Election 2008 - Post Mortem

The voters have spoken and we have a new direction. I'll run down the good, the bad and the ugly in this post. Where we go from here will be a separate post.

Winners:

Sen. Barack Obama is now the president-elect. Whether you attribute his election to massive vote fraud, or an immense advantage in campaign funds (fueled by donations of questionable legality) or anything else there is no question of who won or lost.

The mainstream media who demonstrated they could successfully throw an election.

Senate Democrats clearly won as they picked up 5 seats. While they did not reach the magic number of 60 seats, they got close enough that the threat of a filibuster is not really an option.

ACORN clearly won. If it's revealed that you're running a criminal enterprise to influence an election you definitely feel a lot better to find out any investigation will be controlled by people appointed by the guy you were cheating to help.

Fans of out of control government spending and earmarks won as well.

Fans of government corruption won. U.S. Rep. William Jefferson cruises past Moreno.

People who understand that marriage is a union of one man and one woman won again.

Losers

Sen. John McCain - Waited until his concession speech to give his best performance of the campaign. This election will be poked, prodded and examined to death. However, to me McCain made several strategic missteps. The biggest mistake was to attempt to play his opponents game by repudiating the sitting president from his own party and go change, change, change. He needed to defend the overall course we are on otherwise people would pick his opponent who was the clearer choice for change. The other big mistake was to restrict his campaign from aggressively making the case against his opponents character.

The little remaining credibility of the mainstream media was completely destroyed. Throughout the campaign they displayed no objectivity about this race and chose not to pursue any skeletons of the Dem candidate.

Sen. Dole and Sen. Sununu. It is usually very difficult to unseat an incumbent senator. It takes either a major screw up or a tidal wave against their party. Dole was affected by both as she ran a sloppy campaign with ads that backfired against her. Sununu lost a rematch against a popular former governor in a year which clearly was bad for republicans.

The future of the Supreme Court took a major hit as the most pro-abortion presidential candidate ever was elected. Obama has made clear that he will appoint judges who will base rulings on their emotions instead of actually applying the law as it is written.

The reputations of the people of Pennsylvania and Minnesota. Within the last few weeks Rep. Jack Murtha (D-PA) twice insulted his constituents as racists and rednecks and yet those same people had so little personal pride they still voted for his reelection. No winner has been declared in the U.S. Senate race in Minnesota, but that state's reputation took a serious hit by the mere fact that Al Franken got a single vote let alone over a million votes.

Tax payers obviously will be the biggest losers from last night. Anyone who believed Obama's lies about 95% of people getting a tax cut should be committed.

Endorsement for President of the United States of America

Tomorrow between 130 million and 160 million people will go to the polls and elect the next president. Many people will endorse a candidate and give a couple reasons why they prefer that one over the other (or others, if you actually acknowledge Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney, Bobb Barr, and friends). This time I'd rather address various concerns and how the candidates stack up on those particular issue.

If you care about security and national defense, here is how they compare:
Sen. John McCain - A lifetime of military service, followed by decades in the Senate fighting for defense issues including fighting against misguided spending.
Sen. Barack Obama - Scant history, but wrong on the only issue he has expressed an opinion on - the surge in Iraq. Also, has discussed cutting defense spending by 25% and discontinuing any anti-missile defense spending.

I'll give that one to McCain. Make your own call.

If you care about foreign affairs:
McCain - Has been repeatedly tested and will be respected by foreign leaders.
Obama - Very naive and assumes leader of hostile nations can be talked into being nice. Chose Sen. Biden as his running mate because of Biden's vast experience in foreign affairs. Problem is Biden has decades of being wrong on nearly every issue that has come up.

I kind of think that one goes to McCain as well.

If you care about the economy:
McCain - Not an economist by his own admission. However, we can count on him to work diligently to curb excessive government spending.
Obama - Will raise taxes causing a much deeper and longer recession. His positions that he admits to border on European socialism. His long associations with admitted communists like Bill Ayers and Frank Davis leave me thinking socialism is the least of our concerns with Obama.

McCain isn't my first choice on this issue, but he is far better than his opponent again.

