Ohio

Victories For Right To Vote Mounting In Republican Controlled States That Tried To Limit Voting

Ronald 1 Comment

After a year or more of attempts to limit the right to vote for senior citizens, college students, minorities, and the poor, the forces battling for the right to vote are winning victories, due to court action by the federal government, and decisions of federal judges in favor of the whole basis of democracy—voting!

Florida, Texas, and Ohio are among the states where the tide has turned, and Pennsylvania is awaiting a six member state Supreme Court decision that is thought to be ready to throw out the limits on voting set up by the Republican legislature and governor, with the three Republican members of the Court showing skepticism about the limit on voting rights.

This trend makes the likelihood of Barack Obama winning all of the above states, except Texas, more realistic, and it is a stain on the GOP that the party that expanded the right to vote to include African Americans in 1870, and supported civil rights at its founding, now has become the image of the Southern Democrats of the 1870s to the 1960s, who took away the right to vote and promoted Jim Crow segregation!

This is a time for mourning for the Republican Party of the past, which was principled and on the side of voting rights, and now has been captured by extreme right wing elements that are against basic democracy, what people in all nations around the world fight and die for—the right to express their view of who should govern them!

“Swing” States Down To Eight, Narrowing Romney Chances Of Winning Presidency!

Ronald Leave a comment

The Mitt Romney Presidential campaign has decided to buy advertising time on television in only eight states, narrowing the chance that the former Massachusetts Governor can win the Presidency.

Eliminated as places of opportunity are Michigan, the birthplace and childhood of Romney, and the state that his father was Governor in the 1960s; Wisconsin, the birthplace and home of his running mate, Paul Ryan; and Pennsylvania, despite the well known white male battleground of western Pennsylvania, often thought to be an Achilles Heel for Barack Obama!

So what are the states still in play?

New Hampshire–4 electoral votes
Virginia–13 electoral votes
North Carolina–15 electoral votes
Florida–29 electoral votes
Ohio–18 electoral votes
Iowa–6 electoral votes
Colorado–9 electoral votes
Nevada–6 electoral votes

The total electoral votes in play are 100, while Obama leads with 247 electoral votes from 19 states and the District of Columbia, and Romney has 191 electoral votes from 23 states. Remember that the winner of the election must have 270 electoral votes.

So, with the updated realities that even Romney’s advertising campaign reflects, Obama wins If

he wins Florida (29 electoral votes)
he wins Ohio and Virginia (31 electoral votes)
he wins Ohio and North Carolina (33 electoral votes)
he wins Ohio and Iowa or Nevada (24 electoral votes)
he wins Ohio and Colorado (27 electoral votes)
he wins New Hampshire, Iowa, Colorado and Nevada (25 electoral votes)
he wins North Carolina and Colorado (24 electoral votes)
he wins North Carolina and Iowa and Nevada (27 electoral votes)
he wins Virginia and Iowa and Nevada (25 electoral votes)
he wins Virginia and Colorado and New Hampshire (26 electoral votes)
he wins Virginia, Colorado, and either Iowa or Nevada (28 electoral votes)

So these are ELEVEN scenarios where Barack Obama has the advantage–needing only between one and four states of the eight “swing” states to win the Presidency in the Electoral College!

The unemployment rate is lower than the national average in New Hampshire, Virginia, Ohio and Iowa, while higher in North Carolina, Florida, Colorado and Nevada.

So if one were to assume that the four states that have the lower unemployment rate than the national average go to Obama, he wins 41 electoral votes, for a grand total of 288 electoral votes.

Of course, there are five states, that are considered “red” or Republican states, that actually are in play, although expected to go to Romney. These are Indiana (11 electoral votes), which went to Obama in 2008; Missouri (10 electoral votes), which was won by John McCain in 2008 by only about 4,000 votes; Montana (3 electoral votes), which is becoming more Democratic; Arizona (11 electoral votes), which is moving toward Democratic over time with the growing Hispanic vote, and the controversial immigration law under Governor Jan Brewer; and Georgia (16 electoral votes), which is gaining a large Hispanic population, which means it will likely trend Democratic over the next few election cycles. Were all of these to go Democratic in a close vote situation, Obama could, theoretically, win 51 more electoral votes!

So, IF Obama were to win all of the eight “swing states” now in play, based on Romney’s decision as to what states to spend money on advertising, he would go from what seems clearly 247 electoral votes to 347 electoral votes–meaning he would have won all of the states he won in 2008, except for Indiana!

This is 18 electoral votes fewer than in 2008, when Obama won 365 electoral votes–due to the theoretical loss of Indiana (11 electoral votes), plus the fact that the states he won lost a total of 7 electoral votes due to reapportionment of seats in Congress, based on the 2010 Census.

