Header Image (book)


Monday, March 19, 2012

Real Hope For November Change?

From this recent article in the Washington Post comes this bit of good news:
Obama’s high-dollar donations lagging

President Obama is struggling to draw in big-dollar donations, with half as many people writing large checks to his campaign than at this point four years ago.

Obama is outpacing his Republican rivals in fundraising overall, and his advisers have concentrated on amassing small-dollar backers, part of a strategy to get more people invested in the reelection effort. At the end of January, 1.4 million people had donated to the Obama campaign, responding to appeals for contributions as small as $2.

But Obama lags behind Republican front-runner Mitt Romney in finding donors willing to give $2,000 or more — a surprising development for a sitting president, and one that could signal more worrisome financial problems heading into the general election. At this point in the last election cycle, Obama had received such large donations from more than 23,000 supporters, more than double the 11,000 who have given him that much this time. President George W. Bush had more than four times that number of big donations at this point in his reelection....
"The One" does seem to have misplaced his halo lately:

On the other hand, THIS ANALYSIS doesn't bode so well for unseating Obama.

Fasten your seatbelts, folks. It's going to be a bumpy ride all the way to the day after Election Day 2012.


  1. It's easy to see why ... All of his voters are on welfare!

  2. Hi AOW.

    I'm sorry to say but i have to disagree on this one , i can't see O going anywhere, he's going to stay no matter what the elections bring.
    I honestly hope i'm wrong, but i fear nothing can be done they will use anything to keep him in power.
    My biggest fear is that America may see another Civil War, and for sure this ain't the moment for it.

  3. Of course being neither American nor living there, my view will be different.

    That view is that it would be better to have Obama remain President. Why?

    From my perspective, none of the candidates are better. Additionally, the bitter infighting and tearing at each other as well as the pig-headedness of the far-right and tea-party movement will mean that if by some stroke of madness the GOP candidate won - he would be not only a lame-duck to any Democrat Congress (be sure at half-way first term) but will be constantly battling his own Party members. In other words, the far-right will consider itself to be more important than the rest of the party - as they do now.

    Better to have Obama fnish his agenda and spend a good four years looking for a real candidate that represents not only the GOP desires but actually all of "the people" whom I think are the ones actually being forgotten.

    Damien Charles

  4. Thankfully the elections are not today. I still think this is the Republican's election to lose. If they develop the right message and stay on message they can and should win in November.

  5. No, regardless of whether Mittens or Obummer wins you are going to be living under the same power structure and controlled by the same entities.

    Time to wise up.

  6. Will,
    I did use a question mark in the title of the post.

    I'm beginning to wonder if the mainstream media will promote Obama's re-election AS THE UNDERDOG. After all, the article to which I linked appeared in the WaPo.

  7. Duck,
    Time to wise up.

    And do what, exactly?

  8. Damien Charles,
    You mentioned the bitter infighting and tearing.

    Yes, it's ugly. But it's also not all that unusual in American politics.

    Better to have Obama fnish his agenda...

    And appoint two justices to the Supreme Court of the United States? I think that is NOT a good option! Those justices sit on the bench FOR LIFE.

    Also, please see 10 Consequences of an Obama Win in 2012. Such a completion of agenda would do grave harm to America -- and, indeed, to the rest of the world too.

  9. Damien Charles,
    And one more thing....If Obama goes down to defeat, Congress will likely overturn as well. The coattails effect.

    When Obama swept into office in 2008, the Dems took over Congress. 2010 brought changes to the House of Representatives. Senators are up for election in 2012 -- 1/3 of the Senate, in fact. All of the House is up for election as the House members are up for election every two years.

    So, a Republican in the White House would not necessarily be a lame duck.

    See what I mean?

  10. Woodsterman,
    I wonder what the proportion of welfare voters is?

    I hasten to add that some people whom I personally know on welfare are not on welfare by choice. Rising health insurance premiums and the jobs disaster has put onto the welfare rolls many who never, ever envisioned themselves so afflicted!

  11. Jim,
    Yes, it's a long, long way to November. A lot can happen between now and then.

  12. Ducky just has crabby criticisms, AOW.

    Don't embarrass him by asking for solutions.

    A Romney campaign will deny Obama a lot of Wall Street money.

