Elections 2016 (and 2014)

or

Taming the Black Swan

or

Selling Out vs Sticking to Principles

Back to Politics

Despite the fact that this blog was originally established for the purpose of discussing and defending traditional ethics and morality in our modern culture, we keep digressing into politics.

This may be fitting, since what is politics, after all, if not the interaction of human beings on an organized group level; an interaction that certainly ought to be subject to the same rules of morality and decency that apply to individual human interactions?

And since what goes around comes around applies to our personal lives, guess what?  What goes around comes around applies to politics as well.  (The expression means that bad things you do come back to bite you later, and the good things you do come back to reward you later.)

Readers Demand Political Philosophy

Readers seem to know this, and as elections approach, they keep returning to those old articles here which discuss political philosophy, which explore the crucial interconnection between morality and the State (i.e., interconnection between Church and State).

Such discussions are not commonly available in the public arena in the present political atmosphere, which is so often controlled by fear of political bullies like the Freedom From Religion Foundation and their ilk, who attempt to eradicate all mention of right and wrong from the public forum. These bullies who attack religion are effectively advocating the absence of all morality from government, from law, and from public life.

So after a hiatus following the ethically dubious 2012 Presidential election in which Barack Obama purchased votes by bribery with Obama-phones and other lollipops, and in which conservatives tossed the vote by staying home in disgust, this blogger returns again to discussion of politics, of coming elections, and of election strategies for Elections 2016.

Why the Hiatus?

The results of the 2012 Presidential election made clear several important facts, which required some time to resolve:

• The people had spoken, and the Obama administration now had four more years to deliver on its campaign promises.  The United States is, after all, a democracy.  The fair loser steps aside gracefully and lets the wheels of democracy turn.
• Those people who were foolish enough to vote for Obama needed to experience more Obama consequences, to experience a rise in personal misery index, before they could be persuaded to vote for someone more responsible who does not promise lollipops and who does not lie.  And 2013/14 certainly provided ample rise in personal misery index generated by government; now even Democrats are calling Obama incompetent and are distancing themselves from him before the 2014 elections.  Meanwhile, we conservatives take an imposed rest and simply watch the inevitable  and painful implosion. We don’t enjoy it any more than parents enjoy watching their teens making painful mistakes.
  What goes around comes around. But it takes time.  We all hurt, we all suffer, but nothing can be done to circumvent some suffering in this life.
• The Republican establishment, which was foolish enough to cheat in order to change Republican convention rules so they could nominate their favorite Compromise Candidate, Mitt Romney, needed to figure out that there is a limit to the degree of compromise their conservative supporters will tolerate before they rebel.  There was great surprise and shock in November 2012, when 4 million registered Republicans failed to come to the polls, handing the election to Barack Obama.

So now two years have passed, and we have experienced some of the consequences of the 2012 election.  We have experienced more of Obama’s administration, ObamaCare failures, VA scandals, IRS scandals, implosion of Iraq, border crises, and numerous other debacles.  Establishment Republicans have experienced 4 million registered Republicans staying home from the polls, and losing the election.
During all of which, Nero fiddled as Rome burned.
Political puzzle pieces have been falling into place.
We need to redefine how we approach politics. 

So now it’s time to end the hiatus and time to address the future.
Back into politics!

Confusion Reigns

First observation on returning to politics in 2014: confusion reigns.

Democrats are suffering from the deluge of scandals befalling President Obama as the fruits of his erroneous policies and his lies mature. Today, 58% of Americans, including 30% of Democrats, say that the Obama administration is incompetent at managing the government.  Now, even New York Times correspondents are saying that the Obama administration’s ebola response is another example of Obama not running a competent government.  Liberals have begun to acknowledge Obama’s incompetence.  

Republicans are suffering from highly disfunctional infighting, seemingly incapable of choosing between continuing moral compromise with the opposition, and their fear of unpopularity if they choose responsible conservative policy.

000

Support is at an all-time low for both parties, and nobody seems to know how to attract the independent voters from the middle.
Only 24% of American voters identify as Republicans, 31% as Democrats, and a whopping 43% identify as Independents.

This bears repeating: a whopping 43% of Americans identify as Independents!
There are way more independents than Democrats.
There are way more independents than Republicans.

THE LEADING POLITICAL FACTION IN THE UNITED STATES TODAY IS INDEPENDENT.

What does it mean to be Independent?
Being Independent means that nobody tells these voters what to think; they think for themselves, and they owe allegiance to neither party.
If Independents could only agree on a candidate, there would be a landslide election and an Independent victory!

Potential Strategies

How can the two major parties recruit from the 43% of  uncommitted electorate in the middle?
With more lollipops and promises?
With an offer of responsible tough government appealing to those who have suffered enough in this economy?
Will a third party succeed in stealing the election?
Is the time ripe, with broadening disgust with both major parties, for the introduction of a third party?

Birth of the Republican Party

Looking at history, the founding of the present Republican party occurred under similar conditions, and resulted in the election of Abraham Lincoln to the Presidency.

The Whigs seemed incapable of coping with national crisis over slavery, so the Republican Party was established (in Wisconsin!) with the primary goal of opposing slavery. (Yes, contrary to what today’s progressives want you to think, the Republican Party was the first to oppose slavery!) The Whigs lost power, and Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, was elected.

So there is historical precedent for the birth of a third party; provided the nation is sufficiently disgusted with the two existing parties.

Are we sufficiently disgusted with the two existing parties today?

Can a third party rise to the occasion in present divided times and succeed in election 2016?

Or would a third party simply divide the conservative vote and hand victory to Democrats?

The Republican Split Today

The Conservative Dilemma

With four factions advocating four different approaches, the solution to this conservative dilemma is not obvious.
The above four approaches are mutually exclusive, and getting conservatives to agree on one approach would pose quite the obstacle.

• Those favoring the Buckley Rule would nominate someone like Mitt Romney or Chris Christie again.
• Those favoring the Limbaugh Rule would nominate someone like Scott Walker or Ben Carson.
• Those favoring the Third Party Option would replace the Republican Party by a group like the Tea Party.
• Article V supporters, if successful, would provide an opportunity for radical change and decentralization of government, returning much power to the states and reducing the power of the federal government.

The first option (Buckley Rule) has already been tried and failed in Election 2012.

Many conservatives favor the second option (Limbaugh Rule) right now. Stick to your principles an nominate the most conservative candidate in the primaries.

But as discontent with Washington continues to grow, it becomes more and more likely that some Americans may abandon business as usual and may opt for the more startling last two options- third party or even overriding Washington DC via Article V.

One thing is certain- the 4 million disgusted registered Republicans who stayed home in November of 2012 are not likely to change their minds and get back on board with John Boehner and the Buckley Rule.

It is much more likely that an additional 4 million will join the first 4 million in boycotting the Republican establishment’s cowardly and ever-compromising path towards defeat.  Yet staying home OR voting for a third party can hand the election to Democrats, even if they do not have majority support.

So What’s a Conservative to Do in 2014/2016 ?

There will be much discussion, much angst, and

much disagreement among conservatives over which of the above four approaches should be followed in 2016.
There will be even more anxiety over whether the guaranteed lack of unity will defeat us, handing victory to progressives.

But an examination of history, an examination of the forces that determine the fate of nations and of elections, reveals that perhaps we need not worry.
There is a simple and practical approach that may reassure those so very worried about the future.
Hint: it involves simply sticking to your principles and not selling out.
-The approach the Almighty might suggest if anybody bothered to ask Him.

The Determinants of History

What determines history?
What determines the fate of a nation or the fate of an election?

It may surprise some to hear that the determinants of history, the elements that identify or determine the nature of events or that fix their outcome, are not usually voters, nor are they politicians.

Many historians acknowledge that much of history is determined not by careful planning and strategy, but by fluke events called Black Swans.

Black Swan theory is taught at universities, and Black Swan theory was discussed by the New York Times in connection with the  9/11 Commission, which sought “to provide a ‘full and complete accounting’ of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 and recommendations as to how to prevent such attacks in the future.”

Black Swan theory is not a joke; it’s a sobering and probable reality.

So when we talk about the 2016 election, it is wise to consider whether a Black Swan event will be the determinant of the election, and to ask whether it is possible for us or for our politicians to influence that Black Swan event.

What IS a Black Swan?

How do we define a Black Swan?

The Cambridge Japanese Journal of Political Science refers to these unpredictable big events that shape human history, or Black Swans (emphasis mine):

The nonlinear dynamical process of self-organized criticality provides a new ‘theory of history’ that explains a number of unresolved anomalies: Why are the really big events in human history usually unpredictable? Why is it impossible to anticipate sudden political, economic, and social changes? Why do distributions of historical data almost always contain a few extreme events that seem to have had a different cause from all the rest? Why do so many of our ‘lessons of history’ fail to predict important future events? As people, organizations, and nations become increasingly sensitive to each other’s behavior, trivial occurrences sometimes propagate into sudden changes. Such events are unpredictable because in the self-organized criticality environment that characterizes human history, the magnitude of a cause often is unrelated to the magnitude of its effect.

Nassim Taleb is a Black Swan specialist.  He is a scientist, essayist, businessman, mathematical trader and scientist-philosopher who studies the epistemology of randomness and the multidisciplinary problems of uncertainty and knowledge, particularly in the large-impact hard-to-predict rare events called “Black Swans”.

