit

A (Very) Young Voter Explains Her Support for Romney

The conservative antidote to the puerile Lena Dunham:

Would you mind telling us why you choose Romney?

...First of all, I believe in the United States Constitution wholeheartedly. Obama has done many, many things under his term that should have been deemed unconstitutional. He wants to change this country and that’s not what I’m looking for.  

I would consider myself mostly Libertarian. I wanted Ron Paul in the beginning but seeing as he is no longer in the race Romney has my vote. Gary Johnson, not for me. I don’t believe in giving illegal aliens amnesty as Obama and Johnson do. I agree with Romney on his stance with adults being deported but children born here getting the chance to become a citizen.  

Next, I don’t like the Affordable Care Act also commonly known as Obamacare. I think it needs to be repealed immediately because it’s a stepping stone in the process to universal health care. Yes, free health care for everyone is GREAT in ideology. But nations do not thrive with that. Elderly will be denied the care they need. People won’t have the right to either buy into or not buy into health care. Yes, I think it’s foolish for a person to not buy into health insurance but it is their right as an American to do as they please. 

Leading into birth control I don’t think it should be free. There is no reason that an adult woman cannot afford the average hormonal birth control pill (most are never above twenty dollars - mine costs twenty two if I didn’t pay through health insurance coverage) if they prioritize their finances maturely. I certainly don’t believe that employers should provide contraception for their employees. That’s ridiculous to me.  

Aside from those issues, gun laws. I don’t want stricter gun laws. The second amendment was created so we CAN protect ourselves from our government and in self defense against criminals.  

As for jobs Obama is doing terribly. 23 million out of work and he says it’s getting better? I don’t think so. I trust that Romney can get the jobs increasing again. After all he is a businessman. Obama is just a lawyer who knows how to work around the laws to get what he wants.  

On the economy, I think Romney has a great plan. Cut spending. We don’t have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. In the whole defense on PBS and him wanting to cut it. PBS doesn’t need the subsidies. They make a third of a billion dollars in revenue. They’ll do just fine on their own...

Read the rest.

If Romney Wins...

Conservatives' work is never done:

CALLER:  Too many Republicans apologize for wanting conservative fiscal policy, and we gotta stop apologizing for that, and I think we're there now.
RUSH:  Well, that's yet to be seen, but we're on the right road in that regard.  Look, I don't want to go there now.  I'm gonna do that after the election, but there are challenges....  

...if Romney wins, there will be a competition in the Republican Party for people who want to take credit for it.  Basically you're going to have two factions.  One faction will be the Republican establishment, which will say their strategy of moderation, cooperation, reaching across the aisle, not scaring the independents, Romney's first debate performance, that's what did it.  

The other faction will be the Tea Party and conservatives who will say, "If you guys don't wake up and realize that what won this election for you is this far-left agenda of the Democrat Party scaring this country to the point that people didn't want any more of it, if you don't realize what that means, you're gonna have to go back to the 2010 midterms. If you want to understand why Romney won this election, go back to the 2010 midterms.  Everything Obama stands for was rejected and there wasn't a Republican on the ballot then." 

CALLER:  That's right.  I agree. 

RUSH:  But that's for down the road.  That may not even materialize.  But if it does, that will be the... you know, even in the best families, there are arguments and there are disagreements, and it'll be the case here in due course.  But if Romney wins, there will still be a lot of work to do. 

Why a Conservative Voted for Obama (emphasis added)

Obama knew it was a terrorist attack all along... but he flew to Vegas the next day for fundraising anyway?

So during the debate (10-16-2012), Romney and Obama sparred over Obama's reaction to last month's 9-11 anniversary terror attack on the U.S. embassy in Egypt.  Romney pointed out that Obama's reaction to the attack was to fly off blithely the next day to raise money for his campaign -- as if that act of war in Egypt had never happened.

Romney also pointed out that the O administration took two weeks to emphatically state that the attack on the U.S. embassy was indeed a pre-meditated terror attack and NOT merely a spontaneous outbreak of ordinary criminal activity.

IN HIS OWN "DEFENSE," Obama stated that he actually knew it was a terror attack all along, and the CNN "moderator" conveniently backed Obama up on that.

While Obama did make a generic remark about terrorism shortly after the attack in Benghazi, Egypt, for two weeks the O administration sent a flurry of mixed signals about whether the violence was a terror attack or not.

The question is still unanswered: If Obama knew from the very beginning that the violence in Benghazi on 9-11-12 was a terrorist attack, why did he jet off to Las Vegas the next day for a fundraiser?

Why did it take the rest of the O administration two whole weeks to get up to speed?  (Was it because Obama was virtually AWOL, preoccupied by the election campaign?)

If Obama knew that this attack was a premeditated act of terrorism, as he now suggests, his actions immediately following the attack (and for the next two weeks) are utterly incomprehensible. Let's make sure that this point is not lost in all of the post-debate "fact checking."

*post edited for clarity; image hat tip: Joshuapundit

Stacey Dash: The Content of His Character

Stacey Dash on Romney: ‘I Chose Him Not By the Color of His Skin But the Content of His Character’

Also of note, earlier in the interview, Dash told Morgan that she's a Democrat who voted for Barack Obama in 2008. She's voting for Romney now "because of the state of the country and I want the next four years to be different."

More:

Civility alert: Obama supporters urge Stacey Dash to kill herself

Samuel L. Jackson: Is Stacey Dash crazy? Paul Ryan thanks Dash for support

Vile: Racist Obama supporters attack Stacey Dash

Citizens speak out in support of actress Stacey Dash

Hat tip: Tumblr

UPDATE: Linked at The Other McCain. Thanks!

Okay, This is Fun...

...have you tried it yet? You can compare your results with other people state-by-state and with people across the country.

It's a quiz from iSideWith.com.

How did I manage to agree with Mitt Romney and Ron Paul virtually equally?

Update: Disagree with the results? The site's creators explain:

• Interview with Taylor Peck and Nick Boutelier, iSideWith

• Frequently Asked Questions

Update II: Linked at Chattering Teeth. Thanks!

Obama's Blatant Racism

More on BooGate:

You don’t go into the NAACP and use the word“Obamacare” and think that you’re not going to hear some boos. It’s a heavily loaded word, and Romney and his people know very well that liberals and the president’s supporters consider it an insult. He and his team had to know those boos were coming, and Romney acknowledged as much a few hours later in an interview with . . . guess which channel (hint: it’s the one whose web site often has to close articles about race to commenters because of the blatant racism).

emphasis added

Yes. The term "Obamacare" is a favorite among malignant bigots. You can find it on all sorts of racist websites:

Quote of The Day: Romney or Obama?

It's Romney or Obama. Take your pick:

ABO.

At least Romney isn’t Obama and can be pressured into doing some of the right things. No hope for Barry, he’s rotten to the core.

As bad as Mitt Romney is, can anyone say that he'd be worse than Obama?

Update: I know conservatives are supposed to fall in line for Romney now that he's truly the inevitable nominee, but I cannot lie. To paraphrase a great leader, I'm not willing to light my pants on fire to try and get support for Mitt Romney. I am who I am...

As a conservative, I can't pretend to be keen on what Romney is selling.

This article is a few weeks old now, but I think it provides a timeless lesson on the folly of the rudderless, unpricipled "compromise" (and the rigidity and intolerance) of the standard moderate.

Update II: Another oldie but goodie: On conservative compromise, via Peggy Noonan, a yardstick metaphor...

Imagine that over at the 36-inch end you’ve got pure liberal thinking—more and larger government programs, a bigger government that costs more in the many ways that cost can be calculated. Over at the other end you’ve got conservative thinking—a government that is growing smaller and less demanding and is less expensive. You assume that when the two major parties are negotiating bills in Washington, they sort of lay down the yardstick and begin negotiations at the 18-inch line. Each party pulls in the direction it wants, and the dominant party moves the government a few inches in their direction.

But if you look at the past half century or so you have to think: How come even when Republicans are in charge, even when they’re dominant, government has always gotten larger and more expensive? It’s always grown! It’s as if something inexorable in our political reality—with those who think in liberal terms dominating the establishment, the media, the academy—has always tilted the starting point in negotiations away from 18 inches, and always toward liberalism, toward the 36-inch point.

