New poll shows that majority of Republicans have no interest in seeing a woman become President. Ever!

And this surprises you?

Courtesy of Newsweek: 

Asked if they'd see a woman president in their lifetime, 20 percent of respondents said they "definitely will," while 43 percent said they "probably will." A total of 63 percent believed they would likely see a female president before they die. 

YouGov also asked, "Do you personally hope that the United States elects a woman president of the United States in your lifetime, or not?" Sixty-six percent of all respondents said yes, while 34 percent said no.

A comfortable majority of Republicans—59 percent—responded no, they don't hope to see a woman president in their lifetime, according to YouGov. In comparison, 89 percent of Democrats and 63 percent of independents responded that yes, they hoped to see a woman president before they died.

Well gee perhaps it wasn't Hillary's politics that made the Republicans hate her so much, but rather her lack of a penis.

Instead of having a Vajayjay running the country they looked for the very embodiment of a dick.

And that boys and girls is how you get this guy.

New NBC poll shows that Democrats have a 10 point lead going into 2018, while Donald Trump's numbers have ticked up four points. Wait, what?

Courtesy of NBC News:  

Democrats enjoy a 10-point advantage over Republicans in congressional preference for the 2018 midterm elections, even as President Donald Trump's job approval rating has ticked up, the latest national NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds. 

Fifty percent of registered voters say they prefer a Democratic-controlled Congress, while 40 percent want a GOP-controlled one. 

That double-digit lead — typically a sign of strong Democratic performance for the upcoming election — is up from the party's 6-point edge in January's NBC/WSJ poll, which was 49 percent to 43 percent, though the change is within the poll's margin of error.

That falls in line with other polling that shows the Democrats with a substantial lead going into the 2018 election.

But then there is this: 

Meanwhile, the NBC/WSJ polls finds that Trump's approval rating stands at 43 percent among all Americans — up four points from January. 

Fifty-three percent of adults say they disapprove of the president’s job, down from 57 percent two months ago. 

The improvement for Trump comes from Republican respondents (who went from 78 percent approve in January to 84 percent this month), white men (52 percent to 59 percent) and independents (33 percent to 45 percent).

Man am I embarrassed to be a white man some days.

I am trying to work it out in my head exactly what Trump has done in the last month or so that could have improved his image even by four points.

Could it be his blatant attacks on our Justice Department?

The constant turnover in his White House?

Or was it the fact that he has definitely been outed as banging a porn star right after his wife gave birth to his last child, and his attempts to keep her quiet?

Yeah, I simply don't get it.

But who cares? Because once we get enough Democrats into office we can shut his ass down hard!

Hillary Clinton has a lot to say about Donald Trump in her new book, but she certainly does not give Bernie Sanders a pass either.

Wow - "I am proud to be a Democrat and wish Bernie were, too." #ShePersisted pic.twitter.com/jSv7ilP5Nv

— Tom Watson (@tomwatson) September 4, 2017

Courtesy of Mediaite: 

She took aim at Sanders for “impugning” her character during the primary, which she believed ultimately helped Donald Trump win in the election. 

“Because we agreed on so much, Bernie couldn’t make an argument against me in this area on policy, so he had to resort to innuendo and impugning my character,” she wrote. “When I finally challenged Bernie during a debate to name a single time I changed a position or a vote because of a financial contribution, he couldn’t come up with anything. Nonetheless, his attacks caused lasting damage, making it harder to unify progressives in the general election and paving the way for Trump’s ‘Crooked Hillary’ campaign.” 

Clinton expressed appreciation for the Vermont Senator for campaigning for her during the general election, but she also expressed her frustration that he himself wasn’t a Democrat to begin with and accused him of not necessarily wanting a Democrat to win the White House.

Ouch!

That is not the only place in the book where Hillary takes a shot at Bernie and his supporters.

SWEET JESUS HILLARY HAS NO MERCY! God I love this. pic.twitter.com/FZomIui7t0

— Adam (@itsAdamJSmith) September 4, 2017

I KNOW this is really going to piss off the Bernie-bots, but Hillary is not wrong here.

I saw this myself during the 2016 election cycle, and it drove me fucking crazy.

The worst part in my opinion was that Trump would use information hacked by the Russians against Clinton, and then the Sanders supporters would spread it like manure all across social media.

