Thursday, March 21, 2013

Obama's 2013 Bracket

ESPN reports that Barack Obama has filled out his brackets for the NCAA tournament, picking Louisville to go all the way.

It's that time of year.

It's also that time of year when the President submits a budget request to Congress. And while he hasn't submitted it to Congress yet, Obama has devised a method to not only help focus his decisions, but also to organize the process in a way that is familiar to him. Here is where he has ended up:

Obama's 2013 Bracket

Clicking the image will take you to the Flickr page for the photo - clicking here will take you directly to the 1024x968 size of the image, probably best for viewing in detail.

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

What The Sequester Hath Wrought

Sequester!

Obama warned us the dire consequences of the Sequester! would be, um, dire. And so far about all we have is White House tours being cancelled to show for it. And now that everyone is laughing at him and not with him for his Chicken Littleism (as opposed to his Barackadoodledoo of 2008), where do we find ourselves?

Using TreasuryDirect.gov, and their "Debt to the Dime" application let's take a look at the total U.S. Debt compared to previous years, and see what effect the Sequester! might have had on it this year.

Where did the total U.S. debt stand at the first week day of March (when the Sequester! took effect this year) compared to the sixth week day of March?

2009
March 2: $10,942,165,294,650.80
March 9: $10,952,663,030,603.40
Added to debt: $10,497,735,952.60
Debt increased 0.096%

2010
March 1: 12,507,536,462,861.oo
March 8: 12,546,372,001,879.70
Added to debt: $38,835,539,018.70
Debt increased 0.31%

2011
March 1: $14,172,957,589,856.60
March 8: $14,193,176,753,471.60
Added to debt: $20,219,163,615.00
Debt increased: 0.143%

2012
March 1: $15,501,014,716,143.70
March 8: $15,517,794,642,311.20
Added to debt: $16,779,926,167.50
Debt increased: 0.108%

So, there's a baseline. How does 2013 fare in comparison, now that we are under the scourge of the cut-spending-to-the-bone Sequester!?

2013
March 1: $16,640,135,316,625.30
March 8: $16,701,846,937,879.70
Added to debt: $61,711,621,254.40
Debt increased: 0.371%

Well that's some real belt-tightening, not to mention eye-popping, austerity right there.

Or something.

Saturday, March 9, 2013

Wacko Birds

It certainly wasn't an original idea -- see this article at Reason -- but once McCain called Rand Paul and those who supported his filibuster "wacko birds," me doing this was inevitable:

Wacko Birds

But forget the photoshop. If I could just get a programmer to develop an app for Wacko Birds...........

Bottom Story of the Day: Look Out Below! Can a Blog Get James Taranto to Fall for a Stunt by Writing a Headline with a Question Nobody Is Asking, Like "Hey, Kids! What Time Is It?" and in Doing So Provide an Example of the Lonely Lives of Columnists? Now That Would Be News - You Can Use

On Wednesday, I was quoted in James Taranto's Best of the Web Today feature at the Wall Street Journal based on an old 2008 post. If you are not familiar with Taranto's work, the title of this post could be a little bit confusing.

In his lead topic, Taranto was discussing how impotent Obama has become as highlighted by his "I am not a dictator" quote earlier in the week. Taranto was tackling an article by Ryan Lizza at the New Yorker who was arguing it's not Obama's fault. Here's the quote:

Contrary to Lizza's account, Obama seemed to understand this before his election. In September 2008, as blogger Jeff Dobbs noted, CBS's Steve Kroft asked the junior U.S. senator from Illinois why he thought he would be a good president. Obama answered: "I'm a practical person. One of the things I'm good at is getting people in a room with a bunch of different ideas who sometimes violently disagree with each other and finding common ground and a sense of common direction."

Of course, read the whole thing. Taranto has long been one of my favorites, and his daily article is must reading. I used to fire stuff off to him all the time and get counted among the people credited at the end of the piece. But notably, this marks the second time my name has been used in the article itself, the last occuring in 2007 when I had a John Edwards joke that struck his fancy.

Interesting, that. In 2007, a John Edwards joke on my blog was picked up by the late Dean Barnett for my first ever mention at the Weekly Standard. Dean became a good friend and helped me in my blogging considerably. The interesting thing tying these events together is that the post Taranto quoted on Wednesday was also quoted in 2008 by Dean at the Weekly Standard, in a post he called The Post Partisan Easter Bunny. The email conversation around that post between Dean and me was the last we had before Dean passed away. That post was made on October 1, 2008. On October 2 Dean made his last post at the Weekly Standard before his death.

Friday, March 8, 2013

Obama The Friendly Host

Obama hosted several Senate Republicans this week for a very nice dinner. The dinner coincided with a 13 hour filibuster from Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, in which he was objecting to the nomination of John Brennan for director of CIA over the lack of an answer from Obama and his administration over the use of drones domestically.

Some of those in attendance at the dinner with Obama made their way to the Senate floor in support of Paul after the dinner was over. Others, notably John McCain of Arizona and Linsdey Graham of South Carolina did not. In fact, not only did they not support Paul's filibuster, they have been attacking him ever since.

Obama's twitter feed showed that he really enjoyed the dinner with the Republicans.

Obama tweets about his dinner with Senate Republicans

After the dinner, reports came out that Obama picked up the tab. But apparently the Sequester, which has already caused Obama and the administration to cancel tours of the White House, also affected Obama's ability to tip his servers.

Obama went to dinner with Senate Republicans

Tuesday, December 25, 2012

A Savior Is Born

Matthew 1:18-24

18 This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. 19 Because Joseph her husband was faithful to the law, and yet did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.

20 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.”

22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23 “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).

24 When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife.

Luke 1:26-34

26 God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27 to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. 28 The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”

29 Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. 30 But the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary; you have found favor with God. 31 You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, 33 and he will reign over Jacob’s descendants forever; his kingdom will never end.”

34 “How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?”

Luke 1:35-45

35 The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God. 36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. 37 For no word from God will ever fail.”

38 “I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May your word to me be fulfilled.” Then the angel left her.

39 At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, 40 where she entered Zechariah’s home and greeted Elizabeth. 41 When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. 42 In a loud voice she exclaimed: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! 43 But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44 As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. 45 Blessed is she who has believed that the Lord would fulfill his promises to her!”

Luke 1:46-55

46 And Mary said:
“My soul glorifies the Lord

47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,

48 for he has been mindful
of the humble state of his servant.
From now on all generations will call me blessed,

49 for the Mighty One has done great things for me—
holy is his name.

50 His mercy extends to those who fear him,
from generation to generation.

51 He has performed mighty deeds with his arm;
he has scattered those who are proud in their inmost thoughts.

52 He has brought down rulers from their thrones
but has lifted up the humble.

53 He has filled the hungry with good things
but has sent the rich away empty.

54 He has helped his servant Israel,
remembering to be merciful

55 to Abraham and his descendants forever,
just as he promised our ancestors.”

Luke 2:1-12

1 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. 2 (This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria.) 3 And everyone went to their own town to register.

4 So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. 5 He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child. 6 While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, 7 and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no guest room available for them.

8 And there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night. 9 An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified.

10 But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid. I bring you good news that will cause great joy for all the people. 11 Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord. 12 This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger.”

Luke 2:13-21

13 Suddenly a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God and saying,

14 “Glory to God in the highest heaven,
and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.”

15 When the angels had left them and gone into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, “Let’s go to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has told us about.”

16 So they hurried off and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby, who was lying in the manger. 17 When they had seen him, they spread the word concerning what had been told them about this child, 18 and all who heard it were amazed at w

hat the shepherds said to them. 19 But Mary treasured up all these things and pondered them in her heart.

20 The shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things they had heard and seen, which were just as they had been told.

