Mitt Romney...Total Electoral Votes 293* (We believe it will take days for the official count to come in)
Mitt Romney...Total Electoral Votes 293* (We believe it will take days for the official count to come in)
The ad bears the headline: “We, the undersigned, proudly support Governor Mitt Romney as our nation’s next President and Commander-in-Chief.” It is then followed by the names of the 500 former military figures announcing their endorsement.
One of those 500, Rear Admiral (ret.) James J. Carey, released this important caveat concerning the ad:
It is important that you’re aware that this is not an ad being paid for by the Romney Campaign. Rather, it is being paid for and placed by the 500 of us who have agreed to have our names in this public ad and to take a public stand on how very important it is that our fellow Americans choose a new Commander-in-Chief in the elections this coming Tuesday.
Please vote on Tuesday, NOT because of revenge for something, but because of “Love of Country.”
God bless our military, and God bless these 500 brave souls who understand that the foreseeable future of our military will be decided by who emerges victorious on Tuesday.
Dr. Joseph Lowery spoke at St. James Baptist Church on Saturday in an attempt to push the vote for President Barack Obama. Lowery, you may recall, was the genius who uttered these glorious words at the inauguration of Obama in 2009 during his benediction:
Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around … when yellow will be mellow … when the red man can get ahead, man … and when white will embrace what is right.
He hasn’t moderated any. At the church, Lowery said that he liked giving the benediction in 2008 because he had the last word. He also said, according to the Reporter, that the inauguration was “the first time in his life he enjoyed the national anthem; he said the anthem is too militaristic. He said he would like to see the national anthem changed to ‘Lift Every Voice,’ which is known as the ‘Negro National Anthem,’ or to ‘America the Beautiful.’
Lowery blasted blacks who didn’t bother showing up to the polls for Obama in 2008. “I don’t know what kind of a n—– wouldn’t vote with a black man running. All that he did with the stimulus was genius. Nobody intelligent would risk this country with Romney.”
He also said that when he was younger, he thought all white people were going to hell. Then he “mellowed and just said most of them were.” Now, the Reporter said, Lowery said he’s back to his original view. All white people are going to hell. Then he added, “I’m frightened by the level of hatred and bitterness coming out in this election.”
0Bama at his best…
Battery maker A123 Systems vowed thousands of new jobs when it received a nearly quarter-billion-dollar stimulus grant in late 2009, but federal job-tracking figures show only a few hundred positions were created before the company joined a growing list of federally backed energy businesses that ended in bankruptcy.
The latest quarterly report on file with a federal stimulus tracking database shows just seven positions created through the grant from April to June this year. Previous quarters’ job reports contained anywhere from a handful of positions created to more than 100 new jobs.
But even when the quarterly reports are combined, a total of 408 new positions were reported under the stimulus program since 2009, amounting to more than $300,000 spent for each new job reported.
“A123 has been struggling for some time. Was the company struggling when the Energy Department decided to award it a federal grant? Did the Energy Department perform enough due diligence before making this award?” Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and John Thune of South Dakota said when they recently pressed Energy Department officials to explain the selection process.
The company’s bankruptcy has spawned renewed scrutiny on the Energy Department after it backed several other businesses now involved in high-profile bankruptcies, including Solyndra LLC, the California-based solar panel manufacturer that went broke after burning through a half-billion dollars in federal money.
BREAKING TITS!! NCT
In 2008, 54% of likely voters identified as Democrat or lean Democrat. 42% of likely voters identified as GOP or lean GOP. In other words, the electorate, including independents who lean towards a particular party, was D+12. This year, however, the Democrat advantage has disappeared. 49% of likely voters today identify as GOP or lean GOP. Just 46% of likely voters are or lean towards the Democrats. This is a 15-point swing towards the GOP from 2008 to an outright +3 advantage for the GOP. By comparison, in 2004, when Bush won reelection, the electorate was evenly split, with each party getting support from 48% of likely voters.
If these numbers are within even a few points of what this survey suggests, then Romney will win decisively and the GOP will pick up the Senate. We are likely standing on the edge of another GOP wave election.
Keep in mind, the Gallup survey suggests that voter turnout among Obama’s biggest supporters, i.e. minorities and young voters, will generally match 2008 levels. Obama’s problem is that, relatively speaking, there just aren’t that many of these voters. Voters under 30 will make up 13% of the electorate, one point below ’08 and even with ’04. Minorities will make up 20%, up 5 from ’04 and only up 1 point from ’08.
