Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Where Do We Go From Here: Reactions to Election 2012

I hoped I wouldn't have to write this article. I expected I wouldn't have to write it, as a matter of fact. What happened? It's the question I believe most of us are asking ourselves. After all, everything conservative pundits and humble bloggers like myself said before the election was true: undecided voters usually break for the challenger. So why didn't they this time?

I genuinely do not know the answer. Whether the American people have been paying less attention than they should or there are in fact more takers in America than taxpayers, it was enough for President Obama to be re-elected. At this point, it's hard to say what the reasons were yesterday.

I find myself wondering, honestly, if our country as we know it is lost. I believe America can survive four more years of Obama. My concern is whether we can survive four more years of people who would willingly re-elect Obama. I believe we can survive four more years because we have a firewall. The House of Representatives remains in Republican control so we can stop further damaging legislation by the President.
However, Obamacare is here to stay, and that's going to be bad for business. The Bush Tax Rates are set to expire, and the President seems to want to play hardball on this as well. So what we're looking at is big tax increases that are part of Obamacare, taxes being raised at the minimum on small businesses. Friends, I'm here to tell you things aren't going to get better in the next four years. I believe they will get worse unless the President reverses course and applies policies that actually work. 

So what do we do? I mean, short of Benghazigate blowing up into a huge cover-up scandal it is requiring both President Obama and Vice President Biden being thrown out of office, we're stuck here for four more years. What we can do is continue to fight for conservative principles. We can also work to build a big enough majority in 2014 to reverse the President's agenda. With what is likely to happen economically on the horizon, it's not at all beyond the realm of possibility. 

As for Biblical Conservatism, the blog is also at a crossroads. (This was always in the plans post-election, don't worry.) I began writing Biblical Conservatism as a way to collect my ideas before writing a book of the same title on the same topic. First, I'm going to take a few weeks off to rest from the world of politics. Then, Biblical Conservatism will be back, albeit as a biweekly blog rather than a daily, focusing primarily on topical issues rather than news. You may even see a few sneak peeks into the book. 

I leave you, for now, with this: Thank you for your readership through this Election and since I started back in 2010. Election Day was a banner day for Biblical Conservatism with the biggest one day readership since the beginning. Finally, I remind you one immutable fact that all Biblical Conservatives and Christians of all political stripes should remember: God is in control. No matter who is in the White House, we have a living King who sits on the throne and his name is Jesus Christ. God bless you all, and thank you for reading.

Tuesday, November 6, 2012

A Time for Choosing

Today is the day. I've had a countdown on Biblical Conservatism for over a  year. Today is the day American is given the chance to change course.

The Drive-By Media is already calling the election for Obama. I've already told you why this is happening...they are either a) delusional enough to believe their +5-10% Democrat turnout models or b) we can expect that these polls will be quoted as reasons why Romney's election must be the result of some sort of fraud.

Back in 1964, Ronald Reagan gave a famous speech in support of Republican Barry Goldwater called "A Time for Choosing."  Today we are again at a time for choosing.

Today, I am speaking not to those of you who have already made up your mind. I'm speaking to the few of you who inexplicably have not. Today, as you step into that booth to cast your vote, you have a choice.

Today our choice is whether or not to keep on the same path we are currently on. The path we are on is one of failure. It is a path of $1 Trillion deficits and no plan to fix it, save for raising taxes on "millionaires and billionaires."  Except by the numbers this will only raise about $60 Billion per year...which is only 6% of the deficit. There is no problem to bridge the other 94% of the gap.

Today our choice is whether or not we want to take proactive steps to to fill our nations energy needs with real, tangible energy solutions that we already have domestically like oil, coal and natural gas; or do we want to continue to effort after a solution by burning billions on fantasy green energy.

Today our choice is whether we want to put America back to work by not regulating and taxing those who own businesses.

Today our choice is whether or not we choose to continue to be the last, best hope of mankind and a shining city on a hill or if we want to let the sun set on the United States as a superpower as the sun set on the Soviet Union, the British Empire, the Roman Empire, the Greek Empire, the Babylonian Empire and the Egyptian Empire before us.

Today our choice is whether or not we want to have a President who will defend Americans in harms way or one who will pretend that a preplanned, forewarned terrorist attack was because of a video and then attempt to create a revisionist history of things that just happened.

Today, our choice is whether or not we want our country back.

So I close with a quote from our 40th President, Ronald Wilson Reagan:

Are you better off now than you were four years ago? Is it easier for you to go and buy things in the stores than it was four years ago? Is there more or less unemployment in the country than there was four years ago?  Is America as respected throughout the world as it was? Do you feel that our security is as safe, that we’re as strong as we were four years ago?
And if you answer all of those questions ‘yes’, why then, I think your choice is very obvious as to whom you will vote for. If you don’t agree, if you don’t think that this course that we’ve been on for the last four years is what you would like to see us follow for the next four, then I could suggest another choice that you have.

Monday, November 5, 2012

Be Prepared for Legal Challenges In Close States

Especially the ones where the swing state polls are using preposterous samples that won't happen on Tuesday.

Quick history lesson: Who remembers 2000? I do. Al Gore held up a decision from the 2000 Election for a full month. While it was required by law for Florida to do a machine recount of votes when the margin for victory for Bush was only 2000 votes. Gore then demanded hand recounts of votes, not only focusing ONLY on three of the most heavily Democratic counties in Florida but also demanding that votes be counted for him where votes that were not clearly cast, as defined by law, for a particular candidate.

