Posted on 12/18/2010 9:25:43 AM PST by Brices Crossroads
Predictably, the blogosphere is alive with polls telling conservatives that, in spite of the smashing conservative triumph of last month inspired and led by the TEA Party and Sarah Palin, Governor Palin's nomination for President in 2012 will result in an electoral debacle at the hands of Barack Obama. Most recently, ABC and the Washington Post produced a poll showing that Obama would trounce Palin by 22 points.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/17/AR2010121701512.html?hpid=topnews
I frequently see bloggers and conservative analysts, even those who favor Palin, try to refudiate such polls based upon the sample size, the length of time between now and the election, the absence of the momentum building, year long Presidential campaign, the fact that Regan came back from even greater deficits, and many other factors which render such polls meaningless. All these rebuttals are well taken, but it seems to me that they miss the point.
Notice how the MSM outlets always focus on generic national polls, using 2008 turnout models, ignoring the 2010 elections. By responding to these polls as some do, we are making a classic mistake that no good lawyer or advocate ever makes: We are letting the opponent frame the issue and accepting their premise. The election is not a national election, based on a generic plebiscite. It is 50 separate state elections. The Establishment and its MSM pipe organ never want to talk about the real key to electability....the Electoral College, because it does not fit their chosen meme of Palin's unelectability. Instead, an analysis of the Electoral College, which is the true measure of electability not only shows that Palin is electable, but that it is Obama whose hold on the presidency that is becoming increasingly precarious.
The electoral map is now tilting heavily in her direction, with the South solidly in her corner and the Midwest (especially Ohio and Wisconsin) trending heavily away from Obama and toward her. If she holds the McCain states (which is a given) and adds just six more (Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Nevada, Indiana, and Virginia)---traditional red states, in each of which Obama's poll numbers are in the tank-- she wins the Presidency with 271 electoral votes.
I do not even include formerly blue states that went deep red such as Wisconsin (Tea Party Senator), New Mexico (Mama Grizzly/Tea Party Governor) and New Hampshire (Mama Grizzly wins Senate 60-40 over Dem Congressman). Obama will be hard pressed in all three, especially Wisconsin.
We all need to block out the Charlie Cooks and the other proponents of the MSM agitprop that Palin cannot win. They are out to demoralize us and their generic poll numbers, two years out, do not change the electoral college math, which favors Palin. We need to stop allowing the lamestream media to define "electability" in such a way that it suits their purposes.
From now on, when someone challenges Governor Palin's electability and throws an MSM poll in your face, politely redirect the argument to the electoral college and enlighten them about the fact that, under the Constitution and in light of the current political conditions in the battleground states, Sarah Palin is not only electable, but it is Obama who is becoming increasingly unelectable.
I think the greatest indicator that Sarah is a threat to Obama's reelection is the MSM's obsession with her, dedicated to diminishing her and depicting her as a loser and or damaged goods. The fact is, they wouldn't be so focused on Sarah (and to a lesser extent, all the Palins) unless they considered her a pretty serious threat. The fact is, the liberal mainstream media elite wouldn't dedicate so much time, energy, and expense on her if she was truly the loser candidate as depicted.
The impression I get is that these liberal foot soldiers consider her quite formidable, and are doing their part to diminish her now, as opposed to diminishing her later if she decides to run. They probably figure it may be too late by then.
I would bet that the critics of Gov. Sarah Palin’s intelligence are the ones who thought third grade was the best five years of their life and who say things like “warsh the car.”
Great article, BC. But, what's the status of the movement we read of a while back which intended to moot the EC by a compact which commits states to award Electoral Votes to the winner of the national popular vote?If any one of the states which you rely on in predicting a Palin victory has committed to that compact, there might be a problem! (But then, if so the red sweep of state legislatures last month might enable repeal . . . ).
Perhaps that wants looking into?
“The impression I get is that these liberal foot soldiers consider her quite formidable, and are doing their part to diminish her now, as opposed to diminishing her later if she decides to run. They probably figure it may be too late by then.”
I agree with that, Victoria, and the rest of your analysis as well. I think they are doubling down on Sarah because of a feeling that had they done a more effective hatchet job on Reagan maybe he could have been stopped.(I myself think they did as much as they could to destroy Reagan, but you can never convince a liberal that a stupid strategy should not be reemployed: Just look at how they keep going back to socialism time and time again in spite of its abject failures) The libs definitely fear Palin the most and the liberal backbenchers as well as their conservative toadies (like Jennifer Rubin and Kathleen Parker of the Washington Com-Post) are trying to curry favor with their masters by slamming Palin at every turn. So far it is not working. And, as you say, the hour is getting late. If they don’t come up with something that sticks and soon, she will become inevitable. Indeed, the threshhold of her inevitability may have already been crossed.
