Good to see

Obama is falling further behindWomen are abandoning him. Dale’s dream of handing the boot Obama put on the Church’s neck back to the Dems with the foot still in it may become a reality.  If so, here’s hoping that, unlike Republicans, the Dems will actually be capable of learning from their own damnable stupidity and wickedness.

The only problem–and it is a huge one–is that when Obama loses as he deserves to, Romney wins despite his not deserving to do so at all.

  • Don

    Probably the best thing that could happen is that Romney wins the Electoral College with a minority of the popular vote. (Well, it’d be better if he had a Democratic Congress, but I don’t think that’s in the cards.) Maybe that would make him hesitate to jump into the Middle East with both boots.

    • Bob

      Hey! There’s a US election-result one can genuinely hope and pray for!

      • http://hezekiahgarrett.wordpress.com Hezekiah Garrett

        For the record, I was the first to express the “NO MANDATE” position on this blog…

  • http://chicagoboyz.net TMLutas

    It would be very helpful to talk out and come up with a way to keep engaged and have better results out of the primary the next electoral cycle. And by the next electoral cycle I mean next year, and the one after that, etc. We haven’t gotten into this mess in one cycle. We won’t get out in just one either.

  • Kirt Higdon

    The Real Clear Politics average of recent polls shows Romney ahead in the projected popular vote by a scant 0.4%. And he is still shown as behind in the projected electoral vote. Of the seven biggest electoral vote states, McCain carried only Texas in ’08. Of the six which went for Obama, Romney is ahead (by a hair) only in Florida. RCP also indicates that the Republicans will pick up one seat in the Senate for a total of 48 and will maintain control of the House by roughly the current margin. In other words, the political landscape will look pretty much the same the day after the election as the day before. Obama is likely to eke out a victory and Congress will remain divided. With respect to policy of course, there will be no significant difference no matter who wins.

  • http://attheturnofthetide.blogspot.com Caspar

    Did anyone else catch this moment from Romney during the debate?

    “Every woman in America should have access to contraceptives, and every employer in America should provide women access to contraceptives.”

    Did I hear that wrong?

    • http://hezekiahgarrett.wordpress.com Hezekiah Garrett

      Caspar,

      That’s just what he says to get elected, a necessary evil. But if pressed privately by pro-life forces he will claim something else entirely.

      What are you, some Obama operative sent here to discourage God’s people from their sacred mission of electing the only man who can get America back on track?

    • http://www.revolution21.org The Mighty Favog

      No, you didn’t hear it wrong. Divine judgment’s a bitch.

      (For the record, I believe divine judgment generally is a matter of God giving us just enough rope. If the choice between these two isn’t enough rope, I don’t know what is. Disaster awaits either way.)

    • http://decentfilms.com SDG

      Caspar: YES, you heard wrong.

      Romney DIDN’T say “every employer in America should provide women access to contraceptives.” He said “Every woman should have access to contraception,” i.e., it shouldn’t be illegal or unobtainable — NOT that it should be universally available FOR FREE via every healthcare plan in existence, and all employers should have to pay for it.

  • Lloyd Petre

    “…….Romney wins despite his not deserving to do so at all.”
    Really?
    “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.” Teddy Roosevelt.

    Let us not lose sight of the fact that the HHS abortion mandate is there as a result of the leadership of the Catholic Biden, the Catholic Pelosi, the Catholic Sibelius, the Catholic Roberts and Obama, who took a majority of the Catholic vote in 2008, and if Catholics seem incapable “…of learning from their own damnable stupidity and wickedness”, how could a republican? Or a Mormon for that matter.

    • Mark Shea

      Romney: “I’d just note that I don’t believe that bureaucrats in Washington should tell someone whether they can use contraceptives or not. And I don’t believe employers should tell someone whether they could have contraceptive care of not. Every woman in America should have access to contraceptives.”

      He doesn’t deserve to win. At. All.

      • http://decentfilms.com SDG

        Is it our position that employers should be able to “tell someone whether they could have contraceptive care of not,” or that some women should not even have “access to contraceptives”? Do we want to make contraceptives illegal or unavailable to some women? Do we even want Catholic employers to be able to tell employees “Sorry, you can’t go to the drugstore and buy yourself some contraception”? This is not what I understand the Church’s objection to the HHS mandate to be.

