Author Topic: Needed Perspective on the Campaign: Obama Regime is Unpopular and in Disarray  (Read 424 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 28,975
Needed Perspective on the Campaign: Obama Regime is Unpopular and in Disarray
January 10, 2012
Listen to it Button


RUSH: Despite all that's going on in the Republican primary, of all places, US News & World Report, this is not a magazine that is any way sympathetic to Republicans.  This is not a magazine that has the desire for Republicans to do well.  There is a poll out in US News & World Report, been reported by Paul Bedard I think is how he pronounces his name, of the Washington Whispers portion.  And essentially it is that Americans, two-to-one, when asked what they fear the most about the future, say Obama's reelection.

So while all this stuff on the Republican side is going on, the news media, you must always remember that while the news media will get into every nook and cranny and detail about the so-called defects and problems with Republicans, at the same time they are outwardly, purposefully ignoring any negatives associated with Obama.  Would you also be interested in knowing the Gallup poll that we had yesterday that showed 40% of the country is now independents, they say they're independents, and 31% say that they are Democrats, 27% say they're Republicans.  If -- John Hood pointed this out in North Carolina -- if you read further, and most people don't, we're a headline society when it comes to news.  But if you read further in the Gallup story, what you would learn is that most independents in that Gallup survey, 40% say that they're independents now, most of them plan on voting Republican.  Most of them lean Republican, vast majority of them.  So there is that.

And speaking of the independents, yesterday we mentioned that Gallup magically came up with that poll, a 10% increase in self-described independents is up to 40%, but most of them are Republicans.  And guess what?  Today they have a poll, Gallup does, where they claim that now a majority of conservative voters are ready to accept Romney as their candidate.  But it's not portrayed as Republicans are excited to accept Romney; it's that they're ready to bite the bullet. "Okay, to hell with it, give us Romney."  That's what Gallup is out with today, that a majority of conservative voters, not just Republicans, a majority of conservative voters are now ready to accept Romney as their candidate.  Very convenient on the day of the New Hampshire primary.

So here we have two primaries, the Hawkeye Cauci, with what, 120,000 votes?  We got New Hampshire, what's that 350,000 votes?  Is that the total?  I think 350,000 people are gonna vote on the Republican side in New Hampshire.  That's a small number of votes that is determining the Republican nominee.  So you have with this Gallup poll out today clearly -- and, you know, you can be from Mars and vote in the New Hampshire primary.  You don't have to have a photo ID. You can be an independent. You can go in there today and vote if you want. Remember, everybody wondered how did Hillary win? Obama came out of Iowa big time in 2008. Then Hillary goes into New Hampshire, starts crying. Remember she broke down and cried, I forget over what. And whereas Obama had busloads of people from outside Iowa going into the cauci, there are a lot of people outside New Hampshire that went in and voted for Hillary.  It's not quite that loosy-goosy, but it's not battened down real tight, either.

"When it comes to how Americans view President Obama going into the new year, there appears to be very little spirit of Auld Lang Syne." I'm reading from US News & World Report here.  "Instead, according to the new Washington Whispers poll, many voters aren't forgetting what they dislike about Obama and want him out of office.  In our New Year's poll, when asked what news event they fear most about 2012, Americans -- by a margin of two-to-one -- said Obama's reelection." I don't know how widespread this is.  I don't know if you've heard of this before I mentioned it.  Have you heard this, Snerdley?  There aren't a whole lot of people that read US News anymore, and I don't know how outside the bounds of US News and their website this has spread.  But I think it's fairly relevant given that US News is not someplace that's eager to see Republicans win.

In this poll, "Only 16 percent said they fear the Democrat won't win a second term, while 33 percent said they fear four more years," of Obama. Now, next to Obama's reelection on "what do you fear most?" 31 percent of Americans said they feared higher taxes, which does not bode well for Obama, 'cause the two go hand in hand.  Obama equals high taxes.  So you got Americans two-to-one, the thing they fear most is Obama's reelection, and those that had something else as their number one fear cited tax increases.  I think when you add those together, you come up with a pretty decent majority here that fear Obama, period, and what he's going to do.

But as to be expected here from US News, it says here, "The poll, however, held out some hope for Obama. Some 38 percent of younger Americans, 18-24, said their biggest fear was higher taxes. Just 28 percent of those same voters said they feared Obama winning in November." So the young people who don't vote don't have as great a fear of Obama winning, but how stupid are they?  They do say that higher tax are their greatest fear but they're not worried about Obama.  What the hell.  Who equals higher taxes here?  Who stands for higher taxes?  Who's been dying and talking about raising people's taxes.  It's the Democrat Party and Obama.

So here was the question.  "As we enter the presidential election year of 2012, what potential news event do you fear the most?  President Obama wins reelection 33%. Taxes will increase 31%.  Iran will get a nuclear weapon 16%.  Obama will lose reelection 16%. North Korea will attack South Korea 4%."  You always have 4% of oddballs in any poll.  So while all this is going on with the Republicans, all of this backbiting, infighting, all this destructive stuff, I just want you to know that as far as the people of this country are concerned, Obama is not the answer.  They are not looking forward to his reelection and whatever is happening in the Republican primary is not making Obama look better.  Nothing is.

