Let’s start with the obvious—Romney’s Campaign is not suspended. You can tell, because they are still lying about stuff. They’ve decided to pretend they are also doing some “relief events”, because they will be taking non-perishable items that no one wants and send them to—where did the worst of it hit—oh, that’s right, New Jersey. I’m not kidding:
On a day when millions of Americans face serious hardship as they recover from Hurricane Sandy’s damage, Mitt Romney clearly decided it would be crass to campaign in a conventional way. So he turned a scheduled rally in Kettering, Ohio, this morning into a “storm relief event,” and posed before piles of donated canned goods.
“We’re going to box these things up in just a minute and put them on some trucks, and then we’re going to send them into, I think it’s New Jersey,” he said, according to the Washington Post. “There’s a site we’ve identified where we can take these goods and distribute them to people who need them.”
You can feel the love in the above picture, that’s for sure. I’m not even going to dwell on Mitt Romney, because there’s more examples of disaster bringing out the best in people—like the Obama Administration getting advice from an old hand at dealing with bad situations: Former FEMA Director Michael Brown.
You might wonder what Bush’s FEMA head—famous for being the guy who did a “heckuva job” during Hurrican Katrina—had to say. After all, if folks learn from mistakes, he probably has a lot of wisdom to impar—meh. Here’s him:
“One thing he’s gonna be asked is, why did he jump on [the hurricane] so quickly and go back to D.C. so quickly when in…Benghazi, he went to Las Vegas?” Brown says. “Why was this so quick?… At some point, somebody’s going to ask that question…. This is like the inverse of Benghazi.”
Wow. Look at him pairing a weird criticism (Obama reacted too quickly to a natural disaster—which is kind of time-sensitive if you want to save lives and stuff?) with a partisan smear. You go, Michael Brown! I mean seriously. You go, now. Heckuva a job staying under a rock, dude.
Oh, and finally? I wasn’t going to give this guy attention, but here:
He obviously needs some kind of attention—like a gangrenous appendage. (Amputation?)
You know, I think my title may be misleading. I meant, “OMG the assholes.” Sorry about that.
Dean Chambers fifteen-minutes-of-fame ended somewhere around October 1, 2012, after Drudge, Rush Limbaugh, the Breitbartlets and Gov. Rick Perry of Texas worked themselves into a lather over his wingnut-site UnskewedPolls.com, had an afterglow cigarette and then moved on. Chambers is either the PT Barnum of Politics (there’s a conservative born every minute . . . ) or quite delusional—or maybe a little of both.
The reason that someone like Dean Chambers can not only “break through” but also become a “rock star” in the Conserva-sphere is because movement conservatives clearly don’t place much value on reality, facts or even soft data. When Chambers came along with a handy biased-pollsters conspiracy theory and a contrived method for weighting existing polls that made the numbers look like “Romney in a Landslide,” he was a hero.
At any rate, while his star was in the ascendant, Chambers decided that what the world of conservatives needed was more “unskew-ing,” so UnskewedMedia.com and UnskewedPolitics.com were added to Chambers’ Examiner web-empire. And just for well-roundedness, Chambers added a humor page for a little comic relief, which he warns won’t last long because Willard will soon win the election and bad photoshops of Obama and Nancy Pelosi will no longer be uproariously funny.
Somewhere along this path, Chambers, himself, became convinced that he is a bona-fide go-to pollster and all-round serious person and, as such, he recently vented a little professional jealousy by going-off on Nate Silver for being too effeminate (gay) to be accurate. Not kidding . . . .
Despite the slack-jawed pose above, Daisy Mayhem is a highly intelligent animal. It’s just that when she sees reflected light on the wall (or, FSM forbid, a laser pointer beam), her brain shrivels to the size of a lentil, and all she can think to do is stare and then pounce.
I’m off to vote for President Obama in a few minutes; today is the first day of early voting in Florida. I’m kind of out in the boonies, and our early voting polling place is a library surrounded by cow pastures. It’s usually not very crowded, but it was jam-packed on Election Day in 2008.