Taleb seeks to create a “platform for a new scientific-minded public intellectual dealing with social and historical events — in replacement to the ‘fooled by randomness’ historian and the babbling journalistic public intellectual.”

(Nassim Saleb feels morally bound as a professional philosopher and historian to acknowledge that history is driven by Black Swan events.)

In his book Learning to Expect the Unexpected, Taleb defines the Black Swan like this:

A black swan is an outlier, an event that lies beyond the realm of normal expectations. Most people expect all swans to be white because that’s what their experience tells them; a black swan is by definition a surprise. Nevertheless, people tend to concoct explanations for them after the fact, which makes them appear more predictable, and less random, than they are. Our minds are designed to retain, for efficient storage, past information that fits into a compressed narrative. This distortion, called the hindsight bias, prevents us from adequately learning from the past.

“Much of what happens in history”, he notes, “comes from ‘Black Swan dynamics’, very large, sudden, and totally unpredictable ‘outliers’, while much of what we usually talk about is almost pure noise. Our track record in predicting those events is dismal; yet by some mechanism called the hindsight bias we think that we understand them. We have a bad habit of finding ‘laws’ in history (by fitting stories to events and detecting false patterns); we are drivers looking through the rear view mirror while convinced we are looking ahead.”

So when it comes to elections, whether they be 2014, 2016, or any other election, it would be wise to remind ourselves that Black Swans are often determinants of the outcome.

That’s why nobody can predict election results.

By definition, a Black Swan is an unexpected and surprising historical event that plays a giant role in altering the course of history, yet could not have been predicted, and is not pre-planned by politicians or governments.

Role of the Black Swan in History

Historians and economists both acknowledge the role of Black Swans in human history.

There are many examples of Black Swan events in history, recent and ancient.
Remember the definition: nobody saw it coming, nobody could have seen it coming, it could not be planned for.

Some examples of Black Swan events:

• Terrorist attacks of 9/11
• Victory of American colonists against Imperial England in the Revolutionary War
• Outbreak of World War I (as a result of Archduke Ferdinand of Austria’s driver taking a wrong turn)
• Unexpected rise of Hitler
• Dissolution of the Soviet Union without a single battle in 1991
• Recent spread of Islamic fundamentalism
• Internet bubble
• Housing bubble
• Stock market crashes
• Arab spring
• Surprising defusing of the Syria situation in 2013
• Christianization of Europe by Constantine
• Battle of Lepanto victory (which prevented the conquering of Europe by Muslims against terrific odds)
• Attack on Pearl Harbor

Biblical examples of Black Swan events:

• Moses
• The Exodus
• Crossing of the Red Sea,
• David’s victory over Goliath
• Conversion of Nineveh
• Conversion of Nebuchadnezzar (see also)
• Life, death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ
• Conversion of St. Paul

Aside: The Bible is a valuable source of political instruction for those who realize the wisdom contained in it.

The above examples of Black Swan events occurred against all odds, were so unlikely that they could not previously be imagined, and they changed the course of human history dramatically.

Black Swans- Good or Bad?

Black Swans can be either good or bad.
To qualify as a Black Swan, an event simply has to lie beyond the realm of normal expectations.
The Christianization of Europe was good.
The terror attacks of 9/11 were bad.
Both were Black Swan events.

Black Swan events can occur not only in politics and in global events, but in our personal lives as well.  One unexpected event frequently steers the subsequent course of a person’s entire lifetime.

Taming the Black Swan

Once one accepts the existence and powerful role of Black Swan events in human history, the next logical question becomes- can we possibly prepare for these events and/or influence these events?

By human reason, no.
By definition we cannot expect and prepare for the unexpected.

However, in a nation like ours, in which 80% of citizens believe in God, 80% of citizens pray daily and believe that God answers their prayers, in a nation whose government has been founded on the inalienable rights given to man by God, in a nation structured after Christian morality, it is not unreasonable to bring into this discussion the interaction between God and History, and the interconnection between Church and State.
And this changes the picture dramatically.

In fact, when we acknowledge the interconnection between God and the world, Black Swan events become more easily understood as the intervention of God and of Satan in human affairs.

This view does not refuse to discuss the battle between of Good and Evil battle in our world.  In times of history like the present one, while ISIS mercilessly terrorizes Europe without intervention,  events becomes less mystifying when viewed in their proper light.

Back to Who Is In Charge?

Does this mean that we are helpless pawns at the mercy of warring supernatural forces of Good and Evil, much like the ancient Greeks who believed they were subject to the capricious whims of their warring and jealous gods?

No!
Unlike the ancient Greeks, we have the ability to steer supernatural events indirectly through our personal choices of good and evil and through our prayers.  We have a direct line to God via saintly lives and prayer, through which we can access the most powerful forces in the universe.  This is the power God has given to human beings. A power, incidentally, resented tremendously by Satan.

Unfortunately, some of us also choose to have a direct line to Satan. The Enemy is unleashed and empowered whenever we shun God’s directives and defy God, particularly when we try to be little gods ourselves.

And so, through moral choices and through prayer, we humans do have great influence on the war between Good and Evil.
Why do you think that Pope Francis’s reaction to the crisis in Syria was to call for global Adoration?
The holy man kwows how to fight spiritual warfare.

Satan always baits us with promises and with lies, but ultimately he delivers misery to all human beings, particularly to those who fell for his ploys.  But God limits Satan’s power, and teaches us how to chain the Evil one, by following the guidelines left to us first by the Ten Commandments, and then by Jesus Christ.

And so the mysterious struggles of Good and Evil are played out in our world, while many of us are unaware that victory is really within our grasp and that we have much more power over world events than we realize.

The Solution

or

Taming the Black Swan

The solution is simple;

• Stay close to God through prayer
• Trust God with patience
• Play by God’s rules, even in the face of impossible odds (God does the rest)

Simple formula for Elections

The formula for victory is simple- vote for the wisest and most moral candidate, whether you are voting in elections or in primaries, and forget about arguments on capturing independents in the middle by making moral compromises.

Follow the Limbaugh rule, not only when voters are fed up with liberalism, but ALL the time.
It worked for Abe Lincoln, it worked  for Ronald Reagan, and it worked for Saint John Paul II in the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Most of America (Independents) needs to reclaim a political party and make it our own.
Both existing parties have failed us abysmally.
Democrats have completely sold out Christian values by promoting abortion and redefining marriage.

In 2014, Independents should go to the polls and vote for Republicans, because they oppose abortion (killing over a million citizens each year), and represent fiscal responsibility as well.
Perhaps the Republican party might be willing to shift to the right.

Do your homework; use a neutral source like BALLOTPEDIA.

In 2016, if the Republican establishment resists a shift to conservative values and if the field is littered with numerous conservative candidates who split the vote up as they did in 2012, conservatives should not fear a brokered convention in which many conservatives are pared down to a few with numerous rounds of ballots.
We should not let the Republican establishment force the Buckley Rule, as they did in 2012, forcing the nomination of Mitt Romney against the majority of their party, who supported conservatives.

A message to the Republican establishment: don’t sell out your base and your ethics in some misguided attempt to capture some Independent votes from the middle.
Most Independents want a shift towards conservatism, reality and responsible behavior.

In 2016, if the Republican establishment tries to force liberalism and the “Buckley rule” as they have in the past, we move to a third, more moral and more conservative party.

Independents think, they admire justice, and they rally behind upstanding candidates.
Independents come in riding on black swans.

Reporting History

Most historians separate history and philosophy/theology into distinct and separate compartments, and only rarely do they acknowledge that human beliefs exert a powerful influence on human behavior and on human history.

It is even more rare for an historian to acknowledge that those humans actions which stem from religious belief (such as prayer or such as heroic action) can actually be effective in dealing with a global or political problem.
The political correctness of today does not permit the inclusion of God, moral choices, or prayer in any analysis.

But those who take their heads out of the sand and realize that this nation was founded on Christian principles and that this is still a nation of God-fearing and freedom-loving people in both parties, will realize that this nation’s history has been and will continue to be be steered by ethics, by prayer, and by God.
Unless the minority, the radical progressives who want to eradicate any mention of God from our lives and from our history, are allowed to intimidate the rest of us into inaction and into silence.

The reading of history cannot be partial and biased to exclude the fact that this nations was shaped by Christians, still consists of Christians, and that it’s history has been guided and protected by a very good God.
The role of the supernatural must be acknowledged, if Truth is to be known.
The secularization of human history neglects to consider man’s strongest motivations, denies his noble struggle between the Truth and the Father of Lies, and dismisses his most powerful ally – the Almighty.

Col 2:8 See to it that no one captivate you with an empty, seductive philosophy according to human tradition, according to the elemental powers of the world and not according to Christ.

Interconnection Between Church and State

The interconnection suggested here between Church and State is not the top-down dictation of moral values by Executive Order that is being attempted by President Obama, dictating what newly invented progressive morality the citizens of the United States must follow.  Nor is it a government-imposed State Religion imposed from above.

The interconnection is a democratic one.

When it comes to refining the relationship between government and religion, or between Church and State, the key is for ethical values to flow from the bottom up, not from the top down.

Nobody wants a specific government-imposed religion. But people clearly do want a code of morality and ethics on which most reasonable citizens can agree.