  13. Damien, you're right; not living here does give you an unusual take, particularly regarding the "far right"...which is probably 75% of the right, by the way. That's why I laugh when I hear "fringe"... hardly a fringe.
    Living in Europe, I relied on the internet and the Int'l Herald Tribune and CNN Int'l....it's laughably biased but it's what I got. It can be difficult to draw conclusions that don't share that bias. Truly laughable is the Tribune, which is owned now wholly by the NEW YORK TIMES :-)
    It pains me that EUropeans (all foreigners, really) think they're getting their money's worth from their bilingual journalists' impressions. First, they're generally liberal...then, my German husband used to roar with laughter at how the Germans only translated the New York Times and sold it to Der Spiegel, Frankfurter Allgemeine, etc.; no even handed news delivered at all to the Europeans and then Europeans make their grandiose conclusions.
    I don't count you in that bunch, but there is shades of that in your thinking.
    Canadian media is a little better, and The Daily Mail of England seems to inform of us information we don't get from our Pravda media that's been allowed to happen these last 10 years or so.

    AOW...Obama raised FORTY FIVE MILLION in February; I'm thinking that's a pretty good chunk and doesn't really rate anybody saying his donations are down!? huh?

  14. The SOCTUS' 'Citizens United' Decision and SuperPACS allows for unfettered, anonymous donations by big business and lobbyists-even those with overseas interests. They sold our Democracy and the GOP is running with it. Hope you like the 'Nucular' Reactor in your back yard.

  15. Well, I'm probably going to wait for the formality of the GOP convention giving the nomination to Romney before I start gung-ho campaigning for Obama.

    Romney may not be Obama, but Obama has never claimed to be a conservative while not actually being one.

    Obama's second term will likely destroy America, but it's an America that thinks Romney is a conservative that would be destroyed, so I fail to see to downside.

  16. Z - thanks interesting points that I will bear in mind. I must say though, not in defence but just to add, my stays in the US shows rather similar lack of understanding of what is happening over here by your countrymen.

    I guess the bulk of every population is rather insulated.

    D Charles

  17. AOW,

    I read that before and am not so certain about many aspects except the economic side which I agree with totally.

    What I most certainly disagree is that Obama has a negative global affect - other than the economics - in fact on every other facit globally, Obama's policies have been to the benefit of the US and thus a better impact globally. It would be hard to sway me with the arguments that he is damaging either your own standing overseas or making things worse for the rest of the planet. I would even add that except for some of Romney and Paul, the rest's overseas policies are harkening back to the "dark-ages" of US international relations and would most certainly be a detriment.

    A question.

    Is it not the case that only Bush snr was the only recent President who did not lose Congress after two years? Is it not, thus, safe to say that more than likely any GOP President would also lose it?

    Damien Charles

  18. @Will as for the Civil War thing, I've been saying that since 08. The way this country is divided at this point, and with all the dissatisfaction and anger at the government, it will not take much to push some over the edge.

    @D Charles While I understand Europeans enjoying Obama's bowing (literally) to other countries, over here we rather not be ruled by them. Respect is one thing: US law being second to international is quite another. And one last thing: Yes its different over here- different cultures have different values!

    on-topic: Well, this is a tiny bit encouraging. So the One lost a few believers... drop them by another few thousand and I will be happy. But honestly, he doesn't need money to campaign or bribe- so I;m not sure how big a difference this will ultimately make. A step in the right direction to be sure, but a small one. And at this point, time is not a big friend.


    PS If this was the post about 'Republicans race to lose' I like to know how. Obama is still more popular than Mitt or Romany, and he DOES have time to pull a miracle to wow us. Then again, we can hope he is an idiot and doesn't.

  19. I worry as well that he will start something before the election. He is putting to many pieces in place for this to be random Put me down as having the Heebie Jeebies.

  20. Another reason to like Obama:

    He'll do something no Republican candidate has done this cycle - run an effective anti-Romney campaign.

  21. Apparently the dead can vote, but cannot donate money to his campaign.

    He's not as popular as he likes himself to be. Shame, really. Well, not really.

  22. Hopefully people are seeing Obama for what he is, dangerous to this country, and withholding their donations -- or even better, donating to a Conservative.

    Right Truth

  23. D Charles,
    Is it not the case that only Bush snr was the only recent President who did not lose Congress after two years?

    I'm not sure about that. I wasn't following politics at that time.

    Here's something to consider: The Democrats lost the House of Representatives in 2010, halfway through Obama's term.

    Obama's policies have been to the benefit of the US....

    Oh, really? People in Reading, PA (and elsewhere), would strongly disagree with you. The reality on the ground is quite different from what you apparently think! Areas with lots of government employees, such as here in Northern Virginia, are relatively thriving. But elsewhere? Nope. And even here we have vacant houses and vacant strip malls -- like I've never seen since the 1970s. In fact, two store fronts in a normally-prosperous community near me have been sitting empty for months. Never in my life -- and I've lived in Northern Virginia ALL my life -- have I see store fronts in that town sit empty for more than 15 days.