Liberals spent years using such methods as exit polls and polls done after the election asking people who they had intended to vote to say that the actual votes were wrong. That's the world of the Left, gang...the actual votes don't matter. Just the polls matter.

How about 2004? In that election, the Exit Polls showed John Kerry winning the Presidency. It wasn't close, in some polls. Then the votes started to be counted. It wasn't close. Bush won. He won by a comfortable enough 3% margin.

The stories came out again: There must have been fraud! The polls said Kerry was going to win! Even John Kerry pondered a challenge like Gore four years before...but ultimately thought better of it. That didn't stop the Left from claiming it was illegitimate. It's not the votes that matter...the polls are the TRUTH...according to the Left.

So now we have these poll that are continuing to use 2008 Turnout as their models...if not far greater Democrat turnout that 2008. I made this point Friday on Biblical Conservatism:

When the turnout in, for example, Ohio, ISN'T +9% Democrat but lets say it's +2% Democrat and Romney wins by 1-2%...don't you think the New York Times might just say "How can this be?! Our polls showed Obama winning by 5%!"

My friends, I want you to be ready. I believe we are going to win. And as history has shown, these attempts to claim fraud doesn't stick. What the ultimate result will be if this happens, however, will be a claim that future President-Elect Romney would be told he has no grounds for a mandate and therefore he has no right to institute his policies. That's what they said about George W. Bush.

Bottom line: BE READY. I believe we are going to win on Tuesday. If it's not a sweep victory for Romney (which it could indeed be...see polls before the Election of 1980), there will be these claims from some if not all circles in the Drive-By Media.

Friday, November 2, 2012

Good News, Mr. President: In Fantasy Land, You're Still Winning!

Of course, here in the real world, Mitt Romney's winning.

Scratching your head? Apparently you haven't read this blog.  We've got some new polls that have come out, and they claim Obama's winning. Only one problem: They are using 2008 Election Turnout. Nobody who is honest and worth their salt is claiming that the 2008 Electoral Turnout will happen.

So let's show you what's happening in Fantasy land, shall we?

  • A National Journal Poll on Halloween, the report gave President Obama a +5% advantage nationally. Only one problem, straight from their article:

"In its likely-voter model, the Congressional Connection Poll projected that the 2012 electorate will be virtually unchanged from 2008, with Democrats holding an 8 percentage-point advantage among voters (compared with 7 points last time."

Allow me to respond in writing how I responded vocally when I read this:


Election turnout will mirror 2008? Are you kidding me, National Journal? According to Gallup last week, Election 2012 turnout is going to look not like 2008, but like 2004 and 2010: +2% Republican. Rasmussen's most recent Party ID Poll shows a +3% Republican advantage.

So based on these two
samples, predicting a +8% Democrat turnout is pure, unadulterated sophistry. It's a fantasy. Actually, it is, on average, a +10.5% Democrat oversample. If only someone had predicted this before he had seen that sample happening, say on the Biblical Conservatism Facebook Page:

Oh, I guess I did predict that.

A couple other fun state polls (our example comes from the New York Times, but they are hardly alone in this game) with similar baloney being sold:

In Florida, the New York Times says Obama is leading Romney by 1%. Using a +9% Democrat Sample. Over the last four elections, the average turnout in Florida was +1% Republican. That's a 10% Democrat oversample! Unskew that to the historical average turnout, you see Romney winning by 7%!

In Ohio, the New York Times has Obama leading Romney by 5%. Except they used a +8% Democrat sample. Over the past four elections the real turnout was +2% Democrat. They oversampled Democrats by 6%! Unskewed that puts Romney at +1%.

In Virginia, the Times says Obama is leading by 2%. Except they used a +8% Democrat sample. Over the past four elections the real turnout was an average of +1% Republican. Unskew that poll and Romney leads by 7%.

There are examples of this in other states like Colorado, Iowa, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, the list goes on and on. The bottom line is the only place Obama is winning is in Fantasy Land. Here in the real world he's losing.

Thursday, November 1, 2012

Time for Obama to Panic: Early Voting Favors Romney

That cursing sound you heard near 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue yesterday? That was President Obama, reading a Gallup poll of EARLY VOTERS.

According to Gallup, 52% of Early Voters who have already cast their ballots have voted for Mitt Romney. 45% of Early Voters who have already voted cast their ballots for Barack Obama. (For those of you in Palm Beach County, FL, that means Romney is up 7%.)

Friends, the Democrat Party thinks of early voting as their bread and butter. Some might suggest it's because that makes voter fraud easier.  According to this train of thought, fraud takes time, early voting gives time: Think Ryan Seacrest on American Idol with "Vote Early, Vote Often." (Except for the fact that on American Idol it's perfectly fine to vote as often as you like, in American Elections you cannot.)

So now here we find that Early Voters are favoring Romney, and we can expect that if Early Voting favors Mitt, so will Election Day voters.Combine that with states like Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon and Pennsylvania; previously considered deep blue states, are now tossups, the fact that the gender gap is gone, and the fact that Governor Romney is leading heavily with Independents, it's time for the President to panic. Big time.

My friends, I've said it over and over again: We're going to win in a week. Six more days. Game on.