And this, to me, by the way, ladies and gentlemen, is quite comforting because, you know, I live in the now.  I am Mr. Reality.  I live in Literalville.  And the now and Literalville look at our country, what state is it in?  In a sane world nobody would want anybody to be reelected who's had anything to do with giving us our current circumstances.  And, apparently a majority of Americans are of that feeling and point of view, which is very, very comforting.  So, recap.  US News:  Americans two-to-one, when asked, "What do you fear most about this coming year?" say Obama's reelection, by two-to-one.  Gallup poll yesterday: 40% of Americans now say they're independents.  Read deep, read long, and you'll find out that the majority of them are Republicans, or are leaning in that direction.

Now, Obama can't keep employees. Bill Daley. The Politico... You talk about being in the tank? Bill Daley quit as the chief of staff. Do you know what the political headline is? "Why Daley Had to Go." No, the headline is: Why Daley Had to Quit! This is the fourth chief of staff in three years. The economic team has abandoned Obama. (interruption) It is, Snerdley. It's the fourth chief of staff. The chief of staff in the White House is the person closest to the president. He does all the scheduling, controls access to the guy. You want to meet him with Obama, you gotta go through the chief of staff. At least that's normally how it has always worked.

It may not work that way with Obama; that's why they leave. Four of them! If this were a Republican president, do you know what the stories would be? "Why is this guy so hard to work with? What do all these wonderful employees hate about the president? Why can't he keep his economic team intact?" They'd then be looking, "Is the first lady driving 'em off?" They'd be looking at any number of possible explanations for this. But, no, Bill Daley leaves, and The Politico: Why This Scumbag Had to Go! Well, "scumbag" is not in the headline, but Daley quit! He quit a year earlier than he said he would. He said he'd see Obama through the election.

He decided over the holidays to quit, told Obama about it, Obama didn't want him to leave, and Politico headline is: "Why Daley Had to Go"? Now, they could say, "Mr. Limbaugh, you're misinterpreting our headline. All we mean is why Bill Daley thought he had to go." That's not what the headline like that means. When you write a headline, "Why Daley Had to Go," the implication is clear: Why he had to be gotten rid of. So that's shoring up Obama. Look, I'm not trying to ignore that there are problems on the Republican side, what's going on here. I'm hell-bent on telling you that it's not sweetness and light and hunky-dory and milk and roses and so forth on the Obama side.

There is real trouble there, and they know it on the Obama side. Speaking of which, F. Chuck Todd, I think, is the latest that let the cat out of the bag on the Obama campaign preference for Romney. We had Donna Brazile who let that cat out of the bag on Saturday night. George Stephanopoulos tried to rein her in. But more of the Drive-Bys are letting this go. Now, remember, about Bill Daley: Daley was brought in as a response to the Tea Party victories in the midterm. Daley was brought in because he has ties to Wall Street. That's where he was. It's where most Democrats are, is on Wall Street! Bill Daley was brought in because he had the ear of people on Wall Street; he was also brought in as a response to the Tea Party victories.

He was a token to show that Obama was moving to the center, but it never happened. Obama didn't move to the center, and so the tokenism aspect of Daley blew up. We now know that Michelle Obama and Valerie Jarrett didn't want a "move to the center," and they really weren't crazy about Bill Daley being brought in; and so now, "Bill Daley, sayonara, vamanos, adios, out of there." So not only can Obama not get along with members of Congress, he can't get along with people on his own staff. Pure and simple. I mean they brought Daley in to further this idea of Obama reaching across the aisle, compromise, that sort of stuff; but then there wasn't any.

There wasn't in the compromise -- and guess who gets blamed for that? Daley! So, well, I'm not gonna sit here and take the blame for something that my boss isn't even trying to do. I'm out of here. I'll roll my dice with Rahm in Chicago. That's where I'm comfortable anyway. So it's not hunky-dory in the White House. There's not robust happiness in there, and there's not a whole lot of confidence in there, and it's not going smooth as silk in there. I don't care what is happening on the Republican side. In fact, it's safe to say that what's happening on the Republican side is not redounding in a positive way to Obama.


RUSH: No, that's exactly right. If this were a Republican presidency the headline would be, "White House in Disarray!" Obama can't hold onto his economic team. They're all gone. It's a lot of people. Austan Goolsbee, economic advisers (two or three of those people) are gone. Now the fourth chief of staff out there. "White House in Disarray! People Can't Work for This President," would be the headline. "Why Can't This President Hold onto His Staff?" would be the headline. But instead what we get is "Why Daley Had to Go" from The Politico.

"It aint what you don't know that kills you.  It's what you know that aint so!" ...Theodore Sturgeon

"If you want to change the world, go home and love your family".    ...Mother Teresa

"It's not the mountain before you, but the pebble in your shoe"      ....or something like that

Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo