Day: April 15, 2012

A Comparison Of The Presidential Elections Of 2004 And 2012 And A Contrast At The Same Time!

Ronald Leave a comment

When one thinks about it, there are comparisons that can be made between the Presidential Elections of 2004 and 2012. But there are also dramatic differences!

In both elections, there is an incumbent President, highly unpopular among members of the opposition party in Congress, as well as voters of that opposition party.

In both elections, the opponent comes from the state of Massachusetts!

In both elections, the opponent is far wealthier than the President in office.

In both elections, the opponent is a stiff person in public, not good at relating to ordinary people.

In both elections, the opponent proved to be a “flip flopper”, a person who was constantly changing views on many issues, and seemed uncomfortable in his beliefs and in his own “skin”!

Of course, there is a world of differences between Senator John Kerry and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, and this post is not meant to denigrate Senator Kerry.

Senator Kerry has had more than 30 years of service in Congress, including 28 in the US Senate, and is presently Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He has dedicated his life to public service, and could very well be Barack Obama’s next Secretary of State when Hillary Clinton leaves the State Department in 2013. He had an issue of being a “flip flopper” on some issues, but was never as much a master of changing his mind as Mitt Romney. Kerry also served his country in VIetnam, while Romney did not serve, and spent his life making money, except for a brief stint as a one term Governor.

So to compare Kerry to Romney is interesting, but Kerry comes out looking a lot better than the Republican nominee for President in 2012!

Latest Estimate On Presidential Election Results: Obama An Easy Winner Of Second Term!

Ronald 3 Comments

We are now a little more than six and a half months until the Presidential Election of 2012.

The latest estimates on the Electoral College, which will decide who takes the Oath of Office as President of the United States on Sunday, January 20, 2013, make it clear that President Obama has a clear edge to be re-elected.

According to the Associated Press, the Democrats have solid leads in 14 states and the District of Columbia, leading in five New England states, four Mid Atlantic states and the District of Columbia, plus Illinois, and the three Pacific Coast states and Hawaii, for a total of 186 electoral votes.

Obama also leads in four “swing states” in the crucial area of the Midwest (Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota), along with Pennsylvania, with a total of 56 electoral votes.

So when you add these 18 states and the District of Columbia, it adds up to 242 electoral votes, only 28 short of the number needed to win the election.

So to believe that Obama will not gain 28 electoral votes as a minimum out of a grand total of 296 remaining electoral votes requires true delusion by those who predict a Mitt Romney and Republican victory!

Nine states are said to be “Up For Grabs”, all “swing states”, including Colorado, Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia, for a grand total of 105 electoral votes

So if Obama wins Florida, he has won the election. If he wins Virginia and North Carolina, he has won the election. If he wins Ohio and Colorado, he needs only ONE more vote to be elected, which could come about from New Hampshire’s 4, New Mexico’s 5, Nevada’s 6, or Iowa’s 6.

Obama will probably not win all of the “swing states”, but to imagine he will lose all of them, or enough of them to lose the election, is a figment of a person’s imagination!

Were Obama to win all nine of these states making for a total of 27 states plus the District of Columbia, he would have 347 electoral votes.

Three states lean Republican, but could go to Obama theoretically if everything worked out in an ideal fashion–Arizona, Indiana, and Missouri. Indiana went to Obama in 2008, while Missouri went to John McCain by fewer than 5,000 votes. Arizona could go to Obama because of the rapidly rising Hispanic-Latino vote in a state which has promoted discriminatory laws against them. These three states have 32 electoral votes among them. Were everything to break right, it would allow Obama a grand total of 379 electoral votes and 30 states and the District of Columbia.

The other twenty states are solidly Republican, but with the possible exception of Georgia, with its growing number of Hispanics and Latinos Were the unbelievable but possible win by Obama in Georgia, it would mean 16 more electoral votes and a final grand total of 395 electoral votes in 31 states and the District of Columbia!

One might ask why Obama could end up with fewer electoral votes than 2008, if winning all of the states he won then. The answer is that states that are anti Obama have more electoral votes than they did, under reapportionment that goes into effect once a decade. These states include South Carolina, Georgia, Texas, Arizona and Utah.

Meanwhile, states which went for Obama in 2008 lost seats–New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois and Iowa.

Three states that went for Obama in 2008 gained seats–Florida, Nevada and Washington, while two states which went for McCain in 2008 lost seats–Louisiana and Missouri.

So this is the state of affairs regarding the Presidential Election of 2012 with a little over 200 days left in the Presidential campaign!

The Sectionalism And Regionalism In America’s 50 States

Ronald Leave a comment

An interesting part of American history and contemporary America is the reality of sectionalism and regionalism in many American states.

One classic example was the case of West Virginia, a breakaway from Virginia of areas of the state that were anti slavery, occurring during the Civil War in 1863. Therefore, the site of John Brown’s Raid on Harpers Ferry in 1859, which had been part of Virginia, became probably the most famous site in the new state of West Virginia, and remains a fascinating historic site today, which the author has visited.

But also, there have been desires in many states to have secessionist movements and the creation of new states.

So when observers look at the 50 states, they realize that in many of them, there are real rivalries and divisions, and a different state of mind about politics and the economy.

It is well known that upstate New York has little in common with New York City and Long Island and the counties just north of New York City.

Also, downstate Illinois is totally different in mentality than Chicago.

Central and North Florida are totally alienated from South Florida, and particularly, Miami.

Upper and Western Michigan are a different world than Detroit.

Central and Western Pennsylvania are a world apart from Philadelphia.

Central and Southern New Jersey are vastly different than Northern New Jersey, just across the George Washington Bridge from New York City.

Central and Southern Virginia are another planet from Northern Virginia, which is the Washington DC suburbs.

Central and Southern Ohio are totally different than northeastern Ohio, around Cleveland.

Central and Southern Missouri are a different world than Eastern Missouri, the area of St. Louis.

Texas and California are the best examples of sectionalism and regionalism, particularly with being the second and third largest states in area.

So Texas has the “Panhandle” centered around Lubbock; the area around Dallas and Fort Worth; the capital of Austin in the center of the state; the largest metropolitan area around Houston; and the area around San Antonio and further south to the Mexican border. It could easily be five or more states.

California has the traditional split between north and south, between San Francisco and Los Angeles. But now it is recognized that California also has a gap between East and West, between the coastal areas and the interior areas, with the interior being very different economically, and very much conservative and Republican, as compared to the rest of the state. There has even been a movement to separate interior areas in the south from the rest of the state, creating a 51st state, but the chances of its success are seen as highly unlikely.

The point is that there tends to be stereotyping of our 50 states, labeling them as having a particular economic and political structure, but the reality is much more complicated, and could, some day, lead to the breaking up of a few states, creating a few new additions to the Union!

National Security And Sexuality: Espionage And Blackmail Danger

Ronald 2 Comments

The scandal involving eleven Secret Service agents and five military personnel, engaged in drinking and prostitution in Colombia before the arrival of President Barack Obama at the Sixth Summit of the Americas meeting with other nations’ leaders, is extremely troubling in many ways.

It is not just the lack of ethics and high levels of immorality involved, but also it is not acceptable to say “boys will be boys” and excuse the misbehavior on that basis.

It is, more seriously, the issue of the dangers presented by these agents’ horrible judgment and reckless behavior.

The national security of the United States and the protection of the President were endangered by what occurred in Colombia.

Once an agent or military personnel engage in drinking and sexual behavior while working, the possibility of espionage and blackmail are opened up, and it means the area of immunity and safety is compromised, which could lead to some “pillow talk” leading to information being given that could compromise our nation’s safety and security, and even the possible “planting” of listening and video devices, and even biological, chemical, nuclear or other devices that could affect the health or life of the President, First Lady, children, Vice President, Presidential candidates, and other top officials of the government protected by the Secret Service!

Therefore, this situation is not be chuckled at, as it is reprehensible and dangerous, and such behavior must be fully investigated, and there must be a fail-safe system to prevent any such misbehavior and bad judgment such as this to occur ever again!

What it comes down to is that when people work in national security sensitive areas, particularly when involved with the highly responsible job of protecting the President even with their lives, such individuals MUST be informed that their behavior, on and off the job, is limited in special ways, as even off the job liaisons could lead to information being given that could compromise the national security and safety of our leaders, and reveal our national secrets.