“warsh the car.”
That put me in mind of Gomer Huckabee...err Pyle. LOL
No, it is the decision of the American voters in 2012. In a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll released a few days ago, 42 percent of respondents said they plan to vote for President Obama in 2012 against 39 percent who indicated they'd vote for the Republican candidate. 48% of Americans pay no taxes. It looks pretty hard to fix our country if something like the DREAM Act ever passed. Hispanic voters played a key role in defeating Sharron Angle in her challenge to Harry Reid in Nevada, and a large Hispanic Democratic vote in California insulated Democrats in that state from the Republican onslaught that succeeded in other parts of the country.
We are well on our way to becoming a socialist country like Europe, or worse, until, like Margret Thatcher said, they run out of "other people's money". Secession may be the only way to restore freedom and liberty in bastions of what use to be these United States.
I respect that - but it can be spun very effectively, IMHO, to her advantage. Think about what you are saying when you say that her resignation is a negative: You are saying that a person who has a major accomplishment simply in having defeated the Establishment Republican governor and another, apparently, in the pipeline deal, and finds that circumstances are such that her continued tenure in office is not helpful should continue to feed off the perquisites of office just because.You are saying that you are so accustomed to lifers entrenching themselves in a sinecure that when someone gets in office, does what she can, and then gets out of the way she deserves blame and a lifer politician deserves credit.
You are saying that you hate the idea of term limits.
10-4
Sounds like a plan.
Merry Christmas
I didn’t manage to get to your brilliant thread yesterday, (DADT) but I’ve bookmarked it!
Thanks very much for your common sense and well written essay!
Thank you, indefatigable Onyx!
Good point.
Also, if Obama can trounce her so easily, they should be PUSHING her as their desired opponent. Our talking heads should always respond so. When liberal head or pollster says “Palin can’t beat Obama,” then the talking head on the Republican side should say, “So you have nothing to worry about, then. You should adore her as your opponent.” And be silent as the ball falls in their court. Might be fun TV.
I don't know about certifying the election, but the NC legislature (along with the other 56 states) will be redistricting in 2011, and the Governor has no role in the redistricting in NC.
This is the understated, but perhaps the most significant point of the 2010 GOP wins nationwide. This article is from 2007, but it explains this redistricting significance very well.
Congressional Redistricting, the Ultimate Political Prize
Monday, November 26, 2007
By Martin Frost
Every so often an important political issue flies "under the radar screen."
In other words, it's not considered important enough for the national press to spend any time covering it. A perfect example is the next round of redistricting scheduled for 2011.
This is the ultimate political contest, with all the chips on the table. And the contest is already in progress, the national press notwithstanding.
It’s all about whom controls state legislatures across the country and which party controls governor’s offices in various states. And it’s about which party stands for racial justice and which party attempts to maximize its advantage through racially discriminatory plans.
While a few states now use non-partisan commissions to draw Congressional districts, the great majority of Congressional districts will still be drawn by state legislatures following the 2010 census. In most states, the governor still has a veto over Congressional redistricting plans.
... snip ...
The real redistricting battles will occur in states that are slated to gain or lose seats as a result of the 2010 census because some changes will have to occur in current Congressional delegations in those states. States projected to lose seats after the 2010 census are New York (-2), Ohio (-2), Illinois (-1), Iowa (-1), Louisiana (-1), Massachusetts (-1). Michigan (-1), Missouri (-1) and Pennsylvania (-1).
States projected to gain seats after the 2010 census include Texas (+3), Arizona (+2), Florida (+2), California (+1), Georgia (+1), Nevada (+1) and Utah (+1).
You will notice a trend. The states projected to lose seats are generally in the Rust Belt and have quite a few Democratic Congressmen. The states projected to gain seats are primarily in the Sun Belt and are states that have been trending Republican in recent elections.
Thus, Democrats must fight to stay even in the Rust Belt and Republicans have the opportunity to pick up new seats in the Sun Belt. Also, Democrats may have the chance to undo Republican gerrymanders in Michigan and Pennsylvania if they retake control of both legislative houses in those states.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.