21 On the eighth day, when it was time to circumcise the child, he was named Jesus, the name the angel had given him before he was conceived.

Matthew 2:1-11

1 After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod, Magi from the east came to Jerusalem 2 and asked, “Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.”

3 When King Herod heard this he was disturbed, and all Jerusalem with him. 4 When he had called together all the people’s chief priests and teachers of the law, he asked them where the Messiah was to be born.

5 “In Bethlehem in Judea,” they replied, “for this is what the prophet has written:

6 “‘But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;
for out of you will come a ruler
who will shepherd my people Israel.’”

7 Then Herod called the Magi secretly and found out from them the exact time the star had appeared. 8 He sent them to Bethlehem and said, “Go and search carefully for the child. As soon as you find him, report to me, so that I too may go and worship him.”

9 After they had heard the king, they went on their way, and the star they had seen when it rose went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was.

10 When they saw the star, they were overjoyed. 11 On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasures and presented him with gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh.

---------------------------

Philippians 2:5-11

5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

Colossians 1:15-22

15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

21 Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior. 22 But now he has reconciled you by Christ’s physical body through death to present you holy in his sight, without blemish and free from accusation

Saturday, December 22, 2012

Merry Christmas

This was the second annual Luminary night in our neighborhood, organized by my lovely bride.

Luminaries 2012

It is our way of welcoming Santa. This year, the Keeper of the Naughty and Nice List rode through the neighborhood on a fire truck.

Santa Visits the Neighborhood - on a Fire Truck

Monday, November 19, 2012

Obama's Voter Repression

I promised myself I wasn't going to do this. But when it comes to promises I make to myself, I keep them at an almost Obamaian rate.

Oh well. Let's continue on with some election results and exit polls.

Another way to slice the data -- by Ideology. Because looking at it by Party doesn't tell us nearly as much as one might think. If Romney got fewer Republicans than McCain, how do we know whether this was truly "the base" staying home because they weren't sufficiently "fired up"? When I'm referring to "the base", I'm referring to . . . ta da . . . Ideology. Take me, for example. I am very conservative. But I am also a registered Independent. Were I to be exit-polled, my vote would not show up as Republican, but it would be Conservative. By what I would consider a rational definition of a Republican candidate's "base", I should be included.

A number of Republicans may have stayed home -- at this point Romney has about 160K fewer Republican votes than McCain got -- but was it "the base"?

Well.

Conservatives turned out at 35% of voters in 2012 vs 34% in 2008.
Moderates were 41% in 2012 vs 44% in 2008
Liberals were 25% in 2012 vs 22% in 2008

Moderates stayed home, and Liberals picked up the slack.

But let's break it down, shall we?

The Liberals who came out were less liberal in how they voted.

The Overall Liberal vote in 2012 was Obama 86%, Romney 11% and Other 3%
The Overall Liberal vote in 2008 was Obama 89%, McCain 10% and Other 1%

In 2012, 2M more Liberals voted than in 2008.

For those 2M -- the race roughly broke down:

Obama: 980K | 48.9%
Romney: 570K | 28.4%
Other: 480K | 24.1%

The mechanics of breaking down the Liberal vote this way is very crude. It starts with the assumption that the "first" 28.9M Liberals (the number of Liberals voting in 2008) voted exactly as they did in 2008. It then takes the 2M more Liberals who came out in 2012, and breaks down their votes in the ratios necessary to get to the Overall 2012 split between Obama-Romney-Other. The votes didn't actually come in that way, of course. But I present it in this manner just to illustrate the contrast between 2008 and 2012.

The Moderates who did come out out broke heavily for Other compared to 2008, but Romney lost way fewer than Obama.

The Overall Moderate vote in 2012 was Obama 56%, Romney 41%, Other 3%
The Overall Moderate vote in 2008 was Obama 60%, McCain 39%, Other 1%

In 2012 there were 6.8M fewer Moderates than in 2008

Obama got 5.9M fewer Moderate votes
Romney got 1.6M fewer Moderate votes
Other got 700K more Moderate votes

The Conservatives who came out were more conservative in how they voted.