Instead of eliminating morality altogether from public life, and instead of government (King Obama) dictating his own brand of morality, citizens need to vote their personal religious moral beliefs into law.
The Constitution provides the mechanism by which this fundamentally Christian nation, still identifying itself as 80% Christian, can choose representatives in government who reflect their ethical beliefs.

An Optimistic Future

When the interconnection between Church and State is implemented, not from the top down, but  from the grass roots up,
when we all pray and go to the polls and vote for what is right and what is moral, our nation will heal and will get back on the right track.

David will slay Goliath, and Red Sea will part.

That power is in our hands.
We can marshal powerful forces into play that could never be predicted or imagined on a human level alone.

We can steer the Black Swans- provided we don’t throw away the reins.

Related Posts:

The Missing Link – Redefining How We Approach Politics

Pope Francis Takes On Obama

Political Puzzle Pieces Falling into Place

Enjoying the Progress? Join the Prayer

Global Adoration- Say What?

It’s Over, with an Ugly Power Grab

A power grab swept under the rug by the RNC, by FOX, by Rush Limbaugh…

Unable to win by the rules, the RNC estblishment bulldozed a  last-minute rule switch at the Convention yesterday:

Ron Paul had accumulated petitions from enough states (6) to be nominated legitimately, which might also have opened the convention to candidates other than just Mitt Romney and Ron Paul.  According to RNC rules, Ron Paul would have to be listed as a candidate, and a brokered convention, as previously described in Presumtive Nominee, would have followed.
The RNC establishment, wanting only Mitt Romney and wishing to avoid the brokered convention,  drafted a new set of rules which would require petitions from 8 states to nominate a candidate, instead of the previously required 5. This attempt at alteration of the rules after the fact to eliminate an undesired candidate after he has already satisfied the rules of qualification was underhanded, to say the least. But then it got even more ugly.
When it came to the actual vote on the rule change, John Boehner railroaded the vote through dishonestly, announcing that in the opinion of the chair (his opinion) the “ayes have it,” when in fact the sound track of the above video will show clearly that the “ayes” did NOT have it, and Boehner was subsequently booed for the bad call.

What Happened Here?

The Republican Party “establishment” has for decades been drifting towards liberalism through compromise with Democrats.  They have not had much objection from conservative voters, who in prosperous times had less objection to expanding government and expanding spending.

Now, in dire economic times, when unemployment is somewhere between 8 and 15% (depending on how and who defines it), when half of college graduates cannot get jobs, and 85% of college graduates move back in with their parents, when the average American has lost $4,019 due to the economy and the average American’s worth has dropped 39%, Americans have become more conservative.  Americans see the need to conserve.  Numerous movements, including the Tea Party, have placed pressure on Republicans to become more conservative.

The Republican “establishment,” the “old boys,” don’t want to change.  Either they think that they know better than the grass roots “regular guy” (you and me, the voter), or they want to protect their privileged positions and benefits.  There could even be a chance that the powerful liberal-social-engineering-spenders like Soros, Turner or Gates, might be a bit smarter than we give them credit for.  They might have been covering their bets in both parties all along.   There may be some puppets in the Republican Party who take orders from elsewhere.  Democrats have just used fake “Republicans” in their campaign ads, who’s to say they don’t run fake “Republicans” for office?

So There’s a War Going on Within the Republican Party

So there’s a war going on, and the above video illustrates it.
That was the “floor fight” predicted yesterday.
Boehner’s dishonest handling of the vote on the rule change in the above video, as well as Fox’s Ben Swann’s questions Romney’s truthfulness and tactics, show that the liberal, “establishment” half of Republicans are using some pretty dirty tricks.
They are not the only ones not playing it fair. They now seem to have some of the conservative media in their pockets.  FOX News, and even Rush Limbaugh, have stayed away from this story.  They are almost a guilty as the liberal media has been, in failure to report important stories and placating those who are powerful.

We’ve Lost this Battle

It’s pretty clear that we’ve lost this battle of the nomination.

John Boehner falling off pedestal

The fat lady sings “Yes, it’s over.”  The nomination has finally (however undemocratically and dishonestly) been made.
Some of our heroes have fallen; particularly John Boehner.
When the pride of our conservative leaders becomes so inflated that they forget for whom they work, and they try to defy the wishes of their electorate, they become very much like Obama.

The War is Not Over.

“Establishment” Republicans are  the product of the prosperous and liberal past, and are gradually being replaced with new more principled conservatives.
Paul Ryan is an example of that shift. So are some of the Governors who spoke at the Convention last night.
Tough new leaders who are willing to implement tough new reforms.  Scott Walker got a standing ovation last night.
America’s growing grass-roots conservatism will eventually displace the old Republican “establishment” and the required changes will be made. The angry people in the video above are not going home defeated.

The Next Battle

The next battle will be defined in three stages:

• First, Obama needs to be defeated. We will campaign for, and elect, Mitt Romney (gulp!).
  His imperfections are not (yet) as large as Obama’s.
• Then, America’s new grass roots conservatives will have to work hard to hold Mitt Romney to his promises, to keep Mitt accountable to the American people, for whom he works.
• Finally, the next Republican Convention will require some rule changes if we don’t want to drift into conservative totalitarian rule in place of Obama’s liberal totalitarian rule.
• 

So Where is God?

I would have preferred a cleaner and fairer fight at the RNC yesterday, with a better outcome.  I wish we had an (undivided) Republican establishment which respects and enforces it’s own rules, and I wish we could have had a brokered convention to choose the next Reagan or Lincoln for America.  But God’s wisdom, His choices and His intervention are not for us to fathom.  We keep faith in God and watch further developments.

We work to defeat the Abortion President, Obama.
A nation which kills it’s own children cannot prosper.
Neither morally, nor economically.

I love how the left and this president talks about inclusion as they advocate the discarding and destruction of over 1 million children every year. Some inclusion. We stand for the truth. We stand for life. We stand for love, and we will win. – Rick Santorum

God bless and help America!

The Presumptive Nominee

0r

The Secret Insurrection

Mitt Romney, Presumptive Nominee

Presumptive: based on presumption or probability; affording reasonable ground for belief.

Presume: take for granted, assume, or suppose; assume as true in the absence of proof to the contrary; undertake with unwarrantable boldness; undertake without right or permission; take something for granted; act or proceed with unwarrantable or impertinent boldness; go too far in acting unwarrantably or in taking liberties.

The Point: Presumptive  is a pretty loaded word.

Mitt Romney is the Republican party’s Presumptive Nominee for President of the United States.

Romney as Presumptive Nominee: Reasonable Status or Unwarranted Supposition?

The questions must be asked: is Romney the clear front-runner?  Does Romney have a sufficient lead to gain the nomination at the Republican Convention at the end of August?

On the surface, Romney does appear to be a pretty clear front-runner.  He does, after all, have 52% of the popular vote from State primaries at this point, according to Wikipedia’s count, which is based primarily on the Associated Press count.    And the Republican Party “establishment” has recognized Romney as the Presumptive Nominee.

Finally, the mass media, with a few exceptions, certainly seems to be on board with calling Romney the presumptive nominee.
Doesn’t that make Romney a clear winner?
The fact that the conservative Wall Street Journal and Drudge Report did not jump to presume Romney to be the nominee gives us a clue that there may be some doubt about the security of Romney’s position.

Problems with Counting Chickens Before They Are Hatched

There are a number of reasons why Romney should not count his chickens before they are hatched, particularly in this 2012 election:

• In 2012, a huge conflict is going on within the Republican Party between moderate “establishment” Republicans and the new more conservative “tea party” members, and has motivated a number of conservative groups to attempt unseating Romney, who is way too liberal for their taste.  There is a secret insurrection going on.
• In 2012, there seem to be new strategies emerging that involve changing delegates’ minds after the primaries, effectively nullifying the results of the primaries and challenging the concept of “bound” candidates.
• Probability tells us that presumptive candidates are often displaced during the Republican convention– about 43% of the time.  Romney is not immune to this possibility.
• History also shows us that whenever the presumptive nominee was displaced in the past, the replacement nominee was more likely to be successful in defeating the Democrats in the general election.
• Delegate votes at the Republican Convention do not reflect the popular vote directly, so delegate votes at the convention may surprise us despite Romney’s 52% of the popular vote.
• Delegate counts such as AP’s are only estimates, and these have been challenged, the media has been accused of misrepresenting them, and the numbers are under constant change, particularly in 2012.

The Republican Internal Conflict: Why Romney Might Be Challenged

Romney has struggled to inspire a passionate following among conservatives because of his liberal leanings, and much of his early success in primaries was attributed to his campaign’s prolific spending.

Romney’s early struggle in primaries

Prior to his eventual accumulation of 52% of the popular vote in the primaries, Romney struggled to compete with the conservative candidates opposing him.  Lean economic times often cause more voters to be conservative.  Most people have the common sense to realize that during a shortage one must conserve, not spend or waste. Conserving is the root of conservatism.

It has become pretty clear that now in 2012, the Republican “base” includes an increasing number of voters with conservative fiscal and social philosophies, who are not at all happy with Mitt Romney, author of RomneyCare, previous supporter of abortion, and present supporter of gay Boy Scout leaders  and gay adoption.  Some have even challenged Romney’s commitment to one set of values and have accused him of shifting his values in accordance with political advantage.

Although Romney was the front-runner during the primaries, he was also the only liberal candidate.  Since the conservative vote was split among numerous conservative candidates, Romney appeared to be leading, but in actual fact, the total number of conservative voters was outnumbering Romney supporters.  Many of these conservative supporters voted for Santorum in the primaries.  When Santorum suspended his campaign due to his daughter Bella’s illness, these voters were left with nowhere to go other than Romney or Ron Paul.  And Ron Paul’s extreme attitude towards foreign policy, defense budget, and legalization of drugs scared many voters off.  Many voted for Romney because their favorite conservative candidates had suspended their campaigns.  They voted for Romney despite their lack of enthusiasm for Romney.  Romney was the not-Obama.

Ron Paul – Mitt Romney

Things were also complicated by the fact that Ron Paul has refused all along to withdraw from the campaign, and still remains in the race, so Romney cannot claim victory officially.  According to Convention rules (and depending on who is counting or estimating the delegates), Ron Paul still has a plurality of delegates in five states, and his name can be presented for nomination at the Convention.  Romney is still taking this threat very seriously; his supporters are still attempting now in August, to unseat Maine’s Ron Paul delegates – Maine Public Broadcasting Network.  Romney supporters would not be wasting their time if no threat existed.

In fact, three candidates have enough delegates (a plurality of delegates in five states) for their names to be presented for nomination: Paul, Romney, and Santorum.   This opens the door for at least several people to challenge Romney.

What About Paul Ryan? Isn’t He Going to Save the Romney Team?

Paul Ryan joins the Romney ticket

Romney was lagging in some polls against Obama, making establishment Republicans nervous about his ability to carry the election against Obama.  A rightful concern, with so many conservatives still unhappy with the “un-Republican” Romney, who has in the past virtually admitted himself that he was Republican in name only (RINO).: “My R doesn’t stand so much for Republican as it does for reform.”

Many conservatives, particularly in the wake of Obama’s recent abysmal failures to keep his word, are very nervous about the reliability of Romney’s new promises, particularly considering Romney’s previous flip-flop or Etch-a-Sketch reputation.

Republlican Party energized

So Paul Ryan was added to the ticket.  The addition of such a bright, energetic conservative to the ticket has energized the Republican Party dramatically.  The initial reaction has been one of enthusiasm, new focus, strength, and has led to success in changing the agenda; from one of defense against Obama’s fallacious attacks on Romney, to one of challenging Obama on his policies and on his shameless dishonesty.  The addition of Paul Ryan has been very positive, very beneficial, and has been very fruitful in the fundraising department.

Paul Ryan is Too Good

However, something will eventually dawn on people- that if Paul Ryan is so noble in character, intelligent in policy and charismatic in personality that he can transform Romney’s campaign overnight, why is Romney, and not Paul Ryan at the top of the ticket?

It would be tempting for conservatives to rearrange the ticket, putting Paul Ryan at the top, if that is at all possible at the convention.  As Vice President, Paul Ryan’s position and power are not secure.   Ryan could swiftly be demoted by Etch-A-Sketch master Romney into a powerless and peripheral position immediately after the general election.  Already, Mitt Romney is distancing himself from Paul Ryan, claiming that he, Romney, has an economic plan that is “not Paul Ryan’s.”

Mitt Romney would be naïve not to realize that Paul Ryan is a threat to him; not by design, but by Ryan’s inherent likeability, charisma and character; characteristics Romney is lacking.

The fact of the matter is that numerous conservatives like me, who have never committed to one political party, yet who are devoted to unseating the anti-colonialist Barak Obama, are sitting out the Republican internal insurrection to see who wins.  We will support any candidate produced by the GOP convention by virtue of his/her being not-Obama, including Mitt Romney.  But we do have our favorites, and Romney is not one of them.

Is Paul Ryan Enough to Placate the Republican Insurrection?

Many non-Republican conservatives (such as the Tea Party) are not sitting out the insurrection as I am.  They are actively trying to unseat Romney as the presumptive nominee.  (More on specific efforts below.)

Ryan has certainly energized Romney’s campaign, and will help Romney do better in polls against Obama, but Ryan may have little effect on internal Republican battles before the convention, because people realize the “demote-ability” of a Vice President.

If Romney survives convention attempts to unseat him, then Paul Ryan’s presence on the ticket will definitely help Romney against Obama in the general election.  Let’s just hope Ryan does not get demoted to a position of little power and influence after the election, as some Vice-Presidents have been in previous administrations, including George Washington’s, who did not include John Adams in cabinet meetings. The current Vice President, Joe Biden, has virtually been assigned the role of court jester.  In this case, however, his own behavior has contributed to his undignified position; presumably Paul Ryan would fare better than Joe Biden has.

The Case for Nominating Romney Versus Not Nominating Romney

The Republican Party has found its success during previous increasingly liberal decades by compromising repeatedly with liberals.  They have thus slowly drifted away from staunch conservatism.  The seasoned “establishment” Republicans want to continue this trend with the nomination of Mitt Romney, arguing that he will help to capture moderate votes, and perhaps even some liberal votes, helping Republicans to unseat Obama in the general election.

However, the tide of history can change, and has changed in the past.  The Tea Party movement is one indication of a possible change of heart in the American people, driven by economic problems and by the need to face reality.  Economic austerity often motivates philosophical corrections and a shift toward conservatism.  The Republican establishment agenda of compromise and of seeking moderate votes will not attract votes when Americans are drifting towards conservatism.  Instead, it will frustrate people who want true change. When the base gets alienated, they will not go to the polls, and the reduced voter participation will cancel out any gain that was made by compromising to get moderate votes.

Do We Court the Moderates, or Do We Go For a Bold Course-Correction?

The History of Republican primaries and conventions also indicates that the nomination of moderates or liberals (like Romney) often disappoints the Republican base, and leads to defeat in the general election.  Republican Convention historian Dr. Barbara Haney, a RNC convention delegate from Alaska herself, discusses the surprising history of Republican conventions, a history which seems to indicate that the unseating of a lukewarm presumptive nominee by a more conservative alternative during a convention actually improves the chances of winning the general election against the incumbent Democrat.

The enthusiatic rally of support observed this week for Paul Ryan indicates that America might be ready for such a course correction towards conservatism.  A moderate candidate like Romney gets half-hearted, lukewarm support, while a strong, principled conservative like Paul Ryan reenergizes the Republican party overnight.

What Hands Can True Conservatives Still Play?
Can We Learn from History?

The new energized conservatives, including evangelical Christians and the Tea Party, may play any hand available to them at this convention, to nominate a true conservative in place of Mitt Romney.  This might actually be a good idea, based on Barabara Haney’s historical analysis, which showed an 88% chance of success in unseating an incumbent Democrat following the vetting process of a brokered convention, compared with a paltry 31% chance of success in unseating the Democrat incumbent following an uneventful first-ballot nomination of a presumptive nominee like Romney.

Lincoln and Reagan, products of the “brokered convention;” NOT “presumptive nominees.”

Ronald Reagan and Abraham Lincoln are examples of the 88% successes, which illustrate Barbara Haney’s historical analysis and theories, on the beneficial nature of brokered conventions.

So it boils down to: do you play chicken, compromise, court the moderate vote, and risk having only a 33% chance of defeating Obama, or do you boldly embrace the uncertainty of the brokered convention, nominate a candidate capable of energizing the general election (like Reagan or Lincoln), and go for the 88% chance of defeating Obama?  And do you put your energizing candidate in the Vice President slot, or in the President slot?

“Establishment” Republicans are making a fallacious assumption in promoting Romney; they are assuming that a conservative candidate of strong character will not attract liberal votes.  Abraham Lincoln disproved that fear, Ronald Reagan disproved that fear, and, incidentally, Paul Ryan has already disproved that fear in his home district of Janesville, Wisconsin, which is liberal, yet has elected conservative Paul Ryan for seven consecutive terms, because of his integrity, his character, and his reliably.

Jim Thorpe testimony on Paul Ryan’s character and popularity:

Incidentally, Paul Ryan is not the only Republican with the character and integrity capable of attracting liberal and moderate votes; add to that list Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, and Michelle Bachmann, among others.

The UK Guardian offers the following analysis:

The Romney campaign chose him (Paul Ryan) to deliver the Republican base vote amid fears that die-hard conservatives could cost him the White House by staying at home on election day rather than turning out for a candidate they are ambivalent about….

But that strategy was not working. The US is so polarised that there are, according to the polls, few undecided voters left. Compared with 2008, when about 25% of the electorate had still to make up their minds at this stage in the election, only about 5% are undecided. Both the Democratic and Republican strategists have concluded that the winner on 6 November will be the campaign that fires up its own supporters, that gets its base out, rather than the one that wins over the independent swing voters….

Larry Sabato, professor of politics at the University of Virginia, said: “It is base v base. There are hardly any independents.” At the cost of winning over a percentage of that small group in the centre, the campaigns risked alienating their core support, he said.

This analysis supports my arguments and the historical findings of Barbara Haney; that a conservative candidate may secure more votes than a moderate at certain times in history.  2012 is one of those times.

Is It Too Late To Change Our Minds?
Aren’t Delegates Committed to Voting for Romney?

Apparently, it’s not too late to change our minds, and Republican historian Barbara Haney indicates that in the last 21 Republican conventions where the nominee, like Romney, was not an incumbent President, 43% of presumptive nominees were unseated at the convention.  Romney, too, can be unseated.  There is historically a 43% probability of that.

How Can Somebody Who Has Over 51% of the Delegates be Unseated?

Here comes the next surprise:  RNC convention rules contain some surprises.

Whether it is by the wisdom of our predecessors or by fluke, RNC convention rules appear to allow for delegates to change their minds about candidates between the primaries and the convention.  Although there has been some dispute over this, the 2008 convention raised this issue for a delegate from Utah, and the RNC Legal Counsel Jennifer Sheehan  upheld the freedom of delegates to change their minds, writing:

The RNC does not recognize a state’s binding of national delegates, but considers each delegate a free agent who can vote for whoever they choose.
and
The national convention allows delegates to vote for the individual of their choice, regardless of whether the person’s name is officially placed into nomination or not.

More details on this controversy on Rule 38 at Rule 38.

Why would the architects of democracy allow such uncertainty and reversibility in RNC primary and convention rules?  Presumably they assumed that delegates will be honorable and will not to change their minds frivolously; that they will make a serious effort to vote (in the first ballot) for the candidate they were “bound” to by the primaries. But ultimately, they are allowed to consider events and developments prior to the Republican Convention, and are allowed to change their votes, or to abstain from voting, if they feel it is in the best interests of their constituents.  It could be argued in 2012 that the majority of primary voters wanted a solid conservative to represent them, and Mitt Romney is not that solid conservative. We have the unusual case where delegates could honestly believe that they will be more faithful to the wishes of the people if they abandon Mitt Romney.  It is such an eventuality that would motivate the architects to include some flexibility into the system.  After all, our elected Representatives and Senators are not bound to vote the party line after their election either, and are allowed to use their best judgment in response to developing events.

What Could Motivate a “Bound” Delegate to Change Their Vote or to Abstain?

Internal tension within the Republican Party is undermining the security of Romney’s projected victory.

Ben Swann, a Fox News anchor from Cincinnati, Ohio, produced a segment of Reality Check, explaining why he believes that internal tension within the Republican Party may be undermining the security of Romney’s projected victory. According to Ben Swann’s Reality Check, The Liberty Movement (conservatives who support Ron Paul) is taking over the GOP. Reality Check suggests that the Republican Party might be winning the Texas battle at the moment, but could actually be losing the primary war to conservatives. Some claim that Ron Paul may have recruited as many as 1,000 delegates going into the Tampa convention, reducing the support Romney thinks that he has:
Ron Paul’s not-so-secret plot for the GOP convention– ABC News

Fox Reality Check is not alone in their suspicions.  Newt Gingrich also acknowledged that Ron Paul is the “biggest danger” for Romney in Tampa.  As Ron Paul wins over delegates Romney thought he had, it becomes difficult to make any projections about the convention at all.  For example, 1,144 delegates become only 144 delegates if somebody wins over 1,000 of them.  Extreme example, but illustrates the point.

Very recently, a conservative movement has surfaced issuing an appeal to 20,000 RNC members and delegates at the Convention called DumpRomney.   They propose that dumping Romney would be accomplished by “bound” delegates conscientiously abstaining from voting in the first ballot.  When Romney does not get the required 1144 votes in the first ballot, then all delegates are released to vote their conscience in subsequent ballots, and new candidates can be added to the list of contenders.  Not only can previous contenders like Santorum, Gingrich, Ron Paul and Michelle Bachmann be added, but new names can also be added.  Sarah Palin? Scott Walker? Paul Ryan?  Anybody’s guess.  DumpRomney does not advocate any particular candidate; they simply advocate the dumping of Romney at the RNC convention.

Ron Paul’s campaign has claimed to have won over 500-1,000 delegates. The DumpRomney folks may or may not have success in persuading delegates to abstain in the first ballot.  This split in the Republican Party makes Romney’s nomination in the first ballot very uncertain.

The Battle Is Still On

The present battle for delegates is (not surprisingly) not covered by the mainstream media, who would love to see liberal Romney as the Republican nominee.

The Republican Party is also not advertising the conflict.  Public show of division is rarely wise.

But the battle rages on:

Battle of Gettysburg by Currier & Ives

• Battle over Maine delegates
• Maine Governor threatening to boycott convention
• Battle over Oklahoma delegates 
• Republican activists challenging 20 Ron Paul delegates from Maine 
• 160 convention delegates sued the RNC to be freed from voting for Romney
• Louisiana’s GOP delegate count is being challenged (8-13-12)
• Arguments continue over GOP convention delegates

Why Haven’t We Heard This in the Media?

• Most of the Media is liberal and would love to run against Mitt Romney, who would be challenged to offer anything different from what Obama has offered.
• “Establishment” Republicans are not in a rush to advertise disunity to their opposition.
• Conservatives hoping to make a course correction in the Republican Party are not in a rush to advertise their plans and their tactics.

But now, for those of us who are rooting for a brokered convention, for a replacement of Mitt Romney with a true conservative, for the election of the next Ronald Reagan or Abraham Lincoln, this, 1 week before the Republican Convention, when the plans have been laid and the agenda is set, is a good time to remind everyone to have an open mind and a positive attitude toward the possibility of a brokered convention.

This Convention is Bound to Be Very Exciting

There is no question that this Republican Convention is bound to be very exciting.
It also holds the potential to alter the course of history dramatically.
Let’s presume little: historically speaking, Mitt’s odds are 57:43.
Much is going on behind the scenes that the media is not telling us about.
However, if Mitt does get the nomination, our chances of beating Obama are reduced by a factor of about three.

Can Romney Still Redeem Himself?

Can Mitt Romney convince Republican conservatives that he is capable of the kind of leadership that the fiscal and moral challenges of 2012 demand?

Mitt Romney has already pledged to repeal ObamaCare (which 2/3 of America opposes) and to oppose abortion.  He claims that he will balance the budget, something that is high on American list of priorities.

Romney could also pledge to uphold the values that close to 2/3 of Americans hold:

• Life: 2/3 of Americans oppose federal funding of abortion
• Liberty: more Americans support religious leaders on upholding religious freedom than those who support Obama’s trampling of religious freedom, and 2/3 of Americans want reduced government control of our daily lives
• Marriage: 2/3 of American states have passed amendments protecting traditional marriage.

Mitt Romney could sign the Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life Pledge. He is one of the few Republican candidates who have refused to sign the pledge so far.

Mitt could promise to uphold religious freedom, a freedom that is under threat for the 25% of Americans who are Catholics.

Would Promises Be Believed?

There was a time when political promises carried more weight.   But a new era of political dishonesty has been inaugurated with Obama’s demonstrated ability to about face, and to thumb his nose at his own previous promises.

The lies, reversals, security leaks, and imperial mandates characterizing the Obama administration have led many into shock and disbelief that so much could transpire in less than four years.  Obama rules by issuing mandates each time Congress and the Senate fail to approve the legislation he wants.  No FBI, police, or security force has materialized to challenge Barack Obama on his actions, to label him a traitor, or to drag him off in chains.

The head of the Department of Justice, Eric Holder, panders to Obama’s wishes, fails to protect and enforce the Constitution of the U.S. and it’s laws.  He has been held in contempt of Congress, yet the Department of Justice refuses to prosecute him.

The Department of Homeland Security similarly neglects it’s duties, and seems to be headed by a “liberal sisterhood of plundering hacks” who are consumed in an Animal-House style sexual harassment scandal.

In the past, the news media would also have kept presidents and politicians accountable for their promises.  In 2012, they don’t.  The media clearly has a political agenda, an extremely liberal one not shared by the majority of Americans,  an agenda which 2/3 of America opposes, and the media misuses their profession to misinform the public, attempting to steer them towards liberalism.  Liberal Presidents and politicians get away with more and more lying.  No behavior on the part of liberals shocks the media; neither lies (Obama) nor incompetence (Biden) shock anyone.  Media now actively covers for the liberal politicians whom they favor. They excuse any behavior by candidates who continue to advocate lower and lower standards of morality and accountability in our society.

In this atmosphere, it will be difficult for Romney to acquire the credibility to energize the Republican base and to get them to the polls.  His recent statements in support of gay adoption and gay Boy Scout leaders do little to improve his credibility as a conservative or as a Republican.

Previous to 2012, Romney might have had a better chance to redeem himself.

But today, an alternate, more principled nominee with a history of strong character is more likely to be believed, and would serve both the Republican Party and our nation much better in 2012.

May God Bless, Help, and Direct America!

May God bless, help, and direct America… starting with the Republican Convention on August 27- 30, 2012.
Numerous moral and ethical leaders have indicated that this election is the most important election of a lifetime, an election which will determine the future character of America; strong, responsible and autonomous nation, or bankrupt dissolute welfare state.  The movie 2016 predicts disaster for America if Barack Obama is re-elected on November 6^th.

What’s at Stake: Can the People (2/3 of America) Be Highjacked by Media and Politicians (Democrat and Republican), or Does Our Democratic System Still Work?

Related Subsequent Articles:

The Missing Link – Redefining How We Approach Politics  

AND

Elections 2016 or Taming the Black Swan or Selling Out vs Sticking to Principles

 Cardinal Dolan for President!

or

Is the Republican Primary Over Yet?

