Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Election Night Updates

Polls in Virginia are closing in about 15 minutes.

Obama Crying
I haven't really thought much about it, but I'll start out with this post as a sticky up top and see how it goes.

There are election night posts at AoSHQ, "OFFICIAL AOSHQDD ELECTION NIGHT RETURNS," at Legal Insurrection, "Election Night 2012 — Live," and at The Other McCain, "ELECTION DAY UPDATES."

Plus check Instapundit as well.

4:07pm Pacific:



4:23pm Pacific: At Fox News, "Virginia too close to call; Romney wins Indiana and Kentucky, Obama takes Vermont."

4:35pm Pacific: CNN reported exit polls showing Obama up 51-48 in Ohio.

4:44pm Pacific: Robert Stacy McCain's not happy with CNN's South Carolina projection as too close to call:


5:07pm Pacific: Polls in a bunch of states just closed. I'll have news reports posted on those in a bit. Florida and Pennsylvania are too close to call but exit data shows an Obama edge. JPod responds to these on Twitter:


5:13pm Pacific: From earlier, at AoSHQ, "GOP Sources: We're Looking Good In CO, IA, NH, and WI":
Assuming Romney wins Florida, NC, and Virginia, then Wisconsin, Colorado, and either Iowa or New Hampshire wins it for him.

I think Team Obama is trying to put out word that Virginia is shaky for Romney. I think they're trying to demoralize us. I don't believe it.
Still too close to call in Florida and Virginia, so we'll see.

5:55pm Pacific: Romney rolling up South, including Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi, and South Carolina. But no word yet on Florida. And of course we're waiting for Ohio and Virginia as well.

The Lonely Conservative is blogging, "Election Results Open Thread," and at Twitchy, "Moving pics of Romney’s final campaign flight; Visibly moved by supporters, talks to media on plane."

6:16pm Pacific: Im in the bathroom just now and I hear my wife scream: "Florida just flipped with Romney ahead!" Susan Candiotti has that:


6:20pm Pacific: Various sources call Pennsylvania for Obama.

6:41pm Pacific: Theo Spark provides an important election reminder:

Obama Communist
Yeah, the CPUSA endorsed him again this year: "... re-electing Obama is absolutely essential."

7:12pm Pacific: CNN projects a New Hampshire win for Obama. And Florida remains within hundreds of votes either way. The path for the GOP ticket is narrowing.

Perhaps the editors of the Wall Street Journal saw the way things were shaking before going to press, but here's this leader, "The Republic Will Survive":
As our early editions went to press Tuesday evening we had no idea who'd win the Presidential race. But we'll venture the prediction that the Republic will somehow survive the outcome. Even if Barack Obama wins a second term.

These columns have made no secret of our disappointments—we're writing with the mute button on—with this Administration. Nor have we stinted on our criticism of Mitt Romney, both on tactics and policy. Sadly for us, Ronald Reagan wasn't on the ballot Tuesday. Sadly for some of our friends, Bill Clinton wasn't on it either, though sometimes you could have been fooled.

To choose between imperfect candidates representing unwieldy coalitions has been the American way since America's first contested election, the squeaker of 1796. If you think the stakes in 2012 are great, remember that Thomas Jefferson's Democratic Republicans accused John Adams of being a closet monarchist, while Adams's Federalists treated their opponents as closet Jacobins. Adams won that race, 71 electoral votes to 68, only to lose to Jefferson four years later. Who was it who said voting is the best revenge? So it has gone ever since. The U.S. has survived countless mediocrities in the White House, several placeholders, at least two scoundrels and some real unmitigated disasters. In that last category, we'd name James Buchanan, Herbert Hoover and Jimmy Carter, with Woodrow Wilson getting an honorable mention. As for President Obama, we'll resist historicizing until we know he's out of the White House. Perspective is usually the best teacher.

That's not to say we're indifferent to what lies ahead these next four years. Elections have consequences. At issue in this one is whether Mr. Obama's attempt to govern the U.S. from the left winds up being a parenthesis in U.S. history, or a point of departure. If the former, we have a chance to return swiftly to real growth in the U.S. economy. If the latter, we will have to wrestle with the negative consequences for many years.
Well, I think I said it earlier, but the country will take a long time to dig itself out from the destruction of the Obama years, and eight years in office will practically bury American exceptionalism. But as the editors note, the republic will survive. Read the rest at the link.