But IF Obama were to win the “red” states that could be in play, listed above, a total of five states with 51 electoral votes, his highest theoretical total of electoral votes would reach 398 electoral votes, meaning Romney would win only 140 electoral votes, with Obama winning 32 states and the District of Columbia, and Romney winning 18 states!

The ultimate point of this discussion is to make it clear that the odds of Obama being re-elected are very high, despite the supposedly tight popular vote on a national level, which really proves nothing, as the polls on popular vote in the eight “swing” states demonstrate that Obama is ahead in all of them, except in North Carolina and Colorado, so to bet against Obama would be a losing bet, best thought about before being placed, as the odds of losing large amounts of money is extremely a likely occurrence!

The Democratic Platform And Israel: An Unnecessary Blunder By Barack Obama! UPDATE: NOW RETURNED TO LANGUAGE OF 2008 PLATFORM, A GREAT MOVE!

Ronald 12 Comments

The decision of the Obama Administration and the Democratic Platform Committee at the Democratic National Convention, to eliminate language which was in the 2008 platform–referring to Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and language dealing with the terrorist group Hamas, and the issue of negotiation of the fate of displaced Palestinian refugees by Israel—is an unnecessary blunder that should have been avoided.

Everyone who is fair minded knows that Barack Obama’s Presidency has been one of full support of Israel on all matters that impact them, while occasionally disagreeing on tactics and approaches of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The Defense Minister, Ehud Barak, and the Israeli President, Shimon Peres, have both praised Obama, and declared him as strong a supporter of Israel as any President, since the founding of the Jewish state in 1948.

But the Republican Jewish Coalition and the Mitt Romney Presidential campaign are now jumping on the removal of the platform language, and it puts Obama and the Democratic Party on the defensive, when keeping the language would have avoided this problem, and would have done no harm.

So it is not the issue of being angry with Obama, although some Jews, obviously, will be so, but rather, why, oh why, did the President decide to “shoot himself in the foot”, and create an issue which might impact the election in the swing states, particularly Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Nevada, in particular, and might also make the victories of the President in other states with substantial Jewish populations a bit closer, and might affect Congressional or Senate races.

The Jewish vote, if a large percentage abandon the President and the Democratic Party, could have long range implications that no one is thinking about now.

And it could make the Islamic world think that Obama might not support Israel to the extreme, in case of an Iranian crisis, even though one should have no doubt about the matter, in reality. But perceptions often matter more than reality, so this is something that Barack Obama and the Democrats will regret, as it gives unnecessary ammunition to the Republican Party!

It has just been learned that the 2008 Platform language on Jerusalem being Israel’s capital city has been returned to the document, a GREAT MOVE!

Medicare Will Decide The Election: IF Obama Wins Florida AND New Hampshire Of “Battleground” States, He Wins The Presidency!

Ronald Leave a comment

Chuck Todd of NBC’s Meet The Press just demonstrated how close Barack Obama is to a victory for the White House.

Showing an electoral vote map with 237 electoral votes in Obama’s camp and 191 in Mitt Romney’s camp, Todd demonstrates that there are NINE true “battleground” or “swing” states, and if Obama wins Florida and New Hampshire, he has the second term he wants in the White House! And the issue of Medicare, brought to central focus by Paul Ryan and his budget plans on that program, will be the center of the victory of Obama for the Presidency!

Even if Romney wins the other seven contestable states—Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, Colorado, and Nevada—he would lose the Electoral College 270-268, due to Florida’s 29 electoral votes and New Hampshire’s 4 electoral votes!

But, to assume that Obama would really lose all seven of those states is also delusional, as it is certain that he will win some, and probably, most of them!

This author has been saying this for a long time, and has found some readers of this blog, conservative and Republican friends and associates, and people on Fox News Channel and talk radio, act as if only the public opinion polls, which often show a close race in many states and nationally, should be paid attention to, but that is NOT the case!

The election is decided by the Electoral College, NOT the popular vote nationally,and do not forget that George W. Bush LOST the popular vote in 2000, but was declared the winner of the Electoral College! The same happened to Benjamin Harrison, Rutherford Hayes, and John Quincy Adams in the past!

But to conclude that, somehow, Barack Obama will lose the national popular vote, with the Republican alienation of Hispanics-Latinos, African Americans, women, young voters, the middle class, senior citizens, gays and lesbians, the poor, labor, educators, consumer advocates, environmentalists, and secular voters—in each case, the majority, not all of any group, of course—indicates that those believing what they do are indeed delusional, and cannot be helped by ordinary medical intervention!