From what I read on Mememorandum, it looks like some folks are starting to entertain the possibility that President Obama will win the election via the Electoral College and lose the popular vote. In a way, that would be poetic justice, and we could spend days here swapping recipes featuring bitter wingnut tears. But it’s not the outcome I want to see.
I hope President Obama crushes Romney like a rotten walnut—and not just because I don’t want to see us return to a policy of shoveling goodies to plutocrats in hopes that a few crumbs will fall off their table for the rest of us. I hope Mr. Obama wins big because Romney is the most shameless liar to ever credibly aspire to the presidency, at least in my lifetime.
That a champion prevaricator and spinning weathercock like Romney is even within striking distance is a shameful indictment of the state of our national politics and media. I entertained similar notions when Bush won in 2004 after it was clear he’d hoodwinked us into a war on false pretenses, but there was a “let’s not change Horsemen in mid-apocalypse” vibe back then.
*These tables list the top donors to these candidates in the 2012 election cycle. The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organizations’ PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals’ immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.
Because of contribution limits, organizations that bundle together many individual contributions are often among the top donors to presidential candidates. These contributions can come from the organization’s members or employees (and their families). The organization may support one candidate, or hedge its bets by supporting multiple candidates. Groups with national networks of donors - like EMILY’s List and Club for Growth - make for particularly big bundlers.
*NOTE: All the numbers on this chart are for the 2012 election cycle and based on Federal Election Commission data released electronically.
Now for the poll: A volunteer from the Koch-sucker AFP group called me awhile back and asked if I thought President Obama’s policies had made the economy better or worse. I said I thought they had definitely made the economy better after Bush and his pals trashed the joint.
She then asked me if I planned to vote, and I told her I certainly did. She asked if I planned to vote early, and I replied that I would have already voted if I could have, but thanks to Tea Party-backed nitwit Governor Scott’s villainous attempt to exclude as many working people as possible by cutting the early voting period, I’d have to wait until tomorrow.
I then said I would be at the polls bright and early to cast my ballot. She wished me a pleasant evening, and I wished her the same.
Oh! Well, that’s all right, then. Stating that God wants women to go through forced pregnancy after rape isn’t extreme when you think about it, as Richard Mourdock has. After all, God loves life, and every woman’s womb could be stocked with life all the time, if women weren’t so abysmally dedicated to saying when. So will you leftie b*tches just leave the man alone already? Mitt Romney’s still exhausted from distancing himself from Todd Akin, and now he’s going to have to dodge and weave his way around poor Richard. Paul Ryan is going to have to distance himself, too, but at least we know he can do it in record time. Stop martyring poor Richard Mourdock! You’re making Michelle Malkin simply furious!
OK. Quick test of listening comprehension. Does President Obama say “no horses and bayonets” or does he say “fewer horses and bayonets”? (Apologies for the commercial.)
OK, so obviously this is a trick question because of course Obama says “fewer horses and bayonets”. Right wing bloggers, however are not known for reading or listening comprehension, to wit, executive editor at Tucker Carlson’s Bucket O’ Fail Daily Whiner David Martosko’s sad attempt to “fact check” the claim. And reports back that bayonets ARE still used by marines and, and in the early stages of the Afghanistan war some soldiers rode, wait for it, wait, HORSES!!! FACT CHECK FAIL, RIGHT!!
Well not so much if you are actually blessed with reading and listening comprehension but, again, we’re talking about right wing bloggers here.
PeaceOut Bobblehead Mittkins™ is the most trustworthy Mittkins™ yet! Just like a real beauty contestant, he wants world peace and knows where the cool Syrian beaches are, sort of. Peaceout Bobblehead Mittkins™ loves Barack Obama’s foreign policy THIIISSSS MUCH. Stand him on your shelf next to Primary Mittkins™, Offshore Mittkins™ and Massachusetts Mittkins™. No collection is complete without him!
Each Mittkins™is fully positionable. Binders, bayonets and beliefs sold separately.