7:35pm Pacific: It ain't over 'till it's over, but folks are getting glum on Twitter:


7:39pm Pacific: As I was saying:


8:36pm: This thread's done. I've got a new entry up: "Kenyan Witch Doctor Calls It Correctly: Barack Obama Re-Elected President."

#RomneyRyan Will Protect and Restore 'Judeo-Christian Values'

I met Mitt Romney in March 2010.

I had a feeling he'd wind up as the 2012 GOP nominee, so I decided to attend that book signing. He's a genuinely nice and decent fellow. He's "corny" in an all-American way, to such an extent that upwards of 30,000 people have been thronging events to hear him speak. There's a longing for the values that Romney represents, after almost four-years of progressive attacks on America's basic values and international standing. Indeed, I wish Paul Ryan had spoken out like this earlier in the campaign, "Ryan Says Obama Policies Threaten 'Judeo-Christian' Values":

CASTLE ROCK, Colo. — Representative Paul D. Ryan accused President Obama on Sunday of taking the country down a path that compromised Judeo-Christian values and the traditions of Western civilization.

The remarks came in a conference call with evangelical Christians, sandwiched between public rallies in which he often spoke of the Romney-Ryan ticket’s promise to bridge partisan divides if elected.

Mr. Ryan’s campaign plane touched down in Colorado late on Sunday, his fourth state in a hectic day of rallies meant to maximize turnout on Election Day, and he spoke by phone to the Faith and Freedom Coalition, a group founded by the conservative Christian strategist Ralph Reed.

“It’s a dangerous path,” Mr. Ryan said, describing Mr. Obama’s policies. “It’s a path that grows government, restricts freedom and liberty and compromises those values, those Judeo-Christian, Western civilization values that made us such a great and exceptional nation in the first place.”’
The election's too close to call. For all my bluster and hype, I honestly have no idea who's going to win. As I've been saying for a long time, I think Ohio will be decisive, and if Romney puts both Florida and the Buckeye State in his column I expect it will be over. But listening to other analysts there's a considerable sense that Romney's widened the map and a number of states are within serious reach of a GOP pickup. Pennsylvania would be awesome (Romney could call it a night after that). But Colorado, Virginia and Wisconsin all look like strong potential pickups. There's a theory floating around that this is an "undertow election," that the expected huge grassroots turnout and massive conservative enthusiasm will upend all the establishment polling prognostications and sweep the Republican ticket to victory. I think it's a plausible --- even likely --- theory and that's why I feel so good as this post is being scheduled to go live early morning Tuesday. I'll be at the college until around 3:00pm Pacific. Then I'll head out to vote and pick up my young son at his after-school program. Then I'll be home, sometime before 5:00pm if there's no delay at the local polling station, and I'll be in front of the television trolling the cable channels for reports. And I'll be on Twitter for instant reactions to the night's developments. I'll of course be blogging, so check in here for periodic updates throughout the night.

In any case, check Instapundit and The Other McCain for updates. And the Wall Street Journal's website features free access all day, so there'll be lots of election reporting over there as well.

Until tonight!

Democracy's Feast

From Timothy Dale, at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, "Elections are celebrations of the American way":
In the United States, our patriotism is rooted in the democratic principle that we participate in the decisions that affect our lives. The symbols of our patriotism - the flag, the national anthem and the Pledge of Allegiance - represent underlying ideals of liberty, equality and self-determination. We unite around these symbols because we agree about the fundamental values they represent. On election day, we should unite around voting because it is more than a symbol of these values. Voting is the actual practice of living out the ideals of democracy.

An election, and all that comes with it, is a celebration of democracy. Voting is the practice and commemoration of the spirit of a government that is founded and renewed on the principle that we are the source of political power. As we vote Tuesday, enthusiasm and pride should overtake our fatigue, knowing that our trip to the ballot box is the lifeblood of democratic governance. Election day is a day to honor democracy.
I like to think of it like that. Indeed, this is what I teach my students.

Read it all at the link.

Voting Irregularities Expected

There may well be some problems at the polls today, but you'll get even better odds on progressives alleging voting irregularities simply to delay vote counting and disrupt GOP momentum in the swing states.

Something's gonna happen, that's for sure.

Some background at the Los Angeles Times, "Election experts say a lot could go wrong":
Peg Rosenfield has been monitoring elections for the League of Women Voters in Ohio for almost 40 years and has seen just about every voting glitch imaginable. She says there's a saying among election workers:

"Please, God, make it a landslide."