    Private industry all over the United States is not doing well. Period.

    Government and government-related industries are doing well -- on the backs of the taxpayers. This situation is unsustainable!

  24. Beamish,
    Obama's second term will likely destroy America, but it's an America that thinks Romney is a conservative that would be destroyed, so I fail to see to downside.

    Well, you WILL eventually see the downside. Taxed into serfdom, I think. You have a lot of working years ahead of you.

    One good thing, IMO: If the Dems win a second term, the Democratic Party will be forever disgraced.

    Furthermore, it is my view that whichever Party wins in 2012 is going to have a terrible time -- to say the least. To parody the epitaph on Frank Sinatra's grave: "The worst is yet to come."

    I'm in the ABO group: Anybody But Obama. I know that you don't agree with that. But there you have it!

  25. Beamish,
    PS: Assuming that we have elections in 2016. If Obama is re-elected in 2012, will we? Just a paranoid thought on one cup of strong coffee this morning.

  26. Good news this, every cent he fails to pull in is a cent he can't spend to smear and weasel his way around his appalling and dreadful record.

  27. Z,
    Thank you for that long comment about the Right and the European media. I appreciate your taking the time to provide so many details.

    Obama raised FORTY FIVE MILLION in February; I'm thinking that's a pretty good chunk and doesn't really rate anybody saying his donations are down!? huh?

    Yes, that's a hefty sum. Did it come from small donors or large donors?

  28. Right Wing Theocrat,
    Yes, Obama's record is dreadful. The mainstream media cover up or elide over those details.

  29. Take a look at what Obamanomics has wrought! This is unsustainable!

  30. I find it humorous how so many repeat the tag lines of the media like little parrots...

    This GOP Primary contest is the same as countless others and it follows the same paradigm of having more conservative voices and more moderate voices arguing it out. You see on the right we debate ideas. We do not follow cults and establish an "annointed one" like you liberals who follow whatever piped piper says hope and change....

    In the end Romney will win and he will pick a staunch conservative to be VP or Santorum will win and he will pick a more moderate VP....duh

    Either is preferable to what we have because it will end the era of Presidential Directives serving as pieces of Legislation, the Constitution will still be circumvented (have to agree with Ducky a little here) but it will be less dictatorial than king Obama, and finally Congress will be Conservative. Only with a Conservative Congress can we have a voice to start the process of turning back all of this nonsense. Not just the nonsense from Obama but Bush Jr passed several bombs trying to reach across the aisle.

  31. As to Civil War......

    I cry every time I am witness to the US Flag being hoisted high and the National Anthem played. I cry because I fear for my children and your children because America is fast losing the battle to remain the Home of the Free and the Land of the Brave. I cry because I study history and it is indeed troubling when you have 2 sides forming that demonize and thereby dehumanize eachother (some Democrats even called us demons). I cry because our debt is at a level no Nation can sustain annd yet we will not even cut tax benefits to illegals (Reid voted down), juicy tax credits to big corporations (GE), or we allow our govenrment to play the Stock market (Solydra).

    Just before Obama took Office a Russian editorialist wrote a piece predicting the US would break up because of him into 5 regions....one of genuises can probably locate it fast than I.

  32. Daily I think of the passages from the Bible when God's people traded their freedom and their children's freedom for food while in Egypt.

    Are we not now trading our freedom for health care, the false sense of security, and cheap products from China???

  33. Blogginator,
    This GOP Primary contest is the same as countless others and it follows the same paradigm of having more conservative voices and more moderate voices arguing it out.

    Thank you for pointing that out!

    It is indeed the media that keep harping on the bitterness in this particular GOP primary. I did some research, going all the way back to the early days of our nation, and found bitterness galore.

    Are we not now trading our freedom for health care, the false sense of security, and cheap products from China???

    Yes, as a nation, we are. It is shameful -- and dangerous in the extreme. The Nanny State has become what Americans rely on. **sigh**

    I'm glad that I'm as old as I am. I won't live to see the harvest of our national folly.

  34. I almost forgot to address the point of the thread.

    Duh, despite the media propaganda Obama is losing the hearts and minds of voters. The evidence is all around us. even with the rigging done by the media they can not hide the fact that the various mandates in the obama health care train wreck are unpopular.

    The media can not hide the fact that despite all of Bush jrs errors the economy was growing 5.6%? versus 1.7%(doubt its that high), unemployment is not improving the obamatons are simply changing the numbers and every time they go to the gas pump they are pissed.

    yes, Obama will get the welfare vote, democrats always do.

    We already seeing an erosion of the democrat electoral map victories in 2008. NC is already back in thee red column, Vrigina and Missouri are in play as we have seen much info suggesting both States want more sanity in government. Biden just got booed in Pittsburgh where Demos always win big. If Santorum wins could Penn be in play? This would put Obama defended terrority. and wait Obama got booed in Calif.....hmmmm

  35. Wow! Apple turns on Obama:

    Apple made an aggressive pitch for a corporate tax holiday Monday, stressing that it plans to keep more than $60 billion parked offshore until Congress makes it easier for companies to bring those profits home....

  36. Blogginator,
    In some parts of California, I know for a FACT that Obama would get booed. Spoke with my CA brother-in-law the other day. People are seething out there where he lives because of the unemployment rate.

  37. Wry, oblique commentary from poet Elizabeth Bishop. My contention is that oftentimes poetry –– most of it from the past –– sheds much stronger light on present reality than mulling over the "facts" of current events. Poetry -- if read with curiosity and comprehension -- provides a sense of perspective dry data cannot. And most verse, even when cryptic, has the great virtue of being succinct.

    I just discovered Lullaby for the Cat this morning. Do you think the poet is pro-Marxist -- or something quite different? I have to admit I'm not quite sure, myself. The poem, however, makes me want to know the poet a great deal better. I hope you have the same reaction.

    ~ FreeThinke

    Lullaby For the Cat

    Minnow, go to sleep and dream,
    Close your great big eyes;
    Round your bed Events prepare
    The pleasantest surprise.

    Darling Minnow, drop that frown,
    Just cooperate,
    Not a kitten shall be drowned
    In the Marxist State.

    Joy and Love will both be yours,
    Minnow, don't be glum.
    Happy days are coming soon --
    Sleep, and let them come...

    ~ Elizabeth Bishop

    Submitted by FreeThinke

  38. "Minnow," by the way is the name of Miss Bishop's cat -- just in case you were wondering. I admit it took me a minute to figure that out, myself.

    Why do I keep posting poetry, when many dismiss it as "OFF TOPIC" or "irrelevant?"

    Three reasons:

    1. I don't believe it is "OFF TOPIC" if you trouble to find and understand how it might apply.

    2. It takes us out of ourselves -- if we let it -- and shows that there's a lot more to reality than what "we" happen to think. In other words it broadens our perspective.

    3. It's often written in language far richer, more interesting, colorful and thought provoking than the
    standardized clichés, talking points of NewsSpeak or "Pundit Anaysis," and the plaintive, angry, bitterly denunciatory rhetoric we indulge in ad nauseam.

    There's an enormous treasure trove of wisdom and penetrating insight to be found in good poetry and fiction. To ignore it or dismiss it as "escapism" is to cut ourselves off from the best humanity has had to offer itself over the centuries.

    One thing's certain. We won't put ourselves on the path to Salvation by indulgence in smugness, defeatist rhetoric and sneering condescension.

    ~ FreeThinke

  39. AOW,

    perhaps my mis-typing my reference is to Obama's foreign policy as there was an original comment by you as to having failed or bad policies overseas. I happen to support Obamas' foreign policies.

    On the subject of domestic, social and especially economics, I would tend to agree with you....

    D Charles

  40. Wildstar,

    I do not understand your comment at all about "Obama's bowing (literally) to other countries, over here we rather not be ruled by them".

    For a start, Obama's a lanky individual as my oldest son is almost exactly the same type of figure. If you attempt to make a nod, such people tend to look like they are bowing. When you do give a respected bow, as Obama did to Queen Elizabeth II, to Dutch Queen Beatrix and to King Saud, if you stand a little bit to far away (as Obama did), your bow looks really bad.

    I will stress that every head of state is expected, when visiting another country and meeting their head of state to follow local protocol. Our Queen bows to Queen Beatrix of The Netherlands when she visits and the same is done in return. I watched on TV, King Saud visiting Morocco and kissing the shoulder of King Mohammed VI which is the way it is done there.

    Now, next point from your comment "over here we rather not be ruled by them". I have no idea how you can assume that the us is being ruled by anyone else (other than attempts by Rupert Murdoch and the Tea Party). Your comment does not make sense at all, showing respect to other countries only gives respect in return, would you rather the US do the opposite because it is exceptional?


    Damien Charles

  41. According to Rove, Obama is burning through the money. In January, he spent 150% of his donations:
    This man is simply incapable of being frugal.

  42. No matter how much worse it gets in Obama's second term, at least it won't be Romney in the White House.

  43. Damien Charles,
    FYI....Wildstar is a student in my high school classes. Her time on the web is limited as she has other responsibilities. That said, you need ot know that she is one astute students of politics: she has "the imprint," so to speak.

