Skewing the Presidential Polls

Have you ever wondered about the Presidential polls?   How they are determined and what do the numbers really mean?  And what "secret sauce" do they use for likely voters, turnout, and independent voter trends?  In the 2012 Presidential race and polling the narrative (interpretation of the polls by MSM) is that the Presidential sweepstakes has been tied, with Obama now pulling away.   But there is a problem with this pro-Obama story line that is being parroted by the Main Stream Media (MSM).   Here is an article on how polls can be skewed:

http://www.examiner.com/article/is-the-latest-washington-post-abc-poll-skewed-for-obama

Here is a polling web site that is adjusting for "likely voters" vs. registered voters.   The website Unskewed is using different voting trend models, including the higher number of registered Republicans in 2012 vs. 2008 and the historical trends suggesting that independents are breaking towards a more conservative vote:

http://unskewedpolls.com/

And here is the backgrounder on Scott Rasmussen from Rasmussen reports, who has been the most accurate pollster in the past 10 years, including the first to predict that Scott Brown (R-Massachusettes) could upset the Democrat in the recent US Senate race.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasmussen_Reports

So, who are you going to believe?    I'd go with the actual voters this November.   But in the meantime, I'd watch Rasmussen and Unskewed out of the corner of my eye, in spite of the steady drumbeat by the MSM that polls are showing Obama more favorably (due to their Democrat skew).

(c) 2012, Jasper Welch, Four Corners Media, www.jasperwelch.org  

Sharpening the Pencils & the Debate (VP Ryan)

The selection of Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan as the Vice Presidential candidate by GOP nominee Mitt Romney changes the Presidential campaign.  While the VP nominee is rarely is a game changer in an election for President, this time around may be different.    To date, the Presidential race has lacked the real debate on the issues facing America:  the US economy, lack of jobs (8%+ unemployment), entitlement reform, limited government and the role of the private sector.    And the campaign debate has failed to address the signature legislative "cram down" by the Obama administration and the government-minded Democrats:  the proposed repeal of ObamaCare by a Mitt Romney administration.
     As the VP candidate, Ryan adds intellectual acumen, budget expertise, youth and the ability to carry the conservative message without apology.   Take the time to pull up some YouTube video clips of Mr. Ryan in action.   Or watch the time that Representative Ryan sliced and diced ObamaCare in his exchange with the President at the joint legislative & executive branch meeting at the White House.   Obama was unable to counter or respond.
     As the Republican Presidential candidate, Romney has changed the subject to the real issues and the "boys from Chicago" will be unable to keep changing the subject away from the obvious.   This President and his liberal expanding of the federal government has failed the American people.   The debate about the true future of limited government vs. unlimited government for the United States now begins in earnest.

(c) 2012, Jasper Welch, Four Corners Media,  www.jasperwelch.org

Behind the Curtain? What have they done?

So exactly who are these Presidential candidates?   Are they defined by what they say, how they look, and or what the Main Stream Media (MSM) says about them?    Or should we look behind curtain, behind the debate stage, or actually consider their records?  What have they actually done, versus just what they have said or has been said about them?  Is the essence of the Presidential candidate’s speech more about the speechwriter or about the candidate or the topic of the day?  What does the candidate say “off line”, when they think that the cameras and microphones are off?   How do Presidential candidates respond with they are “off the talking points”?

Quoting from William Kristol, a leading conservative writer for the Weekly Standard www.weeklystandard.com  on the WS web 10/20/08 publication date.  (Oh, by the way, he is a contributor to Fox News [gasp], the “Fair & Balanced” MSM channel and the New York Times [gasp, a liberal rag!]).  Here is what Mr. Kristol wrote in regards to Senator Obama and Senator McCain:

“One is an orthodox and timid liberal, personally ambitious but intellectually conventional. For all his talk of hope and change, when has Barack Obama ever shown a willingness to break with liberal orthodoxy or Democratic dogma? What bold decision has he taken, what unpopular idea has he embraced? The odd truth about Obama is that, for all his unsavory radical associations--and they are unsavory and a legitimate issue in the campaign--he's not radical enough for the times and challenges we face.”

“The other candidate, John McCain, has been all over the map in terms of domestic policies, and has shown a management style during the campaign that makes one worry about the coherence and purposefulness of his administration. But he's shown strong character in his life, and he's done serious things. His general views are centrist, but he's willing to be bold when necessary. He won't be passive as president, and he'll think anew and act anew as he adjusts to the challenges we face, in the spirit of doing what's necessary to preserve and strengthen the underlying principles of American life.”

So why would it matter what a Presidential candidate actually did?   Why not just go for “Change We Can Believe In?”   Or follow after the “Change in Coming” mantra?

In fact, the conventional wisdom appears to say that if the candidate lacks experience, let’s just gloss over that.  It’s all about how I feel.  Right?

            Maybe we should look behind the curtain?  Who somebody is, really does matter.   What the Presidential candidates have done is more important than what they say or what is said about them.  Let’s take the approach that “observed behavior” tells more the next president than “stated promises” made by the Presidential candidate.

            So as we look behind the curtain, we have one candidate with community, legal and political experience, who has written two books about himself, but hasn’t sponsored any significant legislation.  But he is younger man, and he is still gaining experience.  He has never been in business, he has never been in the military, he has never been avid outdoorsman and he has never advocated cutting spending in a meaningful way.  Senator Obama is from Chicago, and has a full history in the Illinois legislature, although not much has been written about it.   (However, a NYM article is worth reading: Goggle “New Yorker Magazine” and search for “Making It” article on Obama).   He has had various friends for political purposes, until it gets too embarrassing for his political career, and then Barack Obama moves on (usually after disowning or disavowing the friend).  Finally, as we lift the curtain, his books, campaign rhetoric and voting record is liberal and orthodox Democrat.  Change we can believe in?   Yes, if a liberal tax and spend approach is what you’d like, then a vote for Barack will get you there in a hurry.

            Then we lift the curtain on the other candidate.    John McCain is an American hero, which makes some people feel uncomfortable, but most Americans appreciate his service to his country.   He has served in the US Navy.   His father, grandfather and his sons have served as well.   While Senator John McCain has served in Washington for 25 years, he has done so as a maverick, angering and challenging parties, their members and their leadership. He actually has led the fight to cut wasteful spending.   Imagine that: Washington living within its means!  John McCain is an older man, a seasoned warrior (literally and politically) from a long career, being involved in most of the major issues that have faced America over the past 25 years.    Is he the best speaker?    Probably not.   Is he a down the party line Republican?   Definitely not.   Does he speak his mind?   Yes, and to a degree his candor is both disarming, yet refreshing in this age of political double speak. 

            So what has Barack Obama done?  A thin resume backed by good books, winsome looks, great campaigning and over $500 million bucks.   So what has John McCain done?  Served his country with dedication, principle and candor over his 72-year lifetime.    He wrote one book, hasn’t run the best campaign, and opted for $84 million in public financing in the General election.

So, it is now up to you as a voter, to decide how experience in your lifetime best prepares you to be the President of the United States.   Oh, I forgot.   The MSM pundits, the pollsters and the Democrats have already decided for you.   Experience doesn’t matter anymore, it is about change.    And courage under fire is old fashioned; now what matters is how good your campaign is.    And the American dream, built on hard work and determination, is really no longer possible, unless the US government intervenes and spreads the wealth around.  So I guess we just close the curtain at the point, and may the best marketing plan (I mean best man) win!

© 2008, Four Corners Media,  Jasper Welch    www.jasperwelch.org             

Presidential Politics 9.26.08

As a recovering elected official, I’ve been watching the Presidential (and other) race(s) closely.  Actually I served as the Mayor of small town in Colorado…kind of like a community organizer, except with some actual responsibility.

Each day, I’ll get my start with Www.realclearpolitics.com and www.townhall.com and www.politico.com, plus the Weekly Standard and National Review on Line.   Various pundits, columnists, polling data and video clips of the day, will get me off to a good start on the daily campaign chatter.

Sarah Palin was a very good pick by Senator McCain, and the liberal media (NYT, big three TV, AP & Time) totally over reacted and blew their “balanced coverage” facade (which was already left leaning, but now the MSM has fallen into leftist hands as their propaganda organs).  Obviously the Main Stream Media (MSM) thought Palin was a good pick (and needed to be defined in their liberal MSM terms).  This viewpoint is based on the MSM atom bomb approach to disable the newly minted conservative VP before she could define herself with US voters.   It is now very clear that the national press (MSM) is in the tank for Obama, and they will trash the GOP ticket at every chance they have (which is now being done on the 24/7 basis).  Some of the unfounded rumors and over reaching media bias towards Gov Palin is ridiculous.... and in my opinion is helping the GOP, because the average person is saying, “Wait a minute, this is an emerging woman leader and Governor isn’t getting a fair shake”.

And the Democratic VP nominee, US Senator Joe Biden, is Mr. Gaffe extraordinaire.   As the golden-tongued senior Senator on the Democratic ticket, he is a sound bite machine, with a disdain for historical accuracy.    Let’s see, FDR as president on TV dealing with the Depression?   President want to be Biden was only a decade and a major technology away from the truth!   More history in the remaking by our US Senator from the teeny tiny state of Delaware. If president-elect Obama was looking for change, Biden’s role in the “Change ticket” is apparently to keeping changing the stories daily. McCain clearly made the better VP choice, and he looked to the future in selecting a proven reformer and Governor with a record on energy, cutting spending and actually leading a state as the chief elected executive.

 Colorado is a battleground state this year, so we are getting pounded by ads, mostly negative and from out of state 527 groups just carpet bombing the state with “over the top” TV and radio ads.  Do the 527’s or campaigns really think that anyone is listening?  Maybe the money could be better spent on helping orphans around the world?

Only 40 days to go, and it is getting interesting.   McCain’s decision to suspend on the campaign Thursday (9/26) and head back to Washington (and try to actually get something done) shows his leadership.  Obama was trying to figure out what to do, but apparently rolling up his sleeves to actually get something done in Wash DC, was taking a back seat to debate prep and press conferences!   Then, when he and the Obama advisors realized that “debate prep in Florida” was not exactly the “Change We can Believe in”, they were relieved that that President Bush gave them a call to head back to Washington for some actual work.   For all the Dems whining about “injecting Presidential politics into the massive bailout debate”, both Obama and McCain are sitting US Senators, and in my opinion, they should weigh into the “massive bailout” debate as the emerging leaders of their respective parties.   The Dem majority and a weakened “lame duck” president need supervision in Washington, prior to screwing up the present financial mess up even worst than it is now!

We’ll see what the big economic summit in Washington DC brings today.