The Battle For The Jewish Vote In The Presidential Election Of 2012: The Role Of The Republican Jewish Coalition

Ronald 3 Comments

The Jewish vote may be a small percentage of all votes cast in national elections, but it is well known that the Jewish community votes in higher percentages than any other group in American society, and the concentration of the Jewish population in certain states can have a great impact on the electoral college, as for example, Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio, all swing or battleground states.

So the battle for the Jewish vote is intense, with the Republican Jewish Coalition trying to increase the percentage of the Jewish population willing to vote Republican, which was unsuccessful in 2008, when 78 percent of the Jewish vote went to Barack Obama.

Latest indications are that 64 percent of the Jewish vote presently is in the Obama camp, down 14 points, but still two thirds of all Jews. So the Republican Jewish Coalition is hard at work trying to convince even more Jews of the following ideas:

1, Obama is not sufficiently pro Israel, and cannot be trusted to support Israel, due to the well known tension that exists at times between the Obama Administration and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

2. Obama refuses to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, because of concerns about the Middle East balance.

3. Obama has not visited Israel as President in his first term, although he did as a candidate in 2008.

The reality is that the Republican Jewish Coalition has distorted reality dramatically, so how can one answer these three accusations?

1. Obama has backed Israel in the United Nations, has supported lots of extra aid and military support to Israel, has spoken up in defense of Israel in every way possible. And Israeli Defense Minister and former Prime Minister Ehud Barak and President Shimon Peres have issued lavish praise on Obama as a great friend of Israel, as good as any other American President from Harry Truman through George W. Bush, and both Israeli leaders went out of their way to issue these statements of support.

2. It is true that no move has been made to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, but NO President from Lyndon B. Johnson through George W. Bush has been willing to do so, because of sensitivity about peace negotiations between the Palestinians and the Israelis, and this includes Republican Presidents Richard Nixon,. Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush, a total of FIVE Republican Presidents, as compared to FOUR Democratic Presidents, including Johnson, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Obama!

3. It is true that Obama has not visited Israel in his first term, but NO President, Democratic nor Republican, has done so in their first term, and of course, Ford, Carter, and Bush I only served one term or less as President.

So the accusations of the Republican Jewish coalition are distorted, untrue, purely propaganda, and it will not succeed in bringing larger than about a third of the Jewish vote to Mitt Romney!

Latest Poll Averages Show Obama Ahead Of Romney In Eleven Of Twelve Battleground States!

Ronald Leave a comment

Barack Obama may be only slightly ahead of Mitt Romney nationally in the average of various polls–47.3 percent to 44.7 percent, but when one looks at twelve battleground or swing states, he is ahead of Romney in all but North Carolina, where he trails Romney by 48.5 to 46.5, two percentage points.

Obama is ahead by almost 6 points in Ohio; by 2.5 points in Virginia; by 3 points in Florida; by 6.5 points in Pennsylvania; by almost 4 points in Iowa; by 5.5 points in Nevada; by 5 points in Wisconsin; by 7 points in New Mexico; by 6.5 points in Michigan; and by almost 3 points in New Hampshire. In Colorado, the margin is only two tenths of one point for Obama over Romney, nearly an even split.

So Obama is ahead in 10 of the 12 states listed, all of which he won in 2008, nearly even in Colorado, and only behind in North Carolina!

Not bad considering the blistering attacks and lies and deception that have been going on for three and a half years as President, greater than any President since the last one who was called every name in the book, and yet won a landslide victory in 1936 in the midst of the Great Depression, with unemployment levels still much higher than they are in 2012.

The author is referring here to Franklin D. Roosevelt!

A Liberal-Progressive Mount Rushmore And A Conservative Mount Rushmore: Who Would Be On Such Mount Rushmores?

Ronald 9 Comments

Last Friday, Joe Scarborough and MORNING JOE on MSNBC had distinguished historians assess which Presidents might be on a new, second Mount Rushmore, if such a monument were ever built.

This brought to mind the idea of who might be on a Liberal-Progressive Mount Rushmore, and who would be on a Conservative Mount Rushmore, if such were ever constructed anywhere in America.

This is mostly just interesting scholarly speculation, but here goes my suggestions for such honoring on both sides of the political spectrum.

LIBERAL/PROGRESSIVE MOUNT RUSHMORE

Robert La Follette, Sr.–Republican Governor (1900-1906) and Senator (1906-1925) of Wisconsin–Mr. Progressive of the early 20th century and 1924 Progressive Party nominee for President.