The Presidential Race So Far

Mitt Romney - Barack Obama

Recent Gallup polls indicate a neck-in-neck competition between Mitt Romney and Barak Obama in the Presidential race.
Some are worried whether Romney will be able to beat President Barack Obama.
Others are worried whether Romney can be relied upon to repeal ObamaCare and refrain from issuing his own health mandates, if elected to the Presidency.

Solution?

Find someone more conservative and more popular than Mitt Romney!

Cardinal Timothy Dolan

Would anyone have guessed that according to the TIME Person of the Year Poll, Cardinal Dolan is way more popular than either Mitt Romney or Barack Obama?

Cardinal Dolan’s Popularity

Cardinal Dolan placed #16 globally in the TIME Person of the Year Poll, and about #4 nationally.
Cardinal Dolan got almost twice as many votes as Barack Obama, and about 6-fold more votes than Mitt Romney.

More famous people who were less popular than Cardinal Dolan:

• Lady Gaga
• Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona
• Steven Colbert
• Hillary Clinton
• George Cluny
• Sandra Fluke
• Michelle Obama
• Queen Elizabeth II
• Rick Santorum
• Newt Gingrich

Is Anybody in the U.S. More Popular than Cardinal Dolan?

Ron Paul

The only presidential candidate more popular than Cardinal Dolan was Ron Paul.
The only American more popular than both Ron Paul and Cardinal Dolan was Jeremy Lin, a famous baseball player.

Who Else Beat Out Ron Paul and Cardinal Dolan in Popularity?

Not too many people beat Ron Paul and Cardinal Dolan.

Anonymous Recruiting Ad: "Legion"

.

Among those who did globally, were Vladimir Putin and the hackers called Anonymous, reputed to have hacked into the Vatican (and many other national websites).  Of course, in the case of Anonymous, there is the suspicion that they were not voted into #1 position globally, but could have hacked themselves into that position. 🙂

.

Impact on the Republican Primary

Whether these results could impact the Republican Primary, or simply be a reflection of national opinion which can impact the Republican Primary,  is a matter for speculation.

Clearly, neither I, nor anyone else, including Cardinal Dolan, are seriously considering Cardinal Dolan for President.  But this popularity poll is interesting in the light of my previous articles on President Obama and President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Cardinal Dolan.  They have butted heads in an important religious freedom confrontation, and it’s interesting to see which President is so much more popular with Americans.

But back to serious consideration of the Republican Primary.

Most believe that the Republican Primary is all but over.
Some cling tenaciously to alternative possibilities.  These include a Ron Paul, whom many consider to be an ineffective eccentric.

Now, Ron Paul’s ability to top so many national figures in the TIME Person of the Year Poll indicates we should take him much more seriously than we have in the past.  He has beat Cardinal Dolan, Barack Obama, Lady GaGa, Steven Colbert, Hillary Clinton, Queen Elizabeth II, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich.

Could Ron Paul be the next giant political surprise?

Is the Republican Primary Over?

The Republican Primary is Not Yet Over!

There’s already been some discussion of whether the Republican Primary is over yet.
In the light of this TIME poll, and taking into consideration that politics is complicated and is often filled with unexpected surprises and results (like Hillary Clinton’s defeat in 2008 by Barack Obama), in the light of these facts, we better keep an eye on Ron Paul, the pro-life doctor who has delivered over 4,000 babies and now wants to be our President.

Ron Paul shows no signs of giving up.  He is actually making great strides towards taking over state Republican parties and delgations to the Republican National Convention.  His campaign shows no sign of giving up. As of last weekend, Ron Paul has locked up at least half the delegates in at least 3 states (Iowa, Minnesota & Washington).  He only needs the majority of delegates in 2 more states (like North Dakota and Maine) in coming weeks to be entered officially in the nomination at the Convention at Tampa, FL.

Romney, with only 847 if the 1144 delegates needed for the nomination (74%), will still have to contend with Ron Paul for quite some time.

Full Results of the TIME poll:

Is It Over Yet?

So, last night, Romney swept 5 states and may have picked up as many as 200 delegates out of the 231 up for grabs.

Romney needs 1144 delegates to win.
As of last night, he has 844, according to the Associated Press.

Associated Press numbers:

Remaining Primaries:

May 8 – 132 delegates up for grabs, 55 from NC
May 15 – 63 delegates up for grabs, 35 from NE
May 22 – 81 delegates up for grabs, 45 from KY
If Romney got 100% of the delegates from May 8-22, the total would be 1120, still short of the 1144 he needs.
May 29 – 155 delegates up for grabs, all from TX
Jun 5 – 299 delegates up for grabs, 172 from CA
Jun 26 – 40 delegates up for grabs, all from UT

.

When will it be over?

Judging from the numbers above, at earliest it will be over on May 29, and only if Texas, which has winner-takes-all, goes for Romney.  Previously, Texas was likely to lean toward a Tea Party conservative like Santorum.
More likely, it will not be over until Jun 5, when California votes.
It is still possible that that this could go to a brokered convention, although much less likely after Tue, Apr 24th.

Answer: It will not be over until May 29 or perhaps June 5th.

Unless Newt and Paul are persuaded to quit before then.

An Interesting Possibility:

• Say Santorum has quit (so far, he has actually “suspended” his campaign).
• Say Gingrich quits this week (the possibility has been mentioned).
• Say Ron Paul sticks it out to the end, as he has promised.
• Then, say Romney falls short of the 1144 delegates he needs for the nomination (we’ve calculated above that he is likely to struggle to get to that number soon).

Will Ron Paul single-handedly be able to force Romney into a brokered convention?
Somebody should be interviewing Ron Paul and reporting on his intentions.

President Harding had only 20% of the leading candidate’s votes in 1920, yet he ultimately became President.
This will be an exciting election to watch.
Is it to be President Romney, President Paul, or President Obama?
Or will Gingrich stay, and Santorum un-suspend, and all go into a very exciting brokered convention?

The Bottom Line

Of course, probability is on the side of a Romney nomination and a Romney-Obama fight.
In which case, I plan to put all my energies behind Romney.

May God steer us wherever America needs to go.

Four Years Ago: Hillary, Like Romney, Was the Presumed Candidate

or

Where is This Election Headed?

Hillary for President

.

April 22, 2008:

In April of 2008, Hillary and Barak were neck-in-neck.  Hillary won the Pennsylvania Primary.  Then the Clinton campaign raised another $10 million.
Hillary and Barak continued to battle it out, about 1 percentage point apart, as they had been throughout the primary campaign. Hillary had been the presumed nominee for quite some time before the primary, and many believed that she could not lose.

Obama was giving her a run for her money and edging her out, but only by about 1%, and neither Hillary nor supporters were ready to concede.  The race was close. Estimated Delegate Score Card over time can be found here.
The media was not talking about the primary “dragging out,” or about any need to “coalesce behind one candidate” yet.

The battle continued until  Obama had enough delegates to win the primary, and he only won by a very slim margin.  Hillary only conceded on June 7, 2008, 4 days after Barak secured enough delegates to claim the nomination on June 3, 2008.

Who is Leading the Republican Primary Race Today?

Short Answer: Depends on who’s counting and depends on how you classify the votes.

Who’s Counting?
If the mainstream media and the Republican establishment are counting (Romney supporters), Romney is the leading candidate.  If Conservatives,Tea Party, and evangelicals are counting, the race is way too young to call.  50-60% of the delegates have not yet been assigned, and anything could happen.  It’s much too early to tell.

Mitt Romney vs Conservatives Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, and Ron Paul

How Do You Classify the Votes?
If all four candidates attract a random segment of the American vote, and Santorum’s recent bowing out spreads the votes evenly among all candidates, then Romney is winning.
But if Conservatives are wedded to voting for conservatives like Santorum/Gingrich/Paul, and moderates are voting for Romney, then the exit of one conservative candidate will swing all the conservative votes to the next conservative candidate, and not to Romney.  That is certainly the case with my vote: in the first place, my vote goes to Santorum.  Failing that, to Gingrich.  Failing that to Paul.  Finally, failing that, to Romney. By this argument (see chart below), Romney has only 23-25% of the vote so far, and the Conservatives have 16-26% of the vote.  Again, way too early to call.  Conservatives and Romney neck-in-neck, and we have not even heard from 49-61% of America yet!

Uncertainty in the Delegate Counts

The Media has been very quick to assign delegates which are in any way uncertain, uncommitted or disputed, to Romney.  Why? That will be discussed later below.  Those mainstream media counts can be found at Wikipedia.
Conservative counts, on the other hand are made by more stringent criteria.  The Santorum campaign count, for example, shows remarkably different numbers.

The bottom line is, however, that with 49 to 61% of the delegates still unassigned, and with conservative states like Texas (155 delegates available with winner-takes-all) still in the offing, the race if far from over, unless the media (and the Republican establishment) manages to convince everyone that the race is over before it really is.

Here is the range of numbers claimed by various sources, depending on your source of delegate counts and assignment of contested delegates:

.

Bottom Line Today:

Conservatives could be leading Romney by a much larger margin than Barak had on Hillary in 2008.

Lessons for us from 2008’s Democrat Primary

Why are some conservatives giving up?
Do they believe the media already?
Do they want to let the Republican establishment to steer the nomination, instead of the voters steering it?
It’s still early, and the race is far from over.
It’s not over until the fat lady sings (me).  🙂

Stay in there, Rick/Newt/Ron!

A conservative coalition (if you go by Rick Santorum’s numbers) is leading with a slight edge against Romney so far, just as Barak was leading against Hillary in April 2008.
If you guys stay in there, you can prevent Romney from getting the 1144 delegates he needs for the nomination. BTW, Rick’s suspended campaign could also be un-suspended at a later date.

Then, when nobody has the required 1144 delegates, the process starts again at the brokered convention.  As the candidates with least delegates are eliminated, it will boil down to one conservative against Romney, and that conservative will have a great chance of defeating Romney. America is ready for a real change.

The delegate counts so far tell us that Americans are definitely waffling on Romney; they prefer a true conservative. Tea Party candidates, evangelicals, and many other conservatives are nervous about Romney’s liberal past and the reliability of his new found conservative “conversion.”
We’ve just had a taste of somebody who promises one thing but delivers quite another- Obama.
Not to say that Romney’s recent commitments to conservatism are not appreciated or are not genuine.
We’re just a bit nervous about how reliable Romney’s recent “conversion” to conservatism is, given his past.

Time to Put America Ahead of Personal Success

Rick/Newt/Ron should team up to stay in the race for the sole purpose of preventing Romney from acquiring the 1144 delegates he needs for nomination.  In 1920, there was a brokered convention where the previous underdog candidate eventually won. There would still be hope of putting a true conservative in the White House.  Even if a particular candidate is not that person, they will have contributed to the restoration of our great nation by contributing to the election of another conservative.

.

.

What Have You Got Against Mitt Romney?

Well, up front let us say that if Mitt Romney is nominated, we should all back him, campaign for him, and elect him as President of the United States.
Why? Because he has stated that he will oppose federal funding of abortion, that he will repeal ObamaCare, and that he will promote fiscal responsibility and limited government.  As opposed to Obama, who has stated (and done) the complete opposite.

But given Mitt Ronmey’s past positions, I’m just a bit nervous about how reliable Romney’s recent “conversion” to conservatism is.  In my mind, the Presidency should be given to someone we are very sure of.  More discussion of Romney at Committment to Truth; Romney vs Santorum.

Why mention “social issues” before “economic issues?”

“Social issues” (morality) come before economic issues because common sense and wisdom tell us what God already knows: that social issues drive the economics of a nation, and are the springboard from which a stable economy develops.  If you kill all your future citizens, your economy will not prosper.  If you overspend on an inefficient blundering health care system which provides free abortion, contraception and sterilization, your economy will take a blow. If you deny citizens freedom of conscience, sweeping Catholic hospital closings may result.  “Social issues” are the first domino with the power to take the entire economy down.

Judeo-Christian morality, on which conservatism and the Constitution of the United States are based, is a success manual given to us by a loving God, which provides the wisdom needed to avoid pitfalls both personal and national.

Why Would the Media or the Republican Establishment Want to Steer Us Towards Romney?

It’s pretty clear that Romney is much less conservative than the other Republican options.  He has supported abortion in the past, as well as supported socialized medicine, which became a template for ObamaCare.  Of course, the liberal media, as well as the liberal billionaires who fund the liberal media, would prefer Romney to the more conservative candidates, just in case Obama loses.  Hard to imagine that billionaires like George Soros, who make a hobby of attempting to steer global values with their accumulated billions, would not at least cover their bets partially in both parties, Democrat and Republican.

As for the Republican establishment, there are some who are comfortably entrenched in the less-than-perfect Republican establishment and who fear the effect that too much change and too many cuts may have on their comfort.  There are also those who fail to realize that the dynamics have changed in this election, that so many people are so much more committed and  involved in this election. That a giant has awoken.  They fear that they will lose voters in the middle if they offer a strong and  principled candidate who has demonstrated a reliable track record of conservatism.

Where are We Headed?

Time, and American voters, particularly today in the pirmaries, will determine where we are headed.
It is my hope that we still have a chance to elect a conservative to defeat Obama at the end of the day.
If not, my efforts will shift to praying for Romney’s strength and his commitment to the Judeo-Christian values on which this nation was founded. Romney has not been vetted or even questioned on his support of Judeo-Christian values. See Committment to Truth; Romney vs Santorum .

If voters have already jumped on board with Mitt Romney tonight, it will be a (premature) victory for the media and for the Republican establishment.  It will be a sad moment for those true conservatives who had hoped to return to the important “social issues” which determine the success of everything else.

May God bless and guide America!
May God bless and guide the Republican Primary winner!

Rick: No Quit

(click image for report)

WHY NO QUIT?

Because the Media is reporting the wrong math on delegate counts, and Rick Santorum actually has 60% as many delegates as Mitt Romney, with an outstanding forecast for primaries held in May (such as Texas).
Because  Romney only has 25% of the delegates so far, and he needs 50% (1144) for nomination; and if Rick, Newt and Ron continue, Romney will never get the 1144 delegates he needs to become the nominee.  A man who cannot get 50% of the Republican votes should not be the nominee.

WHAT HAPPENS IF ROMNEY DOES NOT GET THE 1144 DELEGATES HE NEEDS?

A “brokered convention,” in which a process of elimination eventually isolates one candidate with a majority of the delegate votes. In 1920, this process allowed a man who had only 20% of the front runner’s delegates to win.  Why? The Romney opponents are now split among Santorum, Gingrich and Paul.  The Romney opponents still outnumber the Romney supporters.  The brokered convention sorts out (with several rounds of votes), which of the three non-Romneys is favored by the American voter.

WHO GETS TO COOSE THE REPUBLICAN NOMINEE– THE MEDIA, THE REPUBLICAN ESTABLISHMENT, OR THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES?

The press, together with the “establishment” Republicans, should not be choosing the Republican nominee.
Rich liberals and liberal media would love to exert pressure on Rick Santorum, a true conservative, to leave the race at this point.
However, the American people, through the primary process, including the brokered convention, should be choosing the nominee.  The “establishment” Republicans are too busy doing business as usual, which includes tiptoeing around moderates and liberals, to realize that this election is different, that America has woken up and wants a return to the Constitution and to Liberty, and that a luke-warm wishy-washy candidate like Mitt Romney is not likely to provide that or to defeat Obama.

ON WITH THE PRIMARIES, ON TO A BROKERED CONVENTION!

My call: Romney does not get the 50% delegates he needs to be nominated before the convention.
The non-Romneys will get the 50% they need to enter the brokered convention process, sharing 51% or more of the delegates among themselves (Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul).  None of them will have 1144 delegates individually, but together conservatives will outnumber Romney.   At the brokered convention,  the competition will begin again.
Conservatives will win the competition, and one of the 3 non-Romneys will be elected as the Republican nominee at the brokered convention– GUESS WHICH ONE?

Rick No Quit Santorum

.

RICK: NO QUIT

Only a fool would quit at this point.  Exactly what Obama and his media would love to persuade Rick to do.

VOTE FOR RICK NO QUIT SANTORUM: HE WON’T QUIT ON THE UNITED STATES.

.

Top Republican Officials Have Decided They No Longer Want to Wait Around for an Official Nominee?

or

Are We Still Living in a Democracy?

or

Republican Party Issues a Mandate

.

.

.

From today’s Wall Street Journal:

Top Republican officials have decided they no longer want to wait around for an official nominee.

WHAT?!

Do radicals own the Republican Party, too?
What happened to the people’s vote?
With only 45% of the votes in, and the conservative candidate Santorum seriously gaining on the author of RomneyCare, Republican Officials are now issuing a mandate?

God help us!

BTW…

• Romney’s advisors helped craft ObamaCare
• Politifact.com agrees that ObamaCare is virtually identical to RomneyCare
• Romney is the only candidate who refused to sign the Susan B. Anthony Presidential Candidate Pro-Life Pledge.
  

  Rick Santorum Won Iowa on the Lowest Budget; He Will also Run the U.S. without Wasting Our Money

What to Do:

Vote for Rick Santorum, a conservative who still respects the Constitution and the will of the people.
There is still hope.
The people can still (just barely) recover control of this nation.

and PRAY like your life depended on it; it does.

Calling the shots

>

Fortune cookie:

This is your day to call the shots, so you should.

O.K., if I had an ounce of self-restraint left before the Wisconsin primary coming up this Tuesday, this fortune cookie just eliminated it.
I’m going to call the shots.
What shots would I like to call today?
The 2012 Presidential election, of course.
Something I have little control over, so the results are bound to be amusing.

Calling the Shots

If you call the shots, you are in charge and you tell people what to do.
But calling the shots can also mean using a psychological trick: you “call the shot” in advance, forecasting a result, hoping to influence people’s choices, so that you encourage your favored result.

Calling the Shots in Advance

And that seems to be what the Republican Party is doing right now- calling the shots in advance.
The Republican establishment probably never planned that Mitt Romney would get serious competition from any of his running mates, and now that he’s getting some serious competition from Rick Santorum, they are scrambling to discourage that.  They are bringing out the big guns, party leaders who are endorsing Mitt Romney prematurely, when Mitt has only 565 of the necessary 1144 delegates to win the primary.