    About the bowing....American Presidents are supposed to follow the protocol of NOT bowing, particularly to a foreign head of state. From this source (emphases mine):

    ...The bow was an extraordinary protocol violation. Such an act is a traditional obeisance befitting a king's subjects, not his peer. There is no precedent for U.S. presidents bowing to Saudi or any other royals. Former President Franklin D. Roosevelt shook hands with Saudi King Abdulaziz in February 1945. Granted, Mr. Roosevelt was wheelchair-bound, but former President Dwight D. Eisenhower shook hands when he first met King Saud in January 1957. Mr. Obama's bow to the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques does not help his image with those who believe he is secretly a Muslim, and why he chose to bow only to the Saudi King and not to any other royals remains unexplained.

    No Americans of any station are required to bow to royalty. It is one of the pillars of American exceptionalism that our country rejected traditional caste divisions. Article I Section 9 of the Constitution forbids titles of nobility and stipulates that no officeholder or government employee may “accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state” without the consent of Congress. Judith Martin wrote in her Miss Manners column in 2001 that bowing “is not an ordinary bit of foreign etiquette one might adopt out of courtesy when traveling. … Americans do not properly bow to any royalty. We show respect for other countries' leaders the same way we do to our own.”...

    As a European, you may be ignorant of the above.

  44. but such high poetry is condescension for most do not have your level of education in this area. It is the same with the use of more complicated and sophisticated grammer. You description of why you do this further revealing that you view your audience as less educated, less worldly wise, in short ignorant or the colorful and vibrant word about them.

    Some of us no doubt enjoyed your turn of phrase, but the point is while you are searching stacks of poetry people are unemployed or working a job with a pay raise for 3 years.

    Our educational system would likely benefit from such a view as yours so donot take this as an insult but right now our educational system is failing to teach our nation's children the basics. In that sense you are off topic

  45. Anonymous,
    Is that you, D Charles? I note unusual language patterns and the misspelling of "grammer." Sometimes you evince such a writing style. Just sayin'.

    Anyway, the only persons who get to scold those who post what you deem as "off topic" comments are Warren and I. We own this web site.

    Thank you in advance for your cooperation as you apparently struggle to understand just WHOSE property this blog is.

  46. Anonymous,
    And one more thing....Make another snarky comment like that, and you're gone.

    Respond to this comment, and you're gone.

    My site, my rules.

  47. Well, Mr., Miss, Mrs. or Ms. Anonymous -- whoever you may be -- you have just given us a fine example of the sort of thinking that has made this country increasingly more ignorant, less sophisticated, less knowledgeable, less aware of history, less aware of broader contexts, less able to comprehend allusions and make connections, less able to see things with humor, less able to appreciate wit and style, less able to see things in depth, less appreciative of things above and beyond the mundane, and MORE VULNERABLE to ATTACK from MORAL and INTELLECTUAL PREDATORS.

    Just as one may look at a glass of water as either half EMPTY or half FULL, one may look at evidence of cultural and intellectual superiority either as SNOBBERY intended to put others in their place, OR as an INVITATION to enrich one's life by RISING to GREATER HEIGHTS through the development of love for an ever widening variety of phenomena.

    "A man's reach should always exceed his grasp."

    In short, despite your lame attempt to mollify me by suggesting my approach might help give some much-needed vitality to public education, you have revealed yourself to be a PHILISTINE. [You might want to look that up.]

    There's a lamentable tendency in humanity to want to STRIKE DOWN or OSTRACIZE whatever seems unfamiliar or not easily understood. By acceding to that tendency -- or giving it the slightest encouragement, instead of cultivating healthy CURIOSITY -- we balk and hobble the advance of Civilization, thereby keeping ourselves in chains.

    If you think I ought to stop being who I am in order to spare the feelings of others -- or to make myself more popular -- and start pandering to the lowest common denominator, you are advocating the very thing that has caused our politicians to lose every shred of authenticity, sincerity and credibility they might once have possessed.

    ~ FreeThinke

    PS: If you want to refer to GRAMMAR, the least you could do would be to spell it correctly. ;-) - FT

  48. FT,
    I'm laughing. Not at you.

    I think you know what I mean, right?

  49. Beamish,
    I understand your position.

    However, I will say this: at least Romney isn't of the school of Chicago politics.

    What school he does belong to isn't clear to me. The man talks out of all sides of his mouth.

    How did he govern in Massachusetts? Some of his governance seemed just fine to me. I did a little reading about Romney's administration yesterday.


We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.