They’ll be seated at a table, close enough to breathe in each others’ stress chemicals. Don’t bet on moderator Bob Schieffer to make the mistake of injecting a fact between Romney’s cascade of prevarications, not unless he wants all of the right-O-sphere to call him fat.
Guardian Liveblog here, and YouTube livestream below the fold. Meme generator here. Because deciding the leader of the free world has come to this. BOO!
For whatever otherworldly reason arrived at by the ever-spinning windmills of their minds, Team Romney has decided that this would be a good time to trot out Mitt Romney’s underwhelming tenure as governor of Massachussetts for another spin around the swing states.
I imagine that they are hoping to make some sort of political hay out of recent Team Obama statements about Republican obstructionism in Congress which Team Romney has decided was all President Obama’s fault—and if he had only taken a page out of Mitt’s book on achieving bipartisan nirvana the Obama administration could have done so much more.
Here are some facts that I’ve unearthed about Mitt’s Magical Mystery Tour of Duty in The Bay State . . .
A blimp-like aircraft emblazoned with an “America Needs Romney” message made an emergency landing near a Davie park this evening, much to the joy of many voters in Broward County, one of the most-liberal places in Florida.
There were no injuries, Davie police said. Except, perhaps, for Republican pride.
Two people were on the 160 foot aircraft but no one was injured, said Davie police spokesman Capt. Dale Engle.
Engle said high winds forced the aircraft to land in the Parkside Estates development around 7:10 p.m., near the Robert H. Bamford Sports Complex.
“The winds were so strong it was pushing them west,” he said. “They were trying to drive east but they couldn’t push into the wind.”
This, the first post-Citizens United American election, has been one long experiment with democracy. It’s too early to call any firm conclusions so far, and superPACs’ activities aren’t restricted to paying for advertising, but it’s becoming apparent that success cannot be measured purely in terms of the amount of money you can throw at the media.
A few days ago, The Atlantic published an article about the differing effects of the two campaigns’ advertising, citing a study by researchers Qualtrics (PDF) and Evolving Strategies:
They found that Obama’s ads were working to sway swing voters, while Romney’s were not—and the Koch Brothers-backed GOP super PAC, Americans for Prosperity, didn’t help Romney either.
The study exposed 2,300 voters to Romney and Obama ads on three themes—Medicare, economic plans, and economy-based attacks on the other candidate—as well as the Americans for Prosperity ad, “Disappointed.” A control group didn’t see any ads. All the respondents were either pure independents or weak partisans; none were strong Democrats or Republicans.
Obama’s ads overall had the desired effect: They increased his share of the vote by six points while decreasing Romney’s share of the vote by 8 points on average. Romney’s ads, meanwhile, had no statistically significant effect on the survey respondents. The survey sample began the experiment favoring Romney by a 47-42 margin; after watching both candidates’ ads, they favored Obama, 48-41.
This may go some way toward explaining the split that national pollsters are finding between the north and the south, where it looks like Romney’s winning hard in the Republicans’ southern heartland, but not so much in the swing states:
There was a silver lining for Romney, however. His ads didn’t convert swing voters, but they did persuade voters who picked John McCain in 2008 to vote for Romney this time around. Obama’s ads had no impact on his supporters’ enthusiasm.
In fact, some of these ads may be backfiring:
As for the super PAC [AFP], with friends like these, Romney may not need enemies. The Americans for Prosperity ad features testimonials from Obama voters who say the president has let them down. The study found it had no effect on the vote overall and actually hurt Romney with women voters. The only positive effect of the ad was a large increase in enthusiasm among males who voted for McCain in 2008. “Surprisingly, the ‘Disappointed’ ad is terrible as a soft-edged appeal to swing voters, but seems to be very effective red meat for male voters in Romney’s base,” the study notes.
When it comes to Web ads, the aims are different. Obviously there’s a hope that some will go viral and peel off some undecideds via social media etc., but generally they’re aimed at bolstering the base and helping GOTV efforts. With ads of the quality of this one doing the rounds, we’ll have to wait and see how it all pans out: