Princeton Election Consortium Continues to See Obama Lead

Sam Wang at Princeton is the most astute election analyst I have ever seen.  His data are impeccable as far as I can see.  And his analysis is excellent due to his superior understanding of numbers, and also to his humility in knowing what not to try to predict. 

You can search for Princeton Election Consortium on line for more information. 

Obama Wins Third Debate Decisiviely: Newsday

As one who is frightened by historic Republican saber-rattling, but is also critical of the general attitude of dominance over others shown by the American government, I find the article linked below useful.  It does seem clear that Pres. Obama "won" last night's debate on both style and substance. 

Two things struck me.  First, I had expected the President to be competent enough to more than hold his own in a debate on foreign policy.  What I did not expect was his near-total dominance of the evening.  Second, I was reminded again of how full of bluster this country's foreign policy has become.  The fact that the deaths of Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, and Ghaddafi, can be crowed over and held up as trophies as if in some primitive battle scene is still startling to me.  As far as I know, not one of these killings comports with international law, no matter how persuasive the arguments on behalf of the assassinations.  This is not the popular position to take, but it is one which supports the rule of law, a concept the U.S. still uses when it is convenient to do so.

At the same time, a Romney win would spell disaster, if he were left to operate the way he operated last night.  He showed a chilling ignorance of international diplomacy, the place of Russia and China in the world, and the nuances of the Middle East.  His talk of peace was welcome but surprising as he hasn't spoken much of peace, at least not through the media.  On style, he was much less combative than in the last two debates.  One can credit him for acknowledging Obama's successes.  Yet, Romney was far from devoid of hubris and impertinancy, as in the case of declaring our Navy is smaller than any time since 1917. 

Whatever else may be true, W. Mitt Romney is not the man for the job of President of the United States.  And Pres. Obama has a decisive edge on foreign and domestic policy. 


Obama Wins Third Debate Decisively


Coming Soon:  More on Alternative Candidates for President (and why you might not want to vote for them)

Princeton Analyst Says a Democratic Take-Over of the House Has 74% Likelihood

I don't have time right now to say much about the following article except that I respect the author very much for his acumen and demonstrated ability.  This is analysis of a strict statistical and mathematical kind, the kind we need more of.


Excellent Analysis of U.S. House Election Situation

Poll Analysis for Those Who Like to Dig Deeper

I feel it necessary to remind us all that polling has inherent weaknesses.  However, the analysis done here attempts to adjust for various biases in individual polls.  Although the analysis here is a little dense, it is readable for those who enjoy such reporting.

The upshot seems to be that Pres. Obama is more than holding his own, although voters appear nearly split.  If the vote count could be relied upon to be fair, I'd say Mr. Obama is on a course to win the Electoral College and the popular vote, both.  With a corrupted vote count in the offing, an Electoral College win is likely, with the popular vote tally in doubt. 


In-depth Polling Analysis

Obama Continues to Lead in Important "Battleground" States

Even as concerns continue to be voiced over Republican voter suppression efforts, Pres. Obama continues to lead in polls in important "battleground" states such as Iowa, Wisconsin, Nevada, and -- importantly -- Ohio.  This continues to give him a lead in the Electoral College count, the vote which really matters.  It also appears Mr. Obama has benefitted from his second debate performance.  A strong appearance in the debate on foreign policy should strongly favor President Obama, and further strengthen him. 

By the way, have you noticed the media was quick to trumpet a Romney "win" in the first debate, even though W. Mitt Romney's case was full of untruths (lies)?  Yet, when Mr. Obama clearly trumped Romney's effort in the second debate, the media in general refused to call it an Obama win?  One exception, surprisingly, were certain Fox News figures who said the President won on "points."  In this case, I'll take deserved praise from whatever source. 



Review of Latest Polls

Pres. Obama Does More than Level the Playing Field

As is becoming clearer now almost twenty-four hours after the second Presidential debate, Pres. Obama did more than level the playing field in last night's dust-up with Willard Mitt Romney.  He re-presented himself to the American people as a person who can learn from his mistakes (in the now-storied first debate underperformance).  While much can be said, it was clear last night which man was the Chief Executive and why. 

I continue as a severe critic of the debate format which lessens the dignity of the office of the President even while elevating incivility and mediocrity (read:  Romney).  When each candidate gets only two minutes (two minutes?!) to make a statement, how can there be any in-depth statement from anyone?  And how can there possibly be a "winner" in such a scenario. 

Read more here:
Romney's Catalogue of Lies

Biden to the Rescue

JOE BIDEN RIDES TO THE RESCUE.  Such might be the lead in a western newspaper were Vice-President Biden running in 1884.  Mr. Biden is being hailed as a savior, a fix-it man, a populist guru, and maybe a western sheriff in the wake of President Obama's debate performance last week.  As I have been saying all week, the fault lies not so much in the stars, or with Mr. Obama, but in our system.  A system which could produce someone so opportunistic, untruthful and simply rude as a Willard Romney is itself the problem.  (See earlier recent posts here for more commentary and resources.)  But to hear the pundits yammering, one would have thought we were talking about a boxing match, not a debate among two men who wanted to be President of the United States. 

Let us hope Mr. Ryan's inner tiger will be tamed by tonight's moderator.  Even George Foreman would have trouble defending against an actual tiger in the ring.   Mr. Biden is a seasoned politician, and should prove to be a shrewd debater.  But let us also hope -- most sincerely -- that the moderator and the debate format will provide for an event somewhere within bounds of the civilized universe, unlike last week's factoid food fight.



Sen. Sherod Brown on Where the Democrats Stand

Hugo Chavez Wins Re-election

Hugo Chavez has won re-election as President of Venezuela with 55% of the vote. 

Bill Clinton Continues to be a Bright Light in This Campaign

Former President Bill Clinton continues as the brightest light on the Democratic block in its supposed night-time of despair.  Over the past few days I have found much reason for hope for the Democratic ticket, everything from lower unemployment numbers to increased "likability" numbers for Pres. Obama after the debate.  (Perhaps there was something to be said for the polite approach after all.)  At the very, very best it is a mixed bag at this point in the election season.  Clearly, Pres. Obama doesn't do as well on his feet in debates as we might have expected. 

But Bill Clinton continues to deliver.  He is clearly the brightest bulb in the pack when it comes to framing issues and speaking clearly and directly to the people.  There truly is no one like him on the political scene today.  No one person, not even Bill Clinton, can save any candidate, given the corporate-dominated media in the U.S.  But clearly he has a contribution to make. 

As for the rest of us, we have a choice.  Barack Obama may not be the savior many people thought he was.  But given the possibility of a Willard Romney administration, one thing is clear:  we must vote "no" to Romeny in 2012!  


Bill Clinton, tied to reality, uses facts and humor to shore up the people

Shh-- Dont Tell: Democrats Really Do Have a Good Chance of Re-taking the House: Salon

Salon on-line magazine is saying that the Democrats really do have a good chance of re-taking the House in next month's elections.  Read along with me as I explore the evidence:


Democratic Chances to Re-take House Looking Better

Obama Campaign Fires Back with Facts and Humor

The Obama Campaign is releasing new television ads based on last week's mediocre and insulting debate.  The Big Bird ad is a must-see!  The other ad I've seen is factual and persuasive.  Why isn't the mainstream media helping get the truth out?  Is it possible they prefer to pump up a slug fight instead of truly informing readers?  It's an old media game. 

But the Obama campaign at least is trying to bring some semblance of rationality to the fray. 

Recovering from the Debate

Last week I had something to say about the Presidential debate fiasco.  My main point then was that the format, the moderator, Willard Romney, and to some extent President Obama, were all to blame.  Beyond the matter of the format (which allowed for blistering and rude interruptions from either candidate apparently), I pointed out that these debates have really become, in effect, bi-partisan rather than non-partisan debates.  The article I linked to claimed certain debate sponsors were withdrawing their support for this reason.

The pundits have harped on one point, a point which I believe is mistaken.  Overall, most have harped on this one point to the virtual exclusion of all others.  They have claimed that Romney was the "winner" of this debate.  Besides making the debate into a wrestling match or a baseball game, this contention is wrong.  First and foremost, a debate is supposed to inform citizens or at least voters.  In this sense, only the truth should win.  The truth suffered terribly in last week's debate, mostly because of Romney's ill-informed and possibly purposeful distortions.  If his distortions were ill-informed he does not know enough to be President.  If they were purposeful he is ethically unfit, for lying to voters on national television is inexcusable. 

There have been many articles which have attempted to hold Romney to account.  I will try to post links to some of them in coming days.  The main claim, and the biggest untruth, is that trickle-down economics has not worked in the past and will not work now.  This is the argument Mr. Obama should have made.  As Pres. Clinton said at the Democratic Convention, the Republicans' main idea is to "double down on 'trickle-down.'"  This is true yet neither Lehrer nor Obama effectively pinned him down on this point.  And the claim made by both candidates that their positions on Social Security were essentially the same has also been found to be untrue. 

As we dig deeper, we find the race hasn't much changed, that actually the facts are trending in Obama's favor with an improved unemployment picture.  At the same time and looking back,  I hoped for a bigger stimulus in 2009.  But I also hoped the American people would rise up in indignation over the ascension of G. W. Bush to the Presidency, solely because the Supreme Court decided he could.  But I do digress. 

Looking deeper, what of the white vote?  It has been said that white voters have deserted the President and vice versa.  But is either true?  The article linked below says, Wait a minute -- look closer.  I believe that when we actually start looking at the numbers, things look fairly good for Mr. Obama.  Now, if we will wake up to the huge Republican dirty tricks operation, including widespread efforts to suppress minority and poor white votes, we will have a chance at an outcome we can live with.  But next time, let's have a non-partisan debate process, if there are to be any debates at all. 



Obama Doing Better Among White Voters?

Romney's Hooey Factor

Wednesday night's Presidential debate is being criticized from all points on the political spectrum and even from nonpartisan professionals.  Whether it was the format (bizarre), the moderator (ineffective and bordering on incompetent), Romney ( hyper and rude), or Pres. Obama (suffering from altitude sickness?), the whole sad event speaks to the low state of American politics. 

This year I tried to listen to the debate on radio.  But the event was so disjointed, disorganized, and weird that I had to switch stations after about twenty minutes.  Willard Romney gave me a headache.  I was shocked at his rudeness in repeatedly interrupting a sitting President of the United States.  I noted Mr. Obama's lack of energy and the absence of targeted rejoinders, but still felt he did a reasonably good job in measuring up to the challenge of Romney's diatribes.

And where were any other candidates?  This debate badly need a Ross Perot, someone who in a few words could puncture the bubble of hubris surrounding this mediocre event.  What a spectacle of less-than-Presidential televised theatre!  America can do better. 



Romney's Ten Most Baseless Claims

Other Candidates for President 2012

As I did in 2008, I am once again providing information on so-called Third Party candidates for President.
While many of these candidates can hardly be considered viable, each seems to offer views worth considering. 

As time goes on I will be offering more information about some of these candidates.

Sadly, these third-party candidates are being systematically eliminated from both national polling lists as published by the media, and the Presidential debates are becoming widely recognized as being, in actuality, bi-partisan debates rather than non-partisan. 

For now, those who would like more information about alternative candidates the following web site is available:


Fuller List of Presidential Candidates 2012

Who Ate the Debate?

Americans may remember the appearance of one Ross Perot in the televised Presidential debates of 1992.  Perot's participation energized the debates bringing a much-needed and long-sought alternative perspective to what was already a fairly boring American Duopoly of Republicans and Democrats. 

Not once since 1992 has any person other than a Democrat or Republican appeared in a Presidential or Vice-Presidential debate.  This gives a quality of pancake v. waffle to these quadrennial match-ups.  Since 1992 an erstwhile "commission," set up by the Democratic and Republican national committees has conspired to prevent any third (or fourth or fifth) party candidates from appearing in the national debates. 

Today I begin a series of reports on other candidates for the office of President.  This will be in the form of periodic insights gleaned from primarily on-line sources. 

The first is an article about Libertarian candidate and former New Mexico Governor, Gary Johnson.  According to this unsubstantiated report, Johnson is garnering as much as 10% of the vote in some states. 

As the first of the Presidential debates looms tonight, it is wise and fitting to consider what is being left out of the national discourse. 


Libertarian Ire Over Debate Exclusion