In a landslide, there is no quibbling over hanging chads or provisional ballots or registration requirements or rigged voting machines or whether ballots were cast by the dead. A winner is declared, a loser concedes — election over.

No one expects a landslide when Americans go to the polls on Tuesday. As in 2000 and 2004, there is great potential for the race to be too close to call immediately in some states, and the possibility that the presidency will hang for days or weeks on a recount, or on the counting of provisional or late-arriving absentee ballots.

It is possible the election won't be decided at the polls alone, but, as in 2000, that it will determined in court — or in Congress.

"The best chance is that we end up with a winner declared on election day and then everything's done," said Rick Hasen, an election law specialist at the UC Irvine School of Law, but "there is no question that there will be some glitches on election day." The question is how serious they are and whether they will decide the winner.

This much is known: The election will be subjected to unprecedented scrutiny by both campaigns, by a variety of partisan and nonpartisan monitors, and by thousands of lawyers prepared to go to court at the sight of the slightest irregularity.

"It's the new normal," said Ed Foley, an election law expert at Ohio State University's Moritz College of Law. "You could see some lawsuits that may end up not amounting to much, but skirmishes as the candidates try to control the terrain."
RTWT.

Payback

After watching Fox News all evening yesterday --- taking in Hannity, Greta, and O'Reilly from 6 to 9pm Pacific --- I clicked over to watch Rachel Maddow's show. I rarely do this, for reasons that are obvious. She's frequently wrong, and regularly dishonest. I'm rarely surprised watching her show, which is of course all progressive red meat for today's far-left Democrat partisans. But this opening segment was a little more over the top than usual. After going through a list of President Obama's accomplishments, she declared that a second term for this administration would elevate Obama as one of "the most consequential" presidents in American history. I guess that's understandable coming from someone as far-left as Maddow. The ideological mirror is true on the right side of the spectrum. Conservatives widely consider this administration as one of the worst in history, even surpassing the Carter administration for the mantle of most inept, candy-assed regime of modern times. I'm not one of those predicting a Mitt Romney landslide. Oh, I won't be surprised at a Romney win, but it'll be a close run thing no matter how it turns out. That said, folks might get a kick out of Michael's Walsh's essay, at National Review, "Crush Them." This passage is key:

From Day One of the Obama administration, real conservatives understood the explicit threat of “fundamental change,” whose meaning can now be clearly discerned in Obama’s “revenge” remark; for the Left, “revenge” is precisely what this election is all about. For them and their voting-bloc constituents, it’s payback time: payback for slavery and segregation; payback for poverty; payback for foreign wars; payback for restrictive immigration laws. They’ve long used the goals of the civil-rights movement — which after all was directed precisely against Democrats – and the Vietnam-era “anti-war” movement — which arose in opposition to the foreign policy of the Democrats — as wedges with which to crack the larger social structure and now, so close to realizing the ultimate expression of “critical theory” — that everything about America stinks — they and their media allies are doing their best to swing one last election for Obama.

Mitt Romney is an imperfect standard bearer, but tomorrow he is the army we have. Elsewhere, I’ve predicted a Romney victory and even a retake of the Senate, despite the breathtaking tactical stupidity of Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock, both of whom needlessly wandered into the mine field of social issues (where the media is guaranteed 100 percent arrayed against them) and blew their own feet off. But, should Romney win, he can’t simply assume the vote was a mandate for putting America back to work, and then do his corporate-turnaround thing. If he wins, if his victory is beyond the margin of David Axelrod’s ability to cheat, Mitt needs to understand that a considerable portion of his vote was not only anti-Obama but anti-Obamaism, that it was a repudiation of everything the Marxist Left and its bien-pensant fellow travelers in the media stand for. And, most important, that going forward, it’s a call to substantially reduce their influence on the body politic.
There's more at the link, but that really is it.

Just listen to the orgasmic glee at which Maddow rattles off this veritable Christmas list of pent-up progressive policy demands. She's loving the payback, and she's literally chomping at the bit for a second term to consolidate the left's programs of the last four years, knowing deep inside that these are not popular agenda items with the bulk of the American people. Obama's been lucky. From his rise as the un-vetted savior in 2008 to his exploitation of the horrible but politically fortuitous hurricane last week, this president has just been riding along atop the froth of history, with hardly a real accomplishment to his name other than becoming a vessel for all the dreams of the American neo-socialist left.

So yes, victory is important. But if Romney doesn't win tomorrow it's only going to delay the reckoning. Politics moves in cycles. Perhaps Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.'s cyclical theory of public purpose is now having its moment after years of private interest politics. But at some point the cycle of history swings back, and in this case it'll swing back with a vengeance. The tea party set the contemporary standard for protests movements, and activists are seasoned now at grassroots-to-governing politics. There'll be a rekindled revolt upon a second Obama term, because the left's push for change has indeed been radical and disruptive. And the left's politics has been completely divisive and contemptuous of what in the past has been largely bipartisan courtesy and respect. Obama himself governed as a calculating partisan, not the highly touted "post-partisan" unifying figure he campaigned as. He's a fraud all around, and a dishonest hack with no decency or larger values. For example, see this shocking post at Lonely Conservative as a case in point, "Uber Creepy Campaign Tweet From Team Obama."

By hook or by crook the Obama Democrat-socialists may indeed leverage themselves back into power. But if they do, there'll be a rekindled conservative movement to light a million prairie fires of outrage against a second Obama term.

Stay tuned. Either way, I'm amped up for the fight.


Savannah Guthrie: Obama's Got Nuthin'

Man, Guthrie's coming on here like a gut punch to the collective MSNBC solar plexus.

Amazing.


Also at Mediaite, "Savannah Guthrie: Hurricane Sandy Handed To Obama ‘From Above’ to Let Him Appeal to Independents."

To Hell With Nate Silver!

That's Robert Stacy McCain, actually: "OHIO: IT’S MITT’S TO WIN":
Eight days into this Ohio road trip, I’m sick of all these experts who issue their pronouncements from the comfort of their living rooms without ever having set foot in a swing state, pundits whose idea of a “road trip” is blogging from their neighborhood Starbucks.

To hell with Nate Silver, and to hell with all the rest of them, these stationary buddhas of political prognostication, journalistic intellectuals who consider mere reporting to be beneath their dignity. You won’t find any graduates of the Kennedy School of Government sleeping on the floors of motel rooms and eating crappy breakfast food from the nearest convenience store. But I digress .
Read it all at the link. Plus, "Wild-Ass Scenarios? Chill."

I'm not for the "wild-ass" prediction scenarios either, although it's grim reaper time for Nate Silver if Obama fails to meet the "wild-ass" 538 "math-based" projections. The wonder boy's got Obama pegged at an 87 percent chance of wining? Sheesh. Talk about progressive dreams. The left is going to be all shot to hell if Romney wins.

And don't miss Colby Cosh at Macleans, "Tarnished Silver: Colby Cosh assesses the new king of stats." (The bottom line: Silver's lucky.)

PREVIOUSLY:

* "Romney's Internal Polling Shows GOP Up in Ohio, Tied in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin."

* "Don't Be Surprised When Obama Loses."

* "Nate Silver Bets $2,000 on Obama's Reelection, Provokes Public Editor's Ire."

* "Nate Silver Fast on His Way to One-Term Celebrity."

* "Akron Beacon Poll Finds Ohio Dead Heat at 49-49 — Presidential Race Tighter Than Obama's A**hole in a Prison Shower."

* "Nate Silver: Voice of the New Castrati."

* "If Bias Doesn't Matter Why Would Bill Maher Host Nate Silver on 'Real Time'?"

* "Oh My! Romney Back Up to 51 Percent in Gallup's Daily Tracking — Nate Silver Hardest Hit!"

* "'Grand Swami' Nate Silver Boosts O's Chances to 71.0% in Electoral College!"

* "Obama Crashing in Ohio; or, For the Love of Mercy, Leave Nate Silver Alone!"

* "Nate Silver Calls It: Advantage Obama!"

* "Nate Silver's Flawed Model."

* "Boom! Romney Back Up 52-45 in Gallup's Daily Tracking of Likely Voters."

* "ABC News Touts Nate Silver's Prediction That Obama's Handicapped at 68 Percent Chance to Win!"

* "'It's becoming increasingly obvious that Silver can't be taken seriously...'"

* "Nate Silver Blows Gasket as Gallup Shows Romney Pulling Away in the Presidential Horse Race."

Check back tonight for the final 2012 Nate Silver polling update!