If you care about character and personality:
McCain - Positives: Survived several years in a POW camp and his fellow prisoners compliment him as a major boost to their morale because of his open defiance of prison officials and refusal to accept early release from prison based on his father's seniority.
Negatives: After returning from prison, he cheated on and later divorced his first wife, Carol, who had been seriously injured in a car accident while he was gone.
Obama - Positives: Seems like a good family man with a happy marriage.
Negatives: Attended a church with a goofy racist preacher for twenty years and had no problem associating with Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, etc.

Feeling generous I'd almost call this a tie. However, Obama's repeated misjudgments of people seriously call his ability to differentiate right from wrong into question.

If you are worried about excessive government intrusion into our lives:
McCain - Has long advocated a limited role for our government.
Obama - Is a major proponent of increased government influence through a national health care plan.

McCain looks better here.

If you're anxious for increased spending on failed social service programs then Sen Obama is the candidate for you. From his failures with the Annenberg Challenge, which spent a hundred million dollars and made no difference in Chicago inner city schools to the tax payer money he wasted to improve his district (you know - the $100,000 Gazebo) he has shown a real fondness for spending other people's money.

If you think we need to continue to force lending institutions to provide home loans to high-risk buyers then Obama is your guy. He is the Fannie Mae sponsored candidate.

If you're concerned about First Amendment rights:
McCain - Co-Author and defender of McCain/Feingold Act which infringed on our right to free speech.
Obama - Expected to take action to restore the misnamed Fairness Doctrine in order to silence talk radio.

Once again, I'll call this a tie though the Fairness Doctrine seems like a greater threat to our rights.

If you're concerned about Second Amendment rights:
McCain/Palin - Both endorsed by the NRA. Palin is an avid hunter and outdoorsman.
Obama/Biden - Prior to running for president, Obama was an extremist against 2nd Amendment rights. He even disagreed with the right of someone to defend themselves in their home.

McCain is your only choice in this regard. Not even close.

Do you want more or less government? I want gridlock more than increased government action. Consider what an Obama election would mean. We'd have an extremely liberal congress (both houses) with an equally liberal rubber stamp in the White House. With a McCain election, anything he proposed would be fought in congress and if congress voted for anything overly ridiculous then McCain could veto.

If you care about the destination of your soul:
McCain/Palin - Don't just talk the talk on pro-life, they live those values.
Obama/Biden - Most pro-abortion presidential ticket ever. Obama has gone so far as to oppose legislation that would require treatment for children who survive abortions out of fear that any infringement on abortion could threaten Roe v. Wade.

Personally, when I meet my maker I'll have enough to account for that I don't want to have to defend voting for Obama.

Bottom line: If you have any concern about the future of our country Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin are the choice going forward. Go with Obama/Biden if you want bad people running bad government.

Today's Good Sign

The Obama campaign and its accomplices in the media and polling businesses have done their best to sell the idea that Obama's election is a fait accompli. However, their actions tell a different story. Here is today's good sign that this election is a lot closer than they want you to believe:

DES MOINES, Iowa - Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama returns to Iowa on Friday where he'll headline a midday rally in Des Moines.

If polls could be believed then Sen. Obama wouldn't waste any precious time in these last few days in a state he seemingly has in the bag. Sen. McCain has never been especially popular in Iowa due to his stance against ethanol subsidies. Iowa neighbors Obama's state of Illinois and his victory in their caucuses early in the primary race gave him much needed credibility. If he is nervous about Iowa I'm feeling better about the whole game.

Separately, instead of in a clear plastic bag, this morning our newspaper came in a bag that said in large print:

DEFEND FREEDOM
DEFEAT OBAMA

PAID FOR BY NRA-POLITICAL VICTORY FUND. WWW.NRAPVF.ORG
NOT AUTHORIZED BY ANY CANDIDATE OR CANDIDATE'S COMMITTEE

You make less than $250K so why should you care about Obama's tax increases?