The Overall Conservative vote in 2012 was Obama 17%, Romey 82%, Other 1%
The Overall Conservative vote in 2008 was Obama 20%, McCain 78%, Other 2%

In 2012 there were 1.2M fewer Conservatives than in 2008.

Obama got 1.4M fewer Conservative votes
Romney got 830K more Conservative votes
Other got 675K fewer Conservative votes

Essentially, Obama lost 100% of the Conservative votes who came out in 2008 and stayed home in 2012.

Between the Moderates and Conservatives who stayed home, it would appear a vast majority of them were 2008 Obama voters who chose not to participate in the 2012 election. It would also appear that the 2008 Republican votes that Romney did not secure compared to McCain were Moderate in ideology.

Obama went completely negative with Bain and the 47%, with the made up war on women and birth control, with anything at hand to avoid a focus on his record by focusing on very emotive appeals in a smearing of Romney. It was a very disciplined effort to convince voters he knew had no appetite for repeating their vote for him that Romney was not worth getting off the couch and going to the polls for.

Obama deliberately ran a Repress As Many Votes As Necessary To Keep Potential Romney Voters Home. And he ran it successfully.

Saturday, November 17, 2012

Obama Wins. Thanks To Sandy?

Well. The election is over. I've been wading my way through the vote results and exit polls in an almost unhealthy manner. If you want to know how many fewer votes Obama got vs 2008, I can tell you (6.3M as of now). If you want to know how many fewer Republicans voted for Romney vs McCain, I can tell you (346K as of now). If you want to know in which states Romney improved vs McCain in 2008, I can tell you (all but AK, LA, MS, NJ). And on and on.

So. Why did Romney lose?

After reading the post election analysis at Gallup, it just may be that a natural disaster played a prominent, if not deciding role.

The Gallup analysis:

Romney clearly gained as a result of the first debate in Denver, and he held onto at least a marginal lead position in our polling until the week before the election, when Superstorm Sandy hit. Obama gained five points on the gap between our last pre-storm polling and the final poll. It may be that he continued to gain on into Election Day.

If you want to know how Hurricane Sandy affected the election, well, here we go. Because, it's right there in the exit polls.

  • 15% of voters said Obama's response to Sandy was "the most important factor" in their vote.
  • Of that percentage, 73% voted for Obama.

  • Now I don't believe that every person who said Sandy was the most important factor was a true on-the-fence-sitter who then decided to vote for Obama. Or a former Romney supporter who switched. Or a definite sitter-outer who decided to get off the couch and vote. Many of them were going to vote for Obama regardless.

    But what is 73% of 15%?

    10.95%

    I believe some number of those who said Obama's response to Sandy was the most important factor in their vote were lying. But what if those who were lying made up a little more than half of those who made such a claim. In other words, they were on Team O all along. That would leave us with just under half of them who made their decision on voting for president based upon a guy in a bomber jacket at an appearance with a fat Republican pretending to care about storm victims for a few minutes to get a photo op.

    Could Obama really have won the election because of Hurricane Sandy? Gallup says that Obama gained five points after Sandy. The national popular vote ended up with Obama leading with less than three points.

    And this nation is faced with another four years of Obama in the White House.

    Tuesday, October 30, 2012

    Defense . . . D-Fence

    Here's the headline from a Hot Air post today:

    Halperin: Democrats now on defense in blue states

    Well, here's Obama campaigning in Michigan:

    D-Fence

    Looks like some Obama supporters know they're on defense.

    (from an old 2008 post)

    Thursday, October 25, 2012

    Fun With Early Voting In North Carolina, "How Do You Like Them Apples?" Edition

    With voting totals through yesterday, North Carolina marks one week of early voting that includes in-person votes cast.

    With that, we can do an apples-to-apples comparison between 2012 and 2008. All numbers below for both 2012 and 2008 are through one week of in person early voting, and have been pulled from the North Carolina State Board of Elections website.

    Overall vote:
    2008: 759,238
    2012: 991,794
    Difference: +232,556
    Number of votes cast is up +30.6%

    Republicans:
    2008: 196,242
    2012: 302,687
    Difference +106,445
    Number of votes is up 54.2%

    Democrats:
    2008: 429,662
    2012: 502,856
    Difference: 73,194
    Number of votes is up 17.0%

    Other:
    2008: 133,334
    2012: 184,507
    Difference: 52,917
    Number of votes is up 39.9%

    2008 vote percentage by party registration:
    Rep: 25.8%
    Dem: 56.6%
    Oth: 17.6%

    2012 vote percentage by party registration (net vs 2008):
    Rep: 30.5% (+4.7%)
    Dem: 50.7% (-5.9%)
    Oth: 18.6% (+1.4%)

    Democrats *do* have a 20 point lead over Republicans at this point. But that compares to a 31 point lead at this point in 2008.

    BOTTOM LINE: Republicans have gained a net 10.6 points compared to 2008.

    But as I’ve cautioned before – the results released by the North Carolina State Board of Elections only tells us the party registration of the person who cast the ballot. We do not know who the person actually voted for.

    Obviously there will be some Republicans voting for Obama, some Democrats voting for Romney, and there is no indication from these statistics that tells us for whom those not affiliated with either major party voted.

    However, we can build a model that allots those votes to tabulate a likely scenario of how the race stands, and how it compares to the likely state of the race at this point in 2008.

    I am going to do two things. First, I will take the 2008 early voting totals through the first week of in person voting by party registration and allot those votes based upon the 2008 North Carolina exit polls. Second, I will take the 2012 votes and allot them based upon the most recent Rasmussen poll.

    Off we go.

    2008

    At this point in 2008, breakdown of total votes by party:
    Rep: 25.8%
    Dem: 56.6%
    Other:17.6%

    In 2008, the exit polls showed the following:

    Republicans:
    McCain: 94% | Obama: 4% | Other: 2%
    Democrats
    McCain: 9% | Obama: 90% | Other: 1%
    Independent
    McCain: 60% | Obama: 39% | Other: 1%

    So for example, we are taking the 25.8% of early voters who were Republican, and allocating those votes such that 94% went to McCain, 4% went to Obama and 2% went to Other.

    Weighting all votes in that manner, the state of the race at this point in 2008 looks like this:

    Estimated Vote Totals:
    McCain: 303,137 | 39.9%
    Obama: 446,546 | 58.8%

    Using this methodology, in 2008 Obama held at 18.9 point lead, or 143,509 votes, over McCain after one week of early voting in North Carolina.

    2012

    At this point in 2012, breakdown of total votes by party:
    Rep: 30.5%
    Dem: 50.7%
    Oth: 18.6%

    Rasmussen’s latest poll in North Carolina asked responders who they intended to vote for – and asked them which party they belonged to. His results show the following:

    Republicans
    Romney: 94% | Obama: 4% | Other: 2%
    Democrats
    Romney: 17% | Obama: 82% | Other: 1%
    Other
    Romney: 59% | Obama: 36% | Other: 5%

    Weighting the votes by how each category is likely to vote using Rasmussen’s survey, the state of the race at this point in 2012 looks like this:

    Estimated Vote Totals:
    Romney: 479,899 | 48.4%
    Obama: 491,500 | 49.6%

    Using this methodology, in 2012 Obama holds a 1.2% lead, or 11,600 votes, over Romney after one week of early voting in North Carolina.

    With an 18.9 point lead at this point in 2008, Obama ultimately won 50.2% to 49.8%.

    With an estimated 143,509 vote lead in 2008, Obama ultimately won by a 14,177 vote margin.

    Obama is now leading by 1.2 points and 11,600 votes.

    The big advantage Obama had after even just one week of early voting in 2008 more or less has been cut down to less than his razor-thin margin by the end of the election.

    From this point forward in 2008, McCain gained 129,232 net votes over Obama in the remainder of early voting and on election day. Even if Romney’s strength and Obama’s weakness so far in early voting is not carried through, and Romney only equals McCain’s performance the rest of the way, Romney would win North Carolina by about a 2-3 point margin.

    If Romney continues to outperform McCain, even modestly compared to what he has done so far, that margin of victory is easily pushed to something approaching a 8-10 point win.

    There is a reason that the rumors have flown around about Obama pulling resources out of and ads off the air in North Carolina. First the polling began to swing away from Obama and toward Romney, and now the results of early voting have begun to confirm that polling. While Team Obama has gone on record denying that they are abandoning the state, one gets the feeling that this is more an attempt to keep up appearances so that the narrative of a campaign that is reeling does not take hold.

    If I had to call this race today – which I don’t, but I will because that’s how I roll – I would predict the final outcome a 54-45 win for Romney.

    Monday, October 22, 2012

    Real Clear Politics Polls At This Point in 2004 and 2008

    In 2004, there were 7 polls in the Real Clear Politics average of polls between 10/15 and 10/22.

  • The average of those polls was Bush +2.3
  • The final outcome was Bush +2.4

    In 2008, there were 14 polls in the Real Clear Politics average of polls between 10/15 and 10/22 (removing outfits that had multiple polls during that timeframe to only show the latest).

  • The average of those polls was Obama +7.6
  • The final outcome was Obama +7.3
  • Thursday, October 18, 2012

    Fun With Early Voting in North Carolina

    In person early voting begins today here in the great state of North Carolina.

    But let’s have some fun with the state’s early voting so far. This means only absentee votes at this point.

    These numbers were pulled from the NC Board of Elections, and are current as of Sunday, September 14. The 2008 numbers I will be using are from George Mason University’s United States Elections Project.

    Off we go!

    Total Votes: 50,674
    Dem: 13,887 - 27.4%
    Rep: 27,455 - 54.2%
    Unaffiliated: 9,255 - 18.3%
    Libertarian: 77 - 0.2%

    Compare that with 2008:
    Dem: 51.4%
    Rep: 30.2%
    Other: 18.5%

    The 2012 numbers are breakouts by registration, not by vote cast (of course, you can't vote for unaffiliated!). But certainly if some assumptions are made -- it appears there has been a complete flip of the parties, at least at this point. But we are in the early part of early voting.

    Notably, the black vote makes up 7.1% of the 2012 early vote total -- 23% of the Democrat vote and 0.2% of the Republican vote. In 2008, they were 27% of the total early vote.

    It remains to be seen if this is evidence of blacks staying home, or if they are less enthusiastic to get votes in early but will still vote when all is said and done.

    One interesting contrast specifically is Cumberland County. Cumberland was a 52-48 state for Bush in 2004, and a 59-41 state for Obama in 2008. In fact, in 2008 Obama picked up a net of 26K more votes in Cumberbland County compared to Kerry in 2004. And remember, North Carolina was a state Obama won by only 14K votes statewide.

    The registration breakdown for early voting in Cumberland County so far is...
    Dem: 33%
    Rep: 47%
    Unaf: 19%

    And another interesting contrast between 2012 and 2008 is Durham County. This is the home of, well, Durham which is home of Duke. It's a Democrat stronghold.

    Durham is the 6th largest county in NC by population. In early voting, it's 17th in terms of ballots cast.

    In 2008 Durham County went 74% Obama, 26% McCain

    Early voting so far...
    Dem: 46%
    Rep: 31%
    Unaf: 23%

    And finally, Iredell County is the 16th largest county by population. In early voting, it's 8th in terms of ballots cast.

    In 2008 Iredell County went 62% McCain, 37% Obama

    Early voting so far:
    Dem: 15%
    Rep:66%
    Unaf: 19%

    How fun was that? The numbers look good for Mitt Romney and rater dire for President Obama.

    However, let’s be clear that we can't claim these numbers as predictive. The comparisons I am making are between absentee ballots cast by party affiliation at this point in the election versus all early voting in 2008 by actual votes. Professor McDonald at the US Elections Project site does a much more thorough job of not only tracking the early numbers for this and past elections, he is able to do a “on this date in 2008” comparison. I would strongly suggest anyone wanting a real comparison between elections to go to his site.

    That said, having seen the news yesterday that Obama is likely shifting resources and efforts away from North Carolina – numbers like these become another data point to consider that reinforces the idea that Mitt Romney is increasingly likely to win the state.

    I wouldn’t mind not being one of the hotly contested battleground states, and I certainly would have no beef if the unrelenting number of campaign ads were trimmed as a result. Then again, if Obama wants to continue pouring money into a state he has a diminishing chance of winning at the expense of more time in states more closely contested, well, I will bear that burden for the cause. Besides, I know how to operate a remote control.

    Wednesday, October 10, 2012

    The 3 am Call Obama Will Take

    UPDATE: A better pic has emerged.

    The 3am Call Obama Will Take

    Calls from Ambassadors go to voice mail.

    The 3 am Call Obama Will Take

    Facebook Eastwoods Its Homepage

    Just went to log on to Facebook. Here's what their home page currently looks like:

    Facebook Eastwoods Its Homepage

    Who knew they were such big fans of Clint Eastwood's Empty Chair speech at the Republican Convention.

    "When somebody doesn't do the job, you gotta let them go."

    2012 Obama Deploys Trick That 2008 Obama Said Would Cause Voters To Stop Listening

    Obama got crushed in the first debate. Everyone...left, right, center, up, down and diagonal knew it. Some of Obama's biggest fans were screaming at him for how bad he was, or practically crying uncontrollably as a result.

    And yet, Obama walked away thinking he had won.

    Now he's been told how thoroughly he was trounced -- so here come the excuses:

    “I think it’s fair to say I was just too polite, because it’s hard to sometimes just keep on saying and what you’re saying isn’t true. It gets repetitive." ...President Obama said

    Ace calls this the CritiBrag, which he describes this way:

    ...the claim of self-criticism which, oddly enough, winds up being a brag on one's virtue -- is kinda sorta complete 100% bullshit. Every time you've told a prospective employer that your "greatest failing" was that you "are too details-oriented" and "can't learn to separate myself from my work" you've deployed the CritiBrag.

    Ah yes. As fate would have it, Obama actually called out Hillary and John Edwards for CritiBragging in 2008:

    Obama poked fun at John Edwards and Hillary Clinton for their response to the "what is your weakness" question at the MSNBC debate. Obama said that he answered the question as an "ordinary person."

    "Folks, they don't tell you what they mean!" exclaimed Obama.

    "I thought that they meant 'what's your biggest weakness?!' So I said 'well you know I don't handle paper that well, you know, my desk is a mess, I need somebody to help me file and stuff all the time.'"

    "So the other two they say well my biggest weakness is 'I'm just too passionate about helping poor people.' I am just too impatient to bring about change in America.'"

    Obama joked, "If I had gone last I would have known what the game was. I could have said 'well you know I like to help old ladies across the street. Sometimes they don't want to be helped. It's terrible.'"

    Back to Ace, who tells us the natural result of CritiBagging in an interview:

    And your interviewer rolled his eyes. If not his visible ones, then internal one called the pineal gland.

    Which -- and again, look at the fate -- agrees with how Obama viewed CritiBagging in 2008 as well:

    Obama ended by calling Clinton's comments "tricks" and said voters will stop listening to politicians because of them.

    2008 Obama was speaking that as a theory. 2012 Obama is learning it in practice.