George Norris–Republican Congressman (1902-1912) and Senator (1912-1942) of Nebraska–the most creative reform figure and longevity of the first half of the 20th century, a bridge between the Progressive Era of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson and the New Deal of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Hubert H. Humphrey–Democratic Mayor Of Minneapolis (1945-1949), Senator (1949-1964, 1970-1978) of Minnesota, and Vice President of the United States (1965-1969) and Democratic Presidential nominee in 1968, who had the most creative record of promoting reform in the years after World War II throughout the 1960s.

Ted Kennedy–Democratic Senator (1962-2009) of Massachusetts, the fourth longest serving US Senator in American history, and the most creative reformer in the years from the 1970s until his death in 2009.

A possible alternative would be Democratic Senator George McGovern of
South Dakota (1922-2012), who ran for President in 1972, and was a major critic of the Vietnam War, one of the most decent men ever in American politics, serving in the Senate from 1963-1981.

CONSERVATIVE MOUNT RUSHMORE

Arthur Vandenberg–Republican Senator (1928-1951) of Michigan, who opposed the New Deal and was an isolationist in foreign policy through World War II, but then became an internationalist in support of the United Nations and President Harry Truman’s Cold War policy against the Soviet Union after World War II, and potential Presidential candidate twice.

Robert Taft–Republican Senator (1939-1953) of Ohio, son of President and Chief Justice William Howard Taft, promoted the anti labor union Taft-Hartley Act, promoted an isolationist foreign policy, and considered Mr. Conservative by his party, and a potential Presidential candidate numerous times.

Barry Goldwater–Senator (1952-1964, 1968-1986) of Arizona, succeeding Robert Taft as Mr. Conservative, and 1964 Republican nominee for President, becoming the hero of conservatives long term, and having an effect on President Ronald Reagan.

Ronald Reagan–Republican Governor of California (1966-1974), and President of the United States (1981-1989), after a career as a movie actor, influenced by the principles and ideas of Barry Goldwater, who he publicly backed in a famous speech in 1964.

The author welcomes commentary on these selections!

First Hints That Citizens United Case May Not Help GOP Gain Victories! Ohio As A Test Case!

Ronald Leave a comment

The first hints that the Supreme Court decision, Citizens United, which allows corporations to spend freely on political campaigns, and billionaires to spend tens of millions of dollars to help their own private interests, is not working, comes with the Quinnipiac polls today, and particularly in Ohio.

The Buckeye state has been essential for every Republican President to win, but Mitt Romney trails Barack Obama in Ohio by 48-39, outside the margin of error!

And Sherrod Brown, the liberal Democratic Senator, is 16 points ahead of Republican Josh Mandel, 50-34!

In both cases, the Republicans have outspent the Democrats, but it is not having an effect!

This is wonderful news, and shows that promoting what is best for the American people can win out over what is good for the elite and the wealthy!

Hopefully, the trend will continue, and lead to a massive victory for Barack Obama in November, and an ability for courageous Democrats, such as Sherrod Brown, to keep their seats in Congress!

Republican Governors Rave About Improved Economy, But Mitt Romney Wants Them NOT To Claim So!

Ronald Leave a comment

An interesting development as we see Republican Governors raving about their improved economies, but causing grief for Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney in doing so!

Florida Governor Rick Scott, Michigan Governor Rick Snyder, Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, and Ohio Governor John Kasich all have been boasting about their states’ economies vastly improving.

The fact that all of these states except Florida have an unemployment rate BELOW the national average is a PLUS for President Barack Obama, although, of course, these GOP Governors will not give him any credit!

But by them pointing out their improved economies, it hurts the cause of Mitt Romney, who is trying to make a campaign simply on the economy, ignoring everything else, such as foreign policy, the future of the Supreme Court, and many social issues.

Romney seems to think that he will be able to focus on what he wants only, but that will certainly not be the case as the Obama campaign zeroes in on other issues, and as the three Presidential debates and one Vice Presidential debate arrive on the scene in September and October!

The Formal Beginning Of Barack Obama’s Presidential Re-election Campaign

Ronald Leave a comment

Although the Presidential campaign has been on for months, today, six months and one day before the election date, Barack Obama is formally beginning he re-election campaign with speeches at Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio, and Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond, Virginia.

Most of the campaign appearances for both Obama and his Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, will be centered in both Ohio and Virginia, as Ohio is a state that every Republican winner of the Presidency has won, and Virginia, typically a Republican state in the past half century, has become a real battleground with the growth of the Northern Virginia population near Washington, DC, making the state more likely to go Democratic, as it did in 2008.

As stated elsewhere in this blog, those two states, along with North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Florida, Colorado, and Nevada will be the most crucial states, as the seven “swing” states most likely to go either way at this point, but with all seven having gone to Obama in 2008.