Obama’s chief problem is that everyone else in the electorate has become much more Republican.
Most of the media’s polls anticipate the 2012 electorate looking either as Democrat as 2008 or even more Democrat. Obama’s slim lead in state polls rests on the foundation of a massive Democrat turnout advantage. This Gallup survey, though, puts that lie to rest. If the electorate is actually even or R+ anything, Romney wins in a blowout.Comments »
BREAKING NEWS…The V.Kingdom is about to announce it’s newest Knight…
Also if you have been “Knighted” by The V.King please respond below with your title and lands bequeathed… We are in the process of bestowing Christmas gifts to our members and our records need to be updated…many thanksComments »
Romney won despite being more cautious than expected–avoiding confrontation on the Libya issue, for example, and emphasizing areas of agreement with Obama where possible. He had a better command of the facts, defended his positions well, and looked more presidential.
Obama was very aggressive throughout the debate–perhaps still trying to compensate for his lackluster first debate–using every single question to attack his opponent’s record and policies. That approach may have backfired, as it allowed Romney to strike a calmer, more stable posture. Romney’s apparent strategy was to give up scoring points on particular issues in favor of appealing to war-weary, politics-weary moderate voters.
But that did not mean Romney failed to fight–and fight he did, particularly on the issue of Iran, which he stressed repeatedly as the biggest threat to the U.S. and the greatest failure of the Obama administration. He also repulsed some of Obama’s attacks–when given the opportunity by a moderator who once again showed far greater favor to the incumbent–and occasionally used some of them to pivot to his favored policy points.
Obama went overboard in some of his criticisms of Romney, not only by striking a less presidential posture but by relying on factual assertions that were bound to be proven false afterwards.
When Romney criticized looming defense cuts, for example, Obama countered by expressing contempt for Romney’s alleged ignorance about the military, saying that it was as outdated as military bayonets.
The problem? The military still uses bayonets.
The strongest point of the debate for Obama was when he spoke about his Afghanistan policy. For what seemed like the only time in the whole debate, he stepped back to paint a broader picture, explaining why he had committed more troops to the effort–and how he intended to help them find jobs when they came home. It was an excellent answer, combining a defense of his record with a pivot to his economic policy.
Romney’s strongest point–aside from a far more optimistic, and presidential, closing statement–was his answer on China. He defended his policy ably, against a remarkably pointed follow-up question from moderator Bob Schieffer that suggested Romney would start a “trade war,” and against a renewed attack from Obama on Romney’s position on the auto bailout. Romney was strong, principled, and unmovable.
A CBS poll immediately after the debate suggested a strong win for Obama–perhaps reflecting Obama’s far more aggressive posture during the debate.
Yet Romney did what he needed to do most, which was to show stature on foreign policy. Obama failed, as predicted, to disqualify his opponent–and seems to have created a few new questions to answer, whether on his retreat from defense sequestration, or his gaffe on bayonets.Comments »
The revelation comes from a Government Accountability Institute (GAI) report to be issued tomorrow that combed the Federal Election Commission (FEC) data to determine the effectiveness of each campaign’s donation security system.
“The use of a robust Address Verification System (AVS) would significantly minimize donations with invalid zip codes from slipping through the net,” said GAI President Peter Schweizer. “When you use your credit card at a pay-at-the-pump gas station, you have to enter your zip code. Enter the wrong number or none at all, your transaction is denied. If that’s the standard to buy gas, surely it’s reasonable to expect the same for donating to federal candidates.”
Obama for America claims it does, in fact, use an AVS system to process its online donations, as well as a “manual process to review any transaction flagged by AVS.” But as e-commerce experts note, AVS systems have a range of settings that allow wide latitude in determining which transactions will be blocked or accepted.
Since February 2012, the Obama campaign has received a total of $2,983,854.78 in donations with invalid ZIP codes, versus the Romney campaign’s $244,287.01—a figure one-twelfth of Obama’s.
I’ve decided to “knock-out” the Obama’s “green job’s”
So far, 36 companies that have received federal support from taxpayers are faltering — either having gone bankrupt or laying off workers or heading for bankruptcy. This list includes only those companies that received federal money from the Obama Administration’s Department of Energy and other agencies. The amount of money indicated does not reflect how much was actually received or spent but how much was offered. The amount also does not include other state, local, and federal tax credits and subsidies, which push the amount of money these companies have received from taxpayers even higher.
The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies that The V.King is going to fight (their CEO’s)…