Republicans have not bargained on an awakening of the American people, a scenario in which politicians on BOTH sides of the aisle would have to become more responsive to their electorates (and responsive to Tea Party supporters) than they previously had been.  It’s a lot easier to sit in comfy chairs making small polite concessions to opponents followed by socializing after work, than to implement the big changes and make the big cuts that many Americans want in 2012, and which will cut some of the frills in Washington, too.

So many Republicans are rallying behind Mitt Romney prematurely, hoping to discourage Rick Santorum, and hoping that Rick Santorum will concede and quit.  This would avoid a long, drawn-out primary, followed by a “brokered” or “contested” convention, during which the Republican establishment will have less control over the results, and the American people will have more control over the results.

Election 2008

Calling the shots in advance did not work so well 4 years ago, when everybody was forecasting that Hillary Clinton would be the nominee. Obama was a nobody.  Yet we have President Nobody issuing mandates today, and the Supreme Court struggling to read the 2700 pages of his NobodyCares for ObamaCare. Calling the Shots in advance backfired on the Democrats in 2008.

Election 1920

President Harding

Then there was President Harding in 1920, who was a nobody with only 20% of the candidates compared with his opponent (General Leonard Wood) in the primary.  If anybody were calling the shots in advance back then, he would have lost the primary.  But what happened?  Nobody won the initial race,  and they went to a contested or brokered convention, where Harding got 70% of the votes and became President.

Election 2012

Now, for the first time since 1920, we could be heading for a contested or brokered convention again. Although Mitt Romney unquestionably has the most delegates at this time, it is not clear whether Romney will be able to reach the 1144 required to win.

1144 out of 2286 total delegates are needed to win; Romney has 565; Santorum has 256; Gingrich has 141; Paul has 66, and thus 1258 delegates are still up for grabs.  In other words, any candidate, including one starting with zero delegates today, could still be the winner.

Top Republicans are panicking and calling for an end to the primary battle, uniting behind Romney.

Newt Gingrich has slowed down his campaign, planning to sit out the fight between Romney and Santorum, then join back in for the contested convention.

Rick Santorum vows to stay in the race, even if he does not win Wisconsin this Tuesday.

My Call

Everybody wants to forecast events before they occur.  I will join them.

Gallup Polls

• Santorum is rapidly gaining on Romney:   Gallup Polls indicate that Romney and Santorum are competing closely, and are alternating in the lead during the last two months.

• Santorum plans to stay in the election.  So, there could well be a brokered convention.

• Santorum is a true conservative. Tea party likes him.  Evangelicals like him.

• Gallup also says that most Americans are conservative:  40% conservative, 35% moderate, and only 21% liberal.   Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.

• Romney is a question mark.  Romney has a shifting record that does not guarantee his sticking to promises any better than Obama has done. He takes direction well and changes direction well.  He would be better than Obama, but not better than Santorum.

• Even Gingrich is expecting a brokered convention; in fact, he is counting on it, while he takes a breather.

Put it all together, and I say:

• There will be a brokered convention.  Romney will not get 1144 delegates.  Santorum will not quit the primary.

• At the brokered convention, people will choose what they want: a conservative, Rick Santorum.

• The Republican establishment will have to make a correction to accommodate the Tea Party: less frills for everyone in Washington.

• Santorum will decimate Obama in the November election.  Even moderates have stopped liking Obama; he has simply gone
  

  Rick Santorum

  too far for everyone. D’Souza has branded Obama as an anti-colonialist whose goal is to readjust America’s standing in the world – not in a positive direction.  When the movie 2016 comes out this summer, Obama’s presidency will be over.

• We will all celebrate the fact that our system of government did in fact protect the people of the United States as the Founding Fathers designed it to do.

Vote for Rick Santorum for President!

>

And if I’m Wrong?

If I am wrong, Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee.

If he beats Obama, since trying to prove why he is different from Obama on central issues like ObamaCare and Abortion will not be easy, he will do one of two things:

Fulfill all the promises he made during the election, unlike his predecessor Obama.

or

Change his mind and continue Obama’s policies, or something akin to them.

>

Santorum Equals Sanity

or

The Cap Times Published My Letter

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

The Cap Times Published My Letter

The Cap Times Published My Letter, which reads:

Santorum Family

Santorum Equals Sanity

Dear Editor: President Obama is out of control.

He is plagued by spending illness, and now it seems by delusions of grandeur, palling around with Russians in defiance of his electorate.

Mitt Romney is a giant question mark. “A political and cultural enigma,” according to Neil .Swidey.

Rick Santorum represents all the values most Americans have grown up with and admire: responsibility, thriftiness, honesty, truthfulness, faithfulness, and he’s a devoted .family man.

No wonder America is flocking to Santorum against all campaign spending predictions. If . Santorum wins, it will be proof that the Founding Fathers constructed a system that does . allow the people to control their own destiny.

Syte Reitz
Madison

.

Why did the Cap Times Publish a Conservative Letter?

When a liberal newspaper like the Cap Times, which is called the Progressive Voice of Madison, WI publishes a conservative letter endorsing Rick Santorum,  something is up.

• They could be filling a quota of “conservative” items to prove how “balanced” their reporting is.
• They could be setting up the conservative author for ridicule (a favorite pastime for Madison’s radical liberals).
• Or, they could actually be reporting in earnest, reflecting the fact that President Obama has really gone too far, and even the progressives of Madison are scratching their heads.

.

Unlikely?

Not according to the Wall Street Journal, in an article entitled Not-So-Smooth Operator, in which Peggy Noonan states that Obama is increasingly coming across as devious and dishonest.  She reports that the “broad, stable, nonradical, non-birther right” is starting to dislike President Obama personally.  A dislike that is arising solely from Obama’s own behavior, that of an “operator who’s not operating in good faith.”

.

According to Noonan, this shift toward disliking President Obama started with his devious behavior over the contraception mandate, and continues to be fueled with recent events such as the open-mic conversation with Russian President Medvedev and with his personalization and manipulation of the the tragic death of Trayvon Martin.

.

Some of My Best Friends are Liberal

I am surrounded with liberals in Madison, WI, home of the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

I am surrounded with liberals among my relatives, many of whom are products of University propaganda machines.

I myself was a product of a University propaganda machine quite similar to UW Madison; the State University of New York at Stony Brook.   And yes, the propaganda worked at first.

.

I am aware of the fact that most liberals are very nice and well-intentioned people.

But I am also aware of the fact that a radical element has taken over leadership among liberals, an element that is extreme and dangerous, and which is leading the Democrat Party, a party which used to be equally good/bad as the Republican Party, to ridiculous and dangerous extremes.

.

I have confidence in the good people of this country, the majority, the non-radicals, on both right and left.  We have more in common with each other than we do with our respective far rights or far lefts.

80% of us pray regularly.  80% of us are broad, stable, and non-radical. 80% of us look for logic and for reason.

.

Broad, Stable, Non-radical, Right and/or Left

Caught in own snare

My fondness of, and my confidence in my “broad, stable, non-radical, non-Marxist left” friends, has led me to blog on conservative issues, laying out the logic and explaining some of the foundations of  conservative thought which I have unearthed during my recovery from my University brainwashing.  Confident that truth and logic wins over reasonable people, I chip away at the misinformation spread by conniving radical leaders like Pelosi and Obama.

.

Now, based on Peggy Noonan’s argument, Obama is actually doing the job of dismantling his agenda himself.  Much faster than we could dismantle the lies the left has been spreading.  Obama is shooting himself in the foot; he is stepping into his own snares.  I do not enjoy watching a man self-destruct, any man.  But it does give me hope for the non-radical, normal and healthy future of America; a future determined by the people, not by a radical dictator.

.

.

Back to Reality

Back to my Cap Times letter.

Democrats Voting in the Republican Primary?

.

I know that the editors of the Cap Times are not likely to be broad, stable, non-radical left types like my neighbors, friends and relatives.

.

Yes, I know, there’s a fourth possibility, the most likely one: that the Cap Times decided that support of Santorum would be most damaging to the upcoming Wisconsin Primary, and that by publishing my letter they would influence voters, both conservatives and also the liberals who plan to sneak in to manipulate the primary as well, to vote for Santorum.  They think that Santorum will have a lesser chance of defeating Obama in November.

.

But they, too, will soon be stepping into their own snares.

That’s what radicals do best.  Set snares for others, but get caught in them themselves.

.

An Invisible Player

And, most important, there is a invisible player, God.  And God has a wicked sense of humor.

I am watching political developments with great anticipation, as America continues to pray.

.

It would be wickedly satisfying to see the Constitution of the United States, which was based on the Ten Commandments and on Judeo-Christian morality, and which was written by the Founding Fathers centuries ago, still allowing us, the people, to take charge of our own destiny and to defeat the efforts of power-mongers on both sides.

.

The broad, stable, non-radicals of both right and left who value Christianity over Marxism, and who value real tolerance over imposition of radical values, could back a man like Rick Santorum, who does not advocate imposing his views on others, but advocates hands-off government.

.

Some think that Rick Santorum is too conservative.

But good, broad, stable, non-radical conservatives such as Rick Santorum (and such as me) do not try to legislate their views onto others.

They are tolerant.

Tolerant with limits: the Constitution of the United States defines the limits.

And that’s a very good thing.

.

Constitutional Limits

McNaughton: One Nation Under Socialism

The limits of the Constitution are Judeo-Christian limits.

These are the limits that radicals want to test and to reverse.

.

.

.

.