I bet most folks have run into friends, family members, neighbors etc., who are unconcerned about the tax implications of this election. A lot of folks just don't care or don't believe it will impact them personally. Sen. Obama clearly understands this and threw out a big number - $250k or a quarter of a million dollars - as the income level that will see an increase in their tax burden. That is a neat dividing line. Most voters make far less than that amount and those that make well above that amount are a small enough segment of the voting population that it is safe to threaten to raise their taxes. You can explain to those people that raising taxes will deepen and lengthen the recession or explain how an overtaxed business owner will hire less employees, not give raises, not expand, etc. Problem is that argument doesn't seem to get through to a lot of people. The mindset remains that as long as I make less than a quarter of a million dollars a year it won't matter to me. The better argument to make is to let people know Obama is lying. When they look suprised that you are certain he's lying, ask those people "what from Obama's limited history would lead them to believe he is telling the truth?" When he ran for the senate he campaign on a promise to work for a middle class tax cut. Never happened. When his racist demogogue pastor became public knowledge his first answer was "I could no more disown him than I could my White Grandmother." Within a month he not only disowned "Rev." Wright but had also tossed his grandmother under the bus as a "typical white person." Another example is public financing for his campaign. Last year, both he and Sen. McCain gave their word to live with the limits of accepting public financing. However, he showed his word is worthless by continuing to go with private contributions. Ask them who will force Obama to keep his word? A senate lead by Harry Reid? A house of representative run by San Fran Nancy Pelosi? Not hardly. They are left with just taking the word of a guy who has never voted for a tax reduction or against a tax hike.

Bottom line: If you believe Obama will only raise taxes on the rich then you likely would also be inclined buy a bridge from a snake-oil salesman. And remember income taxes are far from the only way they can reach into your pocket.

Disclaimer: While I cited Obama's refusal of public funding after promising to abide by those limits as evidence of his untrustworthiness, I am not a fan of tax payer monies being spent on campaigns. Let candidates spend their own money or the money of people dumb enough to donate to their campaigns, but don't use money confiscated from citizens to fund their quixotic job hunts.

Answering the defectors

Charles Krauthammer has a column today explaining his decision to vote for Sen. McCain and knocking down the weak-sisters who defected to endorse Sen. Obama.

Contrarian that I am, I’m voting for John McCain. I’m not talking about bucking the polls or the media consensus that it’s over before it’s over. I’m talking about bucking the rush of wet-fingered conservatives leaping to Barack Obama before they’re left out in the cold without a single state dinner for the next four years.

I stand athwart the rush of conservative ship-jumpers of every stripe — neo (Ken Adelman), moderate (Colin Powell), genetic/ironic (Christopher Buckley) and socialist/atheist (Christopher Hitchens) — yelling “Stop!” I shall have no part of this motley crew. I will go down with the McCain ship. I’d rather lose an election than lose my bearings.

Read the rest. I will quibble with his description of Christopher Hitchens as a conservative of any stripe. Hitchens supported the War on Terror, but he never was anything except a steadfast liberal.

Don't lose hope!

The media and the pollsters have been attempting to create an air of inevitability regarding Sen. Obama's election. It is a transparent ploy to discourage Republicans and in turn reduce voter turn out. Don't buy into their narrative. Write a different result.

Here are somethings to consider as the election nears. Share them with people you know who are undecided or leaning towards voting for the Hopey-Change guy just assuming that any change is improvement.

The comprehensive argument against Barack Obama. This is a long, well-researched breakdown of various reasons to have reservations about Sen. Obama. However, despite the title it is hardly comprehensive.

PA Governor 'Nervous,' Sees McCain Surge. If Gov. Rendell thinks the Obama campaign is in trouble in Pennsylvania it is because he is seeing internal polling that McCain is stronger in rural Pennsylvania than they previously believed. If Obama loses Pennsylvania he can thank Rep. John "My constituents are racist rednecks" Murtha for all his help.

The Bill Ayers Problem. Some people think the Ayers situation has played out and the electorate isn't interested. That could be true if Sen. Obama hadn't been dishonest when initially asked about Ayers. However, instead of being honest, Obama tried to minimize his history of relations with Ayers by saying "He's just some guy in my neighborhood." Since then he has reluctantly and gradually admitted more and more involvement with an unrepentant domestic terrorist. If there was nothing to be ashamed of then there would have been no need to lie. There is more to this story. The question is when will the story be told? What has come out so far is troubling but not as much as his 20 years in "Rev." Wright's hateful, racist church. The rest of the story must be much bigger for him to have bothered lying about the relationship. Evidence is growing that Ayers (an accomplished writer) actually was the ghost writer for Obama's book Dreams of my Father. Why does that matter? It matters for two reasons. There are some people who jumped on the Obama bandwagon partly because they read and liked the book and thought it reflected well on his intellect (perversely including Bill Buckley's son). Equally important is this would come across as a deliberate lie and some people don't like that.

The HOPE ON Project (Help Ohio Prevent Electing Obama Now) is a thirteen part series of posts spearheaded by Tom Blumer of BizzyBlog explaining Obama's unfitness for higher office. Here are links to the first three - One, Two, Three. The rest of the posts in the series will be added each day leading up to election day.

Like it or not, race will play a role in this election and how the results are interpreted. The Bradley Effect theorizes that polls are less accurate in elections with a black candidate. This effect usually leads to polls overestimating the vote for the black candidate. Also, in this election season Sen. Obama and his supporters have at times way overplayed the race card. I sense a growing resentment among voters over feeling like you always have to watch your words to be sure you're not offending the easily offended.

There is anecdotal evidence that McCain is getting some crossover support from voters who would normally vote for the Dem presidential nominee. Some guy named Jack Zettler is the Democrat candidate for county auditor. Well, just in our neighborhood I've seen a half dozen homes with yard signs for both Zettler and McCain. I highly doubt these are lifelong Republicans crossing over to vote for Zettler. My guess/hope is these are Democrats with reservations about voting for Obama.

Lastly, though I don't trust polls until it is within a week of the election, here is a headline to keep you positive: AP presidential poll: Race tightens in final weeks The tightening was credited to the third debate and Obama's answer to Joe the Plumber.

GOP Vice Presidential Choice - Update

With the Republican nomination secured, John McCain can take his time to select the right running mate. In my opinion, McCain's running mate choice will be more closely scrutinized than most. If elected McCain would be the oldest man elected to serve as president. Obviously, his running mate needs to be someone able to convey the ability to seamlessly ascend to the presidency if McCain is incapacitated. Another problem is McCain has gone out of his way to take positions certain to irritate his base in order to ingratiate himself with the liberal media. The right running mate could placate some of us on the right who will have a hard time bringing themselves to vote for the candidate who showed up on all the Sunday talk shows mocking them for the past few years. Here is a quick run down of potential VP picks and my guess as to their chance of being selected. Age listed is as of November.

Dr. Ron Paul - Texas Congressman (73). Positives: Actually more conservative than McCain on some issues. Negatives: Naive on foreign policy and even older than McCain. 0% chance.

Michael Steele - Former Lt Gov. of Maryland (50). Positives: Gave a great speech at the 2004 GOP convention, he's smart, well-respected. Negatives: Lost race for U.S. Senator in 2006. Odd note: Former heavyweight champ Mike Tyson used to be his brother-in-law. 2% chance.

Rudy Giuliani - former mayor of New York city (64). Positives: Has administrative experience that McCain lacks. Negatives: Socially he is as liberal as most Dems. His personal life has been a mess at times. 5% chance.

Rob Portman - Former Ohio congressman, former U.S. Trade Representative and current WH Budget Director (52). Positives. Reliable conservative with good reputation, may deliver votes in key swing state of Ohio. Negatives: Limited name recognition. May be too closely tied to the Bush Administration. 10% chance.

Kay Bailey Hutchison - Texas Senator (65). Positives: Friendly demeanor to offset McCain's temper. Negatives: Age and McCain should already have Texas in the bag. 5% chance.

Fred Thompson - Former Senator and actor (66). Positives: Smart, reliable conservative. Negatives: Age. 7% chance.

Joe Lieberman Senator (66). Positives: Staunch supporter of military action since the 9/11 attacks. Negatives: Age. He is a Democrat turned Independent. 15% chance.

The remaining potential picks are all current or former governors. I believe because of his decades in the legislative branch of government, McCain will be very likely to pick a VP with executive experience.

Sarah Palin - Alaskan Governor (44). Positives: She compliments McCain's weaknesses nicely. She has been a reform minded leader cleaning up a very corrupt state government. Her youthfulness and reliable conservativism stand in stark contrast to McCain's age and maverick tendencies. Negatives: Fairly inexperienced. Very limited name recognition. Gave her kids goofy names (Bristol, Piper, Track, and Willow) bringing her judgment into question. 8% chance.

Mark Sanford - South Carolina Governor (48). Positives: Solid conservative to placate those leery of McCain occasional liberal silliness. Negatives: Limited name recognition. 30% chance.


Charlie Crist - Florida Governor (52). Positive: Timely endorsement of McCain very helpful in winning Florida. Negatives: Relatively inexperienced - only been a governor for two years. 15% chance.