Democrats on the Hill or in the White House try to pull it up to 30, Republicans try to pull it back to 25. A deal is struck at 28. Washington Republicans call it victory: “Hey, it coulda been 29!” But regular conservative-minded or Republican voters see yet another loss. They could live with 18. They’d like eight. Instead it’s 28.

For conservatives on the ground, it has often felt as if Democrats (and moderate Republicans) were always saying, “We should spend a trillion dollars,” and the Republican Party would respond, “No, too costly. How about $700 billion?” Conservatives on the ground are thinking, “How about nothing? How about we don’t spend more money but finally start cutting.”

Read the rest.

Super Tuesday Results: Anthony Kennedy Wins

Romney won Ohio, so he's still the frontrunner, albeit a weak one.

Romney will win the nomination. The writing is on the wall.

Next!

Romney vs. Obama: You're an undecided voter ... why vote for Romney?

1. The Obama economy is a miserable mess.

2. Obama gas prices are too high.

3. You don't like Obamacare and you've been led to believe than Romney will repeal it.

You're a discouraged conservative ... why vote for Romney?

1. Lesser of two evils: nobody could be worse than Obama.

2. Romney's supreme court appointments might be less liberal than Obama's.

I can't imagine why Romney would repeal Obamacare. He said he wants to keep the "good parts." Since Obamacare is Romney's signature achievement writ large, I have to assume that all of Obamacare's parts look pretty good to Mitt.

Romney would set himself on fire before he'd yield to conservatives on a plan for total repeal, so I think it's safe to assume that Romney will be working closely with Democrats on his "repeal" plan. Even if Romney has a few good ideas for some sort of partial repeal, at least half of those ideas will be shot down by Romney's Democratic allies.

In the end, Romney's half-hearted repeal effort would only tighten Washington's grip on private health insurance, making government-run health care a bipartisan scheme.

This means Anthony Kennedy is as important as ever. As the swing vote on the Supreme Court, he's the one person who has the power to strike down Obama's anti-constitutional health care takeover. The immediate results of Kennedy's decision this summer will have a tremendous impact on Romney's prospects in November.

Anthony Kennedy is the man.

UPDATE: Welcome, Theo Sparks readers!

Romney Wins Anti-Tea Party Voters

Say what you will about mashed up video clips, but if you're serious about defeating the Tea Party, you'll vote for Mitt Romney. In Ohio exit polls, Romney is the clear winner among those who oppose the Tea Party.

Frontrunner? What Frontrunner?

Orange denotes a state won by Mitt Romney.

Purple denotes a state won by Newt Gingrich.

Green denotes a state won by Rick Santorum.

Sorry, Karl.

Mitt Romney: He's not a witch...

Mitt Romney: He's You!

As Mitt Romney struggles to connect with ordinary Republican voters, he seems to be having a Christine O'Donnell crisis.

Is he an out-of-touch rich guy? No, he's focused on the middle class. Is he a white guy? Well, yes, but he'd like to be Hispanic!

He's not rich...

He's nothing you’ve heard.

He's you.

None of us are perfect.

But none of us can be happy with what we see all around us.

For Pete's sake, he's running for office...

He’ll go to Washington as a middle-class, progressive, pro-life, anti-Reagan Hispanic wannabe -- to do what you would do.

He's Mitt Romney and he approves this message.

He's you!

Is There a "Real" Romney?

Speaking from his heart?

"I love this land, I love its Constitution, I revere its founders, I will restore those principles, I will get America back to work, and I'll make sure that we remain the shining city on the hill."

Check, check, check, check, check ... and check.

Are we to believe that these are the thoughts that run through Romney's mind when he lays his head on his pillow at night?

Is there a "real" Romney hidden somewhere, waiting to be unveiled? It's time to bring him out.

If Romney can't be authentic, he will continue to struggle in the primaries. But if the authentic Mitt Romney is revealed, will Republican voters like what they see?

Maybe these questions lead us to Romney's own Catch-2012.

Preserve the Status Quo?

Heads, they win. Tails, we lose:

South Carolina, please choose wisely.

Via i-am-john-galt

Romney's Bain Helped Obama With Auto Bailout... UPDATE: Story Retracted

Here's your free-market capitalism:

Revealed: Bain & Company advised Obama on auto bailout, recommended cutting dealerships...

Does it matter that Romney hasn’t worked for Bain & Company in nearly 20 years or are the optics of this one bad enough to make it newsworthy regardless?

...The NYT reported recently that to this day, as part of the deal he negotiated when he left, Romney still gets a share of Bain Capital’s profits.

Uhm, let's see... Romney's cronies at Bain (a company Romney co-founded) worked with Obama on Obama's fiat-market, counter-capitalist, union-appeasing, jobs-killing auto bailout. Does that look bad? Why yes, yes it surely does.

Call it the Obamney Bailout.

x-posted

Update:

...this is what really ticks me off. We're told what a great capitalist Romney is and if we attack him, we're attacking capitalism. So, then why did his firm engage in so much socialism and still manage to screw up businesses, after pocketing tons of cash for themselves? This doesn't sound like the kind of capitalism I believe in. The taxpayers often took part of Romney's risk, or bailed out his mistakes, as with a pension fund, but he always managed to feather his own nest pretty damned well. This is what's wrong with America, not what's worth defending...

Stay tuned...

UPDATE:

STORY RETRACTED

Romney's Kinsley Gaffe

Wikipedia:

In U.S. politics, a Kinsley gaffe is an occurrence of someone telling the truth by accident... The term comes from journalist Michael Kinsley, who said, "A gaffe is when a politician tells the truth."

Mitt Romney's Kinsley gaffe comes in his defense of his work at Bain Capital:

“In the general election I’ll be pointing out that the president took the reins at General Motors and Chrysler – closed factories, closed dealerships laid off thousands and thousands of workers – he did it to try to save the business,” Romney said Wednesday on CBS.

President Obama has publicly touted his plan to “retool and restructure” the auto companies as “an investment in American workers.” Romney was strongly opposed to the auto bailouts, but on Wednesday likened the president’s strategy to his own.

“We also had the occasion to do things that are tough to try and save a business,” he said.

Watch the video.

It's an awfully awful comparison, but I suspect there's more truth in Romney's statement than he would care to admit.

With all of the cronyism and government bailouts at Bain, I fear that Romney’s accomplishments there exemplify the beauty of capitalism in the same way that Romneycare exemplifies the beauty of free markets.

UPDATE: OMG, this is worse than I thought...

Revealed: Bain & Company advised Obama on auto bailout, recommended cutting dealerships...

Does it matter that Romney hasn’t worked for Bain & Company in nearly 20 years or are the optics of this one bad enough to make it newsworthy regardless?

...The NYT reported recently that to this day, as part of the deal he negotiated when he left, Romney still gets a share of Bain Capital’s profits.

Uhm, let's see... Romney's buddies at Bain (a company Romney co-founded) worked with Obama on the fiat-market, counter-capitalist, jobs-killing auto bailout. Does that look bad? Yes it does.

Call it the Obamney Bailout.

Obama States Choose Romney

More good news for Mitt Romney. After a tie with Rick Santorum in Iowa, Romney wins big in his own back yard, New Hampshire.

Note that both Iowa and New Hampshire are Obama states: New Hampshire went for Obama by 10 percentage points in November '08, and Iowa went for Obama by almost the same margin.

Reflecting a bit further back in recent history, you probably remember that the winner of Iowa's caucuses failed to win the GOP nomination in 2008. New Hampshire, however, was successful in launching McCain's ill-fated bid for the White House.

I hope the folks in New Hampshire and Iowa have experienced some kind of enlightenment in the last four years.

More (potential) good news for bonny Prince Mitt: Five of the next six GOP contests will be in Obama territory. The next six elections will be in South Carolina, Florida, Nevada, Maine, Colorado and Minnesota. Of those states, only South Carolina rejected Obama in the general election in 2008.

Even more good news for Romney: Three of the next six contests will be held in Romney states. Nevada, Maine and Minnesota all went for Mitt over McCain in 2008.

Yes, following in John McCain's footsteps, Mitt Romney appears to be the man whose turn it is.

Who can blame the Republican party for choosing Mitt? With the technocratic warmth of Mike Dukakis, the home field advantage of Al Gore, the aristocratic appeal of John Kerry — and the progressive instincts of all of the above — Mitt Romney is a no-brainer.

Yay, GOP!

Update: Insanity