If you follow this blog, you know that on 4/23/08, I predicted Obama was going to be the Democrat's nominee for President. I stand by that statement. Obama beat all expectations in North Carolina and Clinton squeaked by in Indiana. This thing is over. Only the arrogance of the Clinton power machine is keeping this alive.
What will the general election look like? It will be very close. If the election were held today, it's a virtual tie. For a great website that tracks potential electoral vote outcomes, click here.
As a person who does this for a living now, I do get concerned when people say things like, "America isn't ready for a black President" or words like that.
First, America certainly IS ready for a black President. Barack Obama's race has nothing to do with why he shouldn't be President. In fact, it's easy to understand the excitement one might have for an African American to be elected President in a nation that has struggled so mightily with the problem of race. But, Senator Obama is NOT right for America because he has a radical left worldview that will certainly "change" America to a place that Americans do not want it to be.
Second, let's assume "America isn't ready for a black President." I disagree strongly, but let's assume that is correct. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF "AMERICA" IS READY. It matters if enough states to make up 270 electoral votes are. And, folks, THEY ARE. California and New York are nearly automatic Democrat pick-ups. That is nearly 1/3 of the Electoral votes needed to be President and that is one heck of a head-start. What is automatic on our side? Texas? They have 34 electoral votes. After Texas, the "automatic" Republican pick-ups are all southern states with 15 or fewer electoral votes.
Why this long dissertation by me? Because all of this points to the importance of OHIO! Ohio has 20 electoral votes that probably will swing this election. Again, we will be the battleground state for the presidency. For a good article on this topic, click here.
This should motivate every single Republican. Do you want Senator Obama selecting up to 4 Supreme Court Justices? Do you want Senator Obama in the White House when the terrorists strike again? Do you want Senator Obama to raise taxes on the "rich" (people making over $100,000)?
John McCain is a steady and tested leader who brings a tremendous amount of experience to the Presidency. He is ready to lead. Senator McCain has a proven track record of getting things done in Washington, not just "hoping".
We can make a difference in Ohio starting with Hamilton County. What can you do NOW to assure Republican leadership in Washington? Click here for my list of what you can do now.
The Chairman's Blog
Alex M. Triantafilou
Hit Counter
Blog Archive
4 comments:
Tryingtofoolyou is playing a racial concern troll; playing the race card by proxy.
The American people are pissed off. Dem's are winning districts that they have not won in 3 or 4 decades. Denny Hastert's Seat in Illinois. The Baton Rouge, Louisiana seat held by r's for 33 years. Even conservative icon former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has said that the GOP’s chances are zero this year. In an article posted on HumanEvents.com, the former House speaker and said:
"The Republican Party’s loss in a Saturday special election in Louisiana for a House seat the party had held since 1975 should be a sharp wake up call for Republicans: Either Congressional Republicans are going to chart a bold course of real change or they are going to suffer decisive losses this November.”
“The Republican brand has been so badly damaged that if Republicans try to run an anti-Obama, anti-Reverend Wright, or anti-Clinton campaign, they are simply going to fail,” Gingrich warned.
I also have a sinking suspicion that the GOP won’t care, and will blow off his wise advice. They simply can't help themselves, dirty negative campaigns are all the GOP has known for the past 30 years.
Crazy old demagogue McSame is toast. 25% of republicans are still voting against him in the primaries, as seen in IN, NC & PA. Coast is Toast. Good. And Good Riddance to all of you!
The real issue is not how well Clinton, Obama, or McCain might do in the closely divided battleground states, but that we shouldn’t have battleground states and spectator states in the first place. Every vote in every state should be politically relevant in a presidential election. And, every vote should be equal. We should have a national popular vote for President in which the White House goes to the candidate who gets the most popular votes in all 50 states.
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes—that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
The major shortcoming of the current system of electing the President is that presidential candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or worry about the voter concerns in states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind. The reason for this is the winner-take-all rule which awards all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who gets the most votes in each separate state. Because of this rule, candidates concentrate their attention on a handful of closely divided "battleground" states. Two-thirds of the visits and money are focused in just six states; 88% on 9 states, and 99% of the money goes to just 16 states. Two-thirds of the states and people are merely spectators to the presidential election.
Another shortcoming of the current system is that a candidate can win the Presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide.
The National Popular Vote bill has been approved by 17 legislative chambers (one house in Colorado, Arkansas, Maine, North Carolina, and Washington, and two houses in Maryland, Illinois, Hawaii, California, and Vermont). It has been enacted into law in Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. These states have 50 (19%) of the 270 electoral votes needed to bring the law into effect.
See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com
The real issue is not how well Clinton, Obama, or McCain might do in the closely divided battleground states, but that we shouldn’t have battleground states and spectator states in the first place. Every vote in every state should be politically relevant in a presidential election. And, every vote should be equal. We should have a national popular vote for President in which the White House goes to the candidate who gets the most popular votes in all 50 states.
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes—that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
The major shortcoming of the current system of electing the President is that presidential candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or worry about the voter concerns in states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind. The reason for this is the winner-take-all rule which awards all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who gets the most votes in each separate state. Because of this rule, candidates concentrate their attention on a handful of closely divided "battleground" states. Two-thirds of the visits and money are focused in just six states; 88% on 9 states, and 99% of the money goes to just 16 states. Two-thirds of the states and people are merely spectators to the presidential election.
Another shortcoming of the current system is that a candidate can win the Presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide.
The National Popular Vote bill has been approved by 17 legislative chambers (one house in Colorado, Arkansas, Maine, North Carolina, and Washington, and two houses in Maryland, Illinois, Hawaii, California, and Vermont). It has been enacted into law in Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. These states have 50 (19%) of the 270 electoral votes needed to bring the law into effect.
See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com
I'm glad that poster #1 just admits he's an idiot in his username. It saves me the trouble.
The only race card I've seen is from some people in the Clinton camp (like Ferraro) and Obama's choice of a racist church for 20 years. Sorry, but Obama's tryingtofoolyou when he spreads the message of, "I'm not a racist like my Pastor and Spiritual Advisor of 20 years is".
And does anyone really buy that he never heard Jeremiah Wright make those obnoxious comments? He's back in his tryingtofoolyou mode when he says he just never happened to be in the pews when Wright made all those racist and unpatriotic comments. Highly unlikely.
Post a Comment