Haley Barbour - Mississippi Governor (61). Positive: Strong performance in wake of Katrina disaster stood in stark contrast to Louisiana governor's ineptitude. Negatives: Ties to lobby industry. 25% chance.

Jeb Bush - Former Florida Governor (55). Positives: Very successful and popular two term governor of a key swing state. Negatives: Last name is same as his older brother. Also, two of his three kids have criminal history the family would likely not want to see drug through a national campaign. 0% chance.

Mike Huckabee - Former Arkansas Governor (53). Positives: Charismatic speaker. Helps reach out to the social conservatives. Negatives: He is from Hope Arkansas. The voters he can deliver would likely end up going for McCain anyways. 42% chance.

Mitt Romney - Former Massachusetts Governor (61). Positives: Successful businessman and politician. Bowed out of race when it became apparent McCain would be the nominee showing he placed the country's future over his own ambitions. Negatives: Has a label of flip-flopper and many feel he took more conservative positions in recent years more out of political opportunism than principal. Residual animosity from primary campaign. 35% chance.

Tim Pawlenty - Minnesota Governor (47). Positives: Backed McCain early in the primary process. Negatives: Unable to deliver his own state to McCain in the primaries. 35% chance.

I'm sure there are many other potential VP's I overlooked. Please leave suggestions in the comments section.

UPDATE:

Here are some additional names being floated for consideration:

Bobby Jindal - Louisiani Governor (37). Positives: Youth offsets McCain's ancientness. Very intelligent (Rhodes scholar), reliable conservative. Negatives: At 37 may be too young. Limited name recognition. Lack of experience (more experienced than Obama or Clinton, but who isn't). 17% chance.

Carly Fiorina - Former CEO of Hewlett-Packard (HP) (54). Positives: ??? Negatives: Never ran for elective office. 1% chance.

Duncan Hunter - California Congressman (60). Positives: Ready now. Best of the original group running for the GOP nomination. Long time member of the House Armed Services Committee including service as chairman when GOP held the majority. Has a strong stance on illegal immigration offsetting McCain's weakness. Decorated soldier from Vietnam War. Negatives: Limited name recognition. Not likely to even put home state of California in the winning column. 15% chance.

Paul Ryan - Wisconsin Congressman (38). Positives: Youthful contrast to McCain. Good speaker who has won his district by comfortable margin each time. Could be McCain's Dan Quayle. Negatives: Very limited name recognition. Five term congressman with no notable legislative accomplishment. Like McCain all his experience is in the legislative branch. 20% chance.

Condoleeza Rice - Secretary of State and former academic (53). Positives: Very intelligent. If Clinton gets the Dem nomination and bipasses Obama for VP then Rice's addition to the McCain ticket gives angry voters a place to go. Negatives: Outside of foreign policy, her positions on key issues are largely unknown. She bring the baggage of the current administration and has no natural constituency. Has never run for elective office. 1% chance.

John McCain Secures GOP Nomination

Tonight, with victories in Rhode Island, Vermont, Ohio and Texas, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) secured the Republican nomination for president. Meanwhile, the Democrats still have two candidates, Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton, competing to represent them in November. While the Dems sort out the head of their ticket, McCain can focus on choosing a running mate best suited to match his strengths and mitigate his weaknesses.

Ohio Primary Contest

Yesterday, radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh created a stir by recommending that Republican voters in Ohio request a Democrat ballot and vote for Hillary Clinton. His reasoning was we want her to stay in the race so the Democrat candidates will continue to bash each other and more importantly spend more money contesting the remaining primaries. I did NOT follow Limbaugh's advice and hope no one else did either. There are a couple reasons I disagree with that idea. The main reason is I think we should play in our own sandbox. I've resented this idea in the past when Dems have suggested similar tactics and it would be hypocritical for me to change my tune now. Beyond that, based on their extremist position regarding abortion, I feel it would be morally wrong to vote for either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton even just as a "joke" in a primary. Additionally, I think people are mistaken in thinking Clinton would be easier to beat in the general election. Polls may currently reflect Obama as doing better against John McCain. However, reality is Obama has yet to be fully vetted and once people start seeing the full picture the polls will swing accordingly. If Limbaugh succeeds and Clinton pulls off big wins today then we will hear a lot of talk about her resilience and she will assume the "Comeback Kid" label. Lastly, the one thing I learned from the Wizard of Oz movie is you better pour the water on the witch if you get a chance.