This Is The Infographic That The Whole Republican Party Is Freaking Out About

Reading Time: 1

The 3 million McCain voters who didn’t vote for Romney?

They’re dead.

Voters Die

[Click image to view full size. Please forward, download, and print. This is important.]

To survive, the GOP needs to stop being afraid of Millennials and tell them truth: they can move out of mom and dad’s house, they can drop out of school, they can quit their dead-end job with the idiot supervisor. But they can’t get away from government and debt.

If you want freedom, it doesn’t emanate from Washington, DC.   It starts here.

The Republicans also have to stop pandering. It’s weak and annoying and convinces no one.

It’s time to bring professional, scientific marketing and messaging to work for our country. And that means a lot of money shifts from the traditional consultants to people who actually know what they’re doing.

ACTION

Please forward this infographic to your friends. Share it. Download, print, and hand out. This is important.

Stop The Crazy Talk: Vote Fraud Didn’t Cost Romney The Election

Reading Time: 3 minutes

I wrote yesterday that if you need someone to blame, blame me. Don’t blame bogeymen.

reality-check

Yes, vote fraud is real. Voter rolls in most states need to be cleaned up. Voter intimidation should be harshly prosecuted.

You can sign up at True the Vote or Missouri Precinct Project to take effective, useful action. These organizations do vital work, and they both need more volunteers.

Using vote fraud, however, as an excuse for secession or for blocking the Electoral College vote is neither effective nor useful. In fact, it makes us sound like the idiots the left wants us to be.

Please knock it off.

Try Critical Thinking Instead of Knee-Jerk Emotions

I read a piece American Thinker that made me want to jump out a window. Selwyn Duke tries making the case that Romney lost because of voter fraud.

His case is weak.

I won’t bother with his points about anecdotal evidence, since they’re anecdotal. They can’t be proven one way or the other.

Instead, I looked at the numbers.

Romney Got No Votes In Some Philadelphia Divisions

True, this is odd. It may will be that Romney votes were thrown out. But there are two problems with blaming Pennsylvania’s outcome on this anomaly.

1.  We’re talking about a predominantly or exclusively Democrat area. Had Obama received less than 98 percent of the vote, something would have been wrong. So we’re talking about, at most,  a 2 percent problem in a small area.

2.  The total vote in these Philly division was less than 20,000 votes. Suppose that 2 percent intended to vote for Romney. That’s 400 votes. It doesn’t change the results. It doesn’t even come close.

Military Overseas Ballot Requests Way Down

Duke also cites a drop in requests for absentee ballots by armed forces serving over seas. He points a report that in Virginia and Ohio, requests for military absentee ballots were down by 70 percent:

Frankly, it is inconceivable that military interest in voting could’ve dropped so drastically given conservatives’ passion this election season.

There are several problems with Duke’s argument.

  1. Over 83,000 troops came home. Thirty percent fewer troops are serving overseasin 2012 compared to 2008. And a LOT of them are stationed in Virginia.
  2. The drop in requests was for the entire election cycle, not just the November 8 election. Obama was unopposed in the primaries.
  3. The drop is in requests.  The DoD can’t make people request an absentee ballot. (I was the Voting Rights Officer on USS Woodrow Wilson—it’s not always easy to get people to vote.)

I agree that the DoD did a poor job getting ballots to troops. But the problems were with ballots that had already been requested.  Let’s wait to see  how many military ballots were cast before we lose our heads.

Secession and Disrupting the Electoral College Doesn’t Help Conservatism

If you believe the election was stolen, I get why you want to take extreme measures.  But your extreme measures don’t win any hearts and minds. They make us look nuts.

Read Erick Erickson’s blog about rolling up the welcome mat at RedState. Clearly, I’m not the only one noticing the crazy talk around here.

Our mission is to win-over people who want what we want:

  • A strong economy
  • A smaller, fiscally responsible government
  • A safer world
  • A sustainable immigration policy

These are things that almost everyone in America can agree on—everyone except the far left nuts.

Reagan attracted big numbers with 3 of those 4 pillars. Immigration wasn’t as big a deal then, because our population still had some organic growth going on.

Companies and nations fall when they refuse to face the realities of their situations. The conservative movement is supposed to be the embodiment of hard, cold looks at the national condition. Let’s keep it that way, okay?

Here’s My Electoral Map Prediction

Reading Time: 1

Yes, I’m feeling a wave toward Romney.

Bill Hennessy Electoral Map

My gut tells me this year is a lot like 1980.

1980 Was A Dead Heat

The final Gallup poll that year had a dead heat. Time Magazine’s November 3, 1980, called the race a dead heat. So did Newsweek.

The press was hoping John B. Anderson, a former Republican Congressman running for president as an independent, would siphon votes from Reagan. He did siphon votes from Reagan, but not nearly enough. America was fed up with Jimmy Carter.

What appears to be a dead heat to pollsters could, in fact, be a landslide for Romney. And I think that’s the only way Romney wins.

Romney Must Win Big To Win

In a close race, Democrats will cheat, steal, and defraud. They will fight it in the courts, discover ballots in trunks, and sue to let people vote until they get the numbers they need.

For Romney to win, the race must appear hopeless to Democrats before midnight Tuesday.

That’s exactly what I think will happen.

What do you think?

Mitt Romney’s Cleaning Up in Early Voting, but It’s Confused the Hell Out of Politico

Reading Time: 1

Gallup released its early voting poll today, and it shows Mitt Romney winning 52% to 45%—right in line with their Likely Voter poll numbers. Here’s the chart.

GallupEarlyVotingResults

Politico Reporter Can’t Read

But Gallup’s section on early voting by party ID completely lost Politico’s Kevin Robillard.

Robillard looked at the chart that shows when voters intend to vote by party and candidate and mistook it for voting results. This poll question shows that those who support Obama as as likely to vote early as are those who support Romney. No surprise. 

Here’s precisely what Gallup says about this section:

However, when one looks at the voting intentions of likely voters according to candidate support, the political impact for the two candidates appears to be roughly equal.

And here’s what Robillard thinks it says:

Neither candidate has a particular edge among early voters nationally compared to those who will cast their ballots on election day
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/83039.html#ixzz2ApGGRw56

Robillard doesn’t understand that there are simply MORE people who intend to vote for Romney than for Obama. 

What’s worse is the entire liberal media establishment is now confused—or lying—about the poll. They’re taking Robillard’s stupidity and running with it.

More Bad News For Obama

John Nolte points out that Obama’s early voting results are down 22 points from 2008.  That’s huge, and explains why Minnesota and Pennsylvania have moved from Safe for Obama to Toss-Up. 

If Romney wins Pennsylvania, we’ll be celebrating early on the November 6.  Call your friends in PA, comment on Pennsylvania blogs and news sites.  Target people who will vote right if they vote.  Forget conversions—just move the friendlies.

What The Pollsters Aren’t Telling You

Reading Time: 1

Polls do influence elections. That’s why people like Nate Silver and some of the writers at Business Insider are doing somersaults over Gallup’s Daily Presidential Tracking numbers.

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map

For over a week, Gallup has shown a tidal wave for support for Mitt Romney. Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight tried to discredit Gallup by blogging about outlier results it’s shown in past years. Here’s the conclusion Business Insider reached:

Bottom line: Gallup swings wildly and it frequently has results not in line with other pollsters.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/nate-silver-on-the-gallup-poll-showing-huge-lead-for-mitt-romney-2012-10#ixzz29yPJ4rHE

But here’s what Silver and BI aren’t telling you: Romney’s 7-point lead in Gallup (52-45 as of October 21) is not a wild swing. Not by a long shot.

Instead, Gallup is showing a consistent move toward Romney ever since the first debate. For example, over the past four days, Romney has led by 6, 7, 6, and 7 points.  Before that, he move from 4 points to 6 points over the course of four days.

True, Rasmussen and WSJ/MSLSD show Romney and Obama tied. But that’s not enough to toss out Gallup the way Silver and BI attempt.

Now the reason polls matter is because low-information voters tend to break toward the candidate they think will win. If Romney’s cavernous 7-point lead holds steady, those late deciders will break for Romney. That could result in a landslide.

Combine all this with the latest RCP Electoral Map showing Romney up by 5 in the electoral vote count, and you can understand why liberals will say anything to discredit the polls. 

Now We Know Why Mitt Romney Has Been Wildly Successful In Life

Reading Time: 2 minutes

Barack Obama’s performance was not nearly as bad as Romney’s performance was good.

EmptyChair-New-Yorker

Not good—terrific.

I’m not talking about his politics and policies; I’m talking Romney’s remarkable presence. Here are the four principles of presence that Romney knocked out of the park.

Command of the Facts

When it came to facts—and to how those facts matter to the listeners—Mitt Romney seemed more prepared for the office of President than the President. Every attack by the President was countered, not with excuses or logic, but with numbers, facts, and verifiable statements.

The words that popped into viewers minds regarding Romney: confidence, authority, intelligence, competence, and readiness.

Affable Demeanor

From the moment he stepped onto the stage, Mitt Romney’s body and face reflected a friendly, but determined, man. His eyes danced. He smiled when appropriate, and never scowled. He stood still and straight—“in neutral,” as personal coach Frances Cole Jones describes the position: feet planted, hands at sides, ready to move but disciplined to hold steady.

Romney’s demeanor led people to think: approachable, safe, unguarded, honest, open, and strong.

Eye Contact

When Barack Obama attacked Romney, the President looked down or at Jim Lehrer. When Romney called out Obama, he looked his rival in the eye. While Obama’s eye-aversion looked weasel-like and weak, Romney’s forthrightness looked brave.

The word that Romney’s eye contact conjured: mensch.

Consistency

After 90 minutes, the President looked beaten, exhausted, distracted, and uncomfortable. He stood on one leg, often rocking back and forth like fidgety boy in Sunday School. But Romney’s strength, energy, and determination never waned. Romney never soared, but he never descended.

The word viewers thought about Romney’s consistency:  stamina.

Presidential

In every respect, Mitt Romney came across as more presidential than the President himself. He was more in command of facts, he was more likable, he had the wherewithal to look his rival in the eye and maintain all of these qualities consistency.

Mitt Romney’s impression on voters:  Mr. President.