        • Mark Shea

          Steve: I really wish I could believe for a second that Romney is trying to say he believes that when a woman goes on her lunch hour to buy some contraceptive, her boss does not have the right to follow her and threaten her job if she does.

          But quite obviously what he is getting at here is that he agrees with Obama’s playbook and has no intention of letting employers opt out of being forced to pay for Sandra Fluke’s contraceptive candy. He is transparently trying to shore up the female demographic that Obama was (very successfully) appealing to with a transparent “Me too.” He’s not saying “Republicans are not going to ban contraception” (duh). He’s saying “I agree that employers should be forced to provide women with contraception”.

          Now undoubtedly, he’s going to walk that back and shake the etch-a-sketch so that conservative Catholics, eager to have some illusion of integrity to grasp at in the moral void that is his heart, can persuade themselves that he is serious about the Mandate. And it may still be that Dale Price is right (Heh “Price is Right” I made a funny!) and Romney has nothing to lose and everything to gain by overturning the mandate. But last night could just as easily signal that he feels he has a lot to lose and plans to stab his constituents in the back on the question of religious liberty in preference to the “Sex in the City” demographic. He does, after all, know that prolifers will support him no matter how much he smacks them around and shush those in their ranks who point out what a cynical liar he is.

          My point is simply this: those “realists” who constantly berate Third Partiers as “unrealistic” are completely out of touch with reality when they overlook the fact that Romney perpetually sends the message that he is a moral void whom no sane person should trust. In their “realism” they have chosen to back a man who cannot even win his own party’s trust, much less those of Undecided or any significant part of Obama’s. So “realists” are now in the position of yelling at people like Erin Manning and punching them below the belt to keep them in line instead of being able to count on their support and go evangelize the Dems to leave their guy and support Romney. Romney’s atrocious polling against a candidate this weak is not Obama’s fault, not the media’s fault, and not Third Partiers fault. It’s Romney’s fault and the fault of the party that “safely” and “realistically” chose to make him their standard bearer.

          • beccolina

            It just makes me sick for my sex that this seems to be such a deciding issue for women voters. Not the economy, not energy, not foreign policy (and how that affects foreign women), certainly not the right to be born, but our right to have recreational sex and not have to shell out $ for contraception.

            • Rachel K

              Beccolina if it makes you feel any better, I think that’s more the media narrative than the truth. Most polls have shown that women care more about the economy than this nonsense.

              • Kristen inDallas

                And I think also many women for whom this IS the critical issue, but see it as a disrepectful implication of what we “ought” to be doing with our free time who will vote against him on new-feminist principles alone.

          • http://decentfilms.com SDG

            Mark: You could well be right about what Romney will actually do. I have very little confidence about that myself. Insofar as the question is what he is saying here, though, I believe the correct context is the rhetorical attacks that Romney wants employers or legislators to decide if women have “access” to contraception, and that he really is saying “Don’t be stupid, of course women will still have access to contraception.” This statement isn’t a pivot away from his previous statements against the HHS mandate. He may well execute such a pivot in office, but this statement isn’t what it’s been made out to be.

            • Mark Shea

              Nah. This statement is a “Me too”, ripped from the Obama playbook in identical language to that of the Administration, to make clear that employers have no right to deny the gals on “Sex in the City” their contraceptive candy.

              Steve: Romney could have made clear that he supports giving women their contraceptive candy without infringing on religious liberty. He didn’t. Instead, he used *exactly* the same language of the Administration in order to say “me too!” to the demographic Obama was appealing to.

              Exactly the same language.

              • http://decentfilms.com SDG

                Where does Romney say “giving,” Mark? Again, not defending Romney himself or making any predictions about what he will actually do, but bear in mind that these remarks were shoehorned in under direct pressure from an aggressive moderator trying to shut him up, after Obama had made comments during a segment Romney wasn’t allowed to respond to. He didn’t really have a chance to outline his position.

                Basically I agree with this First Things piece: Romney “whiffed” his response, but “what Romney didn’t do—despite what some of my friends said to me tonight—is reverse his position or betray those worried about the mandate.”

              • R. Howell

                The Dems are trying to convince people that opponents of the HHS mandate are trying to prevent women from getting access to contraception. That is false, and it is the argument that Romney needed to respond to. What he needed to communicate clearly was that he does not want either the government or an employer to have any power to stop a woman from getting contraception if she wants it. I don’t know how he could have made that point any more clearly.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X