Decision Day in America

At the Wall Street Journal, "Obama and Romney Battle Down to Wire":

After more than one million television ads, countless appearances and three contentious debates, the 2012 presidential election remained on a knife's edge with both candidates seeking to shore up support in states crucial to their chances Tuesday.

President Barack Obama cheered on backers in Wisconsin, Ohio and Iowa on Monday, evidence that his campaign aimed to build a firewall in the Midwest to try to block his Republican rival. He plans to await the election returns at his base in Chicago.

Mitt Romney swooped through four battleground states—Virginia, Florida, Ohio and New Hampshire—where the Republican needs to do well to secure a win. His campaign organized two additional stops on Election Day, at campaign offices in Cleveland and Pittsburgh. Mr. Romney is hedging his bets with a last-minute push in Pennsylvania before he returns to Boston to monitor the returns.

National polls are essentially tied while polls in some battleground states showed Mr. Obama with narrow leads. Both campaigns said their internal data show their candidate would win.

Voters are set to determine whether $6 billion in advertising and other campaign spending would bring a new era to Washington—with a Republican White House and administration—or extend the status quo of a Democratic White House and split Congress.

The result will answer some questions that have lingered since Mr. Obama's historic 2008 victory. The president was sent to the White House by a coalition comprising segments of the electorate—African-Americans, Hispanics and young voters—as well as women. The president's aides spent much of the past four years working to keep that group together, one that if it remains viable could be a lasting strength for Democrats.

With the margin of victory for the winner expected to be narrow, a likely outcome is a political system as split as the country. It isn't clear either party would be positioned to emerge Wednesday with a clear mandate for tackling some the nation's biggest problems—including the looming tax increases and spending cuts known as the fiscal cliff.

The tightness of the race sparked speculation about the possibility of unusual outcomes, such as an Electoral College tie or the winner failing to capture a majority of the popular vote.

Monday, November 5, 2012

Polling Conservative Bloggers on the 2012 Election

John Hawkins has a survey, at Right Wing News:
Right Wing News polled more than 230 right-of-center bloggers on who they think is going to win tomorrow and whom they plan to vote for in the election. The following 68 bloggers responded....
Check the link for the results.

Jessica Davies at Front Army

Lovely Egotastic! election eve ogling pics.

'Dismal' Obama Springsteen Rally in Madison

Althouse's husband Meade was on hand for the "big" Obama rally today in Madison, Wisconsin. Let's just say the enthusiasm's not matching up with the phenomenal Republican excitement.

Springsteen Obama

* "A disappointing turnout for the Obama rally in Madison, Wisconsin."

* "Photos from the dismal, dull Obama rally in Madison today."

* "Obama rally video."

PHOTO: At Althouse's Flickr page.

RELATED: At NewsBusters, "Jay-Z Substitutes ‘Mitt’ for ‘B-tch’ While Rapping at Obama Rally" (via Memeorandum).

The Ground Glass Election

From Glenn Reynolds, at the Washington Examiner, "Sunday Reflection: The ground-glass election":

Broken Glass
Last week, I noticed this blog comment: "Romney was not my first, second, or third choice, but I will crawl over ground glass to vote for him."

A lot of Republicans -- and, judging from polls, a lot of independents -- feel this way. If there are enough of them, Romney will win, and win big.

Are there? Well, there are some signs. I've written here before that politics is all about showing up. And in recent months, people on the Right have been doing a lot of showing up. They've showed up at Romney-Ryan events in unprecedented numbers. They made Dinesh D'Souza's "2016: Obama's America" a huge hit despite a virtual blackout from traditional media. They stood in line for hours at Chick-fil-A restaurants to buy chicken sandwiches in response to politicians' bullying. They packed houses at the "Hating Breitbart" premiere.

Will they now pack the voting booths and vote for Romney, and against Obama, in similarly unprecedented numbers? If they do, Romney will win in a landslide.
Then a landslide it's going to be. All signs are pointing to an epic day for grassroots conservative turnout --- not just Republican turnout, but conservatives for whom Romney wasn't their first pick but who now see him as the bulwark against continued Obama-Democrat statism and political and economic decay.

It's going to be huge. More at that top link.

Romney's Internal Polling Shows GOP Up in Ohio, Tied in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin

From Toby Harnden, at London's Daily Mail, "Exclusive: Romney UP one point in Ohio and TIED in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, according to his campaign's internal polling":
Mitt Romney is ahead by a single percentage point in Ohio - the swing state that many believe could decide the election, according to internal polling data provided to MailOnline by a Republican party source.

Internal campaign polling completed last night by campaign pollster Neil Newhouse has Romney three points up in New Hampshire, two points up in Iowa and dead level in Wisconsin and - most startlingly - Pennsylvania.

If the Romney campaign's internal numbers are correct - and nearly all independent pollsters have come up with a picture much more favourable for Obama - then the former Massachusetts governor will almost certainly be elected 45th U.S. President.
Well, don't get cocky, kid.

RELATED: At Instapundit, "NATE SILVER ALSO GAVE SHARRON ANGLE A 75 PERCENT CHANCE OF WINNING IN 2010..."

Hey, there's someone who really ought not get cocky.

I'll have more on the wonder boy suicide watch later.

Sheesh.


CBS Covered for Obama's Benghazi Clusterf-k

Here's a November surprise for you that's no surprise at all.

At Legal Insurrection, "CBS Rathered you not see this video of Obama refusing to call Benghazi terrorism," and Lonely Conservative, "Video: On Spetember 12 President Obama Refused To Call Benghazi Attack a Terrorist Attack."

Obama CBS
And AoSHQ has the epic headline, "Buried Bombshell: CBS Video Shows Obama Refusing to Call Benghazi A Terrorist Attack...On September 12th."

Naturally, Bret Baier at Fox News is not pleased, "What President Obama really said in that ‘60 Minutes’ interview about Benghazi":
Two days before the election, CBS posted additional portions of a Sept. 12 "60 Minutes" interview where President Obama seems to contradict himself on the Benghazi attack. As the Benghazi investigation gets more attention and focus, CBS is once again adding to the Benghazi timeline. In the interview, according to the latest portions, Obama would not say whether he thought the attack was terrorism. Yet he would later emphasize at a presidential debate that in the Rose Garden the same day, he had declared the attack an act of terror.

That moment was one of the most intense exchanges in the second presidential debate. Romney was on the offensive on what conservatives believed was a serious vulnerability of Obama -- the handling of the Benghazi attack and what he called it from the beginning.

The town hall questioner asked, "Who was it that denied enhanced security and why?" Obama did not provide a direct answer, but said: "When I say that we are going to find out exactly what happened, everybody will be held accountable, and I am ultimately responsible for what's taking place there, because these are my folks, and I'm the one who has to greet those coffins when they come home, you know that I mean what I say."

Romney pounced, saying, "There were many days that passed before we knew whether this was a spontaneous demonstration or actually whether it was a terrorist attack. And there was no demonstration involved. It was a terrorist attack, and it took a long time for that to be told to the American people."

On rebuttal, Obama seemed rehearsed, but indignant. "The day after the attack, Governor, I stood in the Rose Garden, and I told the American people and the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened, that this was an act of terror... And the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the secretary of state, our U.N. ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we've lost four of our own, Governor, is offensive. That's not what we do. That's not what I do as president. That's not what I do as commander in chief."

Governor Romney walked forward and started questioning ...
ROMNEY: You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack it was an act of terror. It was not a spontaneous demonstration. OBAMA: Please proceed.

ROMNEY: Is that what you're saying?

OBAMA: Please proceed, Governor.

ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record, because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.

OBAMA: Get the transcript.

CROWLEY: It -- he did in fact, sir. So let me -- let me call it an act of terrorism -- (inaudible) --

OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder, Candy? (Laughter, applause.) CROWLEY: He did call it an act of terror. It did as well take -- it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea of there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.

ROMNEY: This -- the administration -- the administration -- (applause) -- indicated that this was a -- a reaction to a -- to a video and was a spontaneous reaction.

CROWLEY: They did.

ROMNEY: It took them a long time to say this was a terrorist act by a terrorist group and -- and to suggest -- am I incorrect in that regard? On Sunday the -- your -- your secretary or --
Obama -- who had clearly won the moment (largely thanks to Candy Crowley) -- clearly wanted to move on from that victorious moment -- and quickly...
Continue reading.

Obama may win tomorrow, but Benghazi-gate's going to dog a second term if he does.

Sprint to Tight Finish in a Nation Deeply Divided

A front-page report at yesterday's Los Angeles Times, "Obama, Romney sprint to tight finish in a nation deeply divided":
Photobucket
WASHINGTON — Against the backdrop of a sharply polarized nation, the long and mean-spirited 2012 presidential contest is barreling toward the finish with the outcome still in doubt.

President Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney remain statistically tied in national polling, as they have been for much of the campaign. But the Democratic incumbent is clinging to a marginal advantage in enough key states to make him a slight favorite to gain reelection in a race that could still go either way.

Analysts in both parties expect Tuesday's vote to more closely resemble the tight 2000 and 2004 elections, which came down to a single state, rather than Obama's expansive 2008 victory. After years of weak economic growth and stalemate in Washington, opinion surveys show an electorate that is more divided than ever, especially along lines of race, age and party.

"We are deeply divided, and that has made a contribution to the closeness of the race. But the public is also divided about these candidates," said independent pollster Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center. "They look at Romney now as a somewhat acceptable candidate, but they still have doubts about him personally with respect to trustworthiness and with respect to how empathetic he'll be to people like themselves. They also have doubts about Obama and about his ability to turn things around."

The future of a divided Congress is also up for grabs. Republicans are virtually certain to keep their majority in the House of Representatives. But barring a late GOP surge at the top of the ticket, Democrats are expected to retain control of the Senate, despite a potential loss of seats.

Romney has sought to frame the election around Obama's handling of the economy, and an uptick in the unemployment rate going into the final weekend of the race allowed the Republican to tell voters that joblessness is worse now than when the president took office. At 7.9%, unemployment is also the worst for any incumbent seeking reelection since Franklin D. Roosevelt.
A nice piece, except for that quote from Andrew Kohut, the progressive hack.

Anyway, that image is from the Looking Spoon, "Obama and Romney's Views On The Economy Make The Right Choice Crystal Clear."

'The Democratic Party just isn't what it used to be...'

Frankly, I don't know how any decent, upright American could identify with the Democrats. But then again, there's a lot that's not right in the world.

In any case, a great essay, from Sheldon Adelson, "I Didn't Leave the Democrats. They Left Me."

A Vote for the Obama-Biden Ticket is a Vote for National Collapse

From Mark Steyn, at IBD, "A Vote For Obama-Biden Is A Vote For National Collapse."

Obama Bet His Presidency on Expanding Government Because That's Who He Is

At the Wall Street Journal, "Obama's Progressive Gamble":
Many of our friends who saw genius in the crease of Barack Obama's trousers four years ago lament that he might be cruising to re-election had he only focused first on the economy and postponed his liberal social priorities. This may be true, but it also misjudges the man and his Presidency.

Mr. Obama has governed from the left not because he miscalculated his priorities but because these are his priorities. His first term is best understood as a race to put himself in the pantheon of the great progressive Presidents—Wilson, FDR, LBJ—who expanded the state's control over the private economy and over the wants and needs of the American middle class.

The price of this governing choice includes a weak recovery, achievements like ObamaCare that are unpopular, the loss of the House in 2010, and a polarized electorate. Unable to run on his record, he has conducted a low-down re-election campaign based on destroying his opponent's character. If the polls are right, even if he wins re-election, he will do so as the first President since Wilson to win with a smaller margin than he did the first time.

But for Mr. Obama, this won't matter. His great progressive gamble will have paid off. His second term will be about preserving the government gains of his first term, especially ObamaCare, and using regulation to press government control wherever else he can.
Man, that's such a penetrating analysis it's almost depressing, and I mean from Obama's point of view. The poor guy. What a horrible existence and what a disastrous legacy. Government for government's sake, going against all that's great about this country. Tearing down personal liberty in the name of morally bankrupt statism. But that's what Democrats are about, and that's why Obama's doing as well as he is. A large chunk of Americans, roughly half if the polls are to be believed, have lost the initiative and moral bearing that built up this nation as the leader of the free world. From ObamaCare to the Middle East, this president has lied and bungled his way through a disgraceful interregnum. If he's reelected it will take that much longer to dismantle the apparatus of mindless bureaucracy, and not to mention the ideology of hate and recrimination.

The good news is that Romney's got momentum and he just may get over the finish line the victor. A bit of a prayer might help him, goodness be to God.

George Will Predicts Mitt Romney Victory

At Instapundit, "GEORGE WILL PREDICTS ROMNEY BLOWOUT."

Here's the whole segment, from yesterday's "This Week." Ronald Brownstein, the only other panelist worth paying attention to, has Obama eking out narrow win, taking Ohio et al., where Romney supposedly hasn't been able to "break though." I think Romney's going to take Ohio, however, and if so, under Brownstein's projection the president would lose.