This gave false information and conspiracy theories the kind of legitimacy among the progressives that they could never achieve while quarantined over on Right Wing new outlets and conservative talk radio programs.

THAT was why the Russian propaganda machine not only targeted Trump supporters but Bernie supporters as well.

Essentially Hillary has nothing to lose by speaking the truth and getting all of this off her chest. In fact it may turn out to be very beneficial moving forward to our next election cycle.

I have said it before but it bears repeating, the ONLY people who can confidently say they were not in some way manipulated by the Russians are those who voted for Hillary Clinton.

Because EVERYTHING they did was directed at keeping her out of the White House.

Donald Trump's poll numbers continue to tank.

Courtesy of Investor's Business Daily: 

Just 34% of the public approve of the job President Trump is doing, as his support among Republicans and independents tumbles, according to the April IBD/TIPP poll. Fifty six percent disapprove of the job he's doing. Approval ratings for a president haven't been this low since President Bush's last months in office. 

Last month, 40% of independents approved of the job Trump is doing; just 29% approve today. Among Republicans, Trump's job approval is 74%, which represents a 14-point decline from last month. 

The latest IBD/TIPP poll was taken from March 24-30, and includes responses from 904 people across the country, giving it a margin of error of +/-3.3 percentage points. The national sample of adults had 34% Democrats, 30% Republicans and 36% Independents. 

Across the board, the poll has bad news for Trump. 

He lost significant support among his strongest backers: white men (which dropped from 58% in March to 49% today), and rural America, which went from 56% to 41% today. 

Just over a third (37%) rate Trump's handling of the economy as "good" or "excellent," which is down from 43% last month. Only a quarter of those polled give him top marks on his handling of health care. 

And 35% now say that Trump is providing strong leadership for the country, compared with 49% who say it is weak.

Donald Trump cares about ratings, crowd size, and poll numbers perhaps more than any other president in history so you just KNOW this is killing him.  

These are historically bad numbers and it really looks as if they are only going to get worse.

As we predicted, Bernie Sanders will return to the Senate as an Independent. I guess the charade is over now.

Bernie Sanders tells @bpolitics breakfast w/reporters he'll return to the Senate as an Independent, not a Dem: 'I was elected as an Ind.'

— Susan Page (@SusanPage) July 26, 2016

THIS is why many real Democrats did not take Sanders seriously.

He was never really part of our party.

He did not want to fix the Democratic party, he wanted to change it into the Independent party.

And as for all of those DNC e-mails that showed officials being frustrated with Sanders' campaign and wanting him to get out of the way of the true Democrat? Who can blame them?

So later on today there will be a roll call vote, and a whole bunch of these Bernie bot pinheads will vote their little hearts out for a candidate who is not even interested in staying in the party at whose convention they are casting that vote.

And here I thought Fundamentalist Christians were easily manipulated.

Donald Trump urges Bernie Sanders to run as an Independent. Well of course he does.

Bernie Sanders has been treated terribly by the Democrats—both with delegates & otherwise. He should show them, and run as an Independent!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 26, 2016

Obviously this would be the best possible scenario for Donald Trump and the Republicans.

IF Sanders took Trump's advice, and to be fair there is no indication that he would, it might well hurt the Democrats enough for Trump to win the election.

Of course there is no real good reason for Sanders to go this route as he would have absolutely NO chance of winning, and it would literally destroy his credibility and reputation as a progressive. (After all any politician who handed Donald Trump the keys to the White House could hardly call themselves a liberal.)

So no I don't think that Sanders would go this route despite the Donald's urging.

However I also hope that Sanders does not actually take this thing all the way to the convention, because every penny that Hillary spends in this primary is one more penny she cannot spend fighting against Donald Trump for the future of this country.

Good guy Bernie Sanders.

Courtesy of CBS News: 

Although he's officially an independent senator, Sanders decided to compete for the Democratic nomination. He's said since he announced his candidacy that he would not run as an independent, and he said Monday that "of course" he still plans to hold to that pledge despite his recent success. 

Sanders said he thought about running as independent in the first place, but decided not to. 

"If we were serious about winning this election, which is always my intention from day one, I thought we could and I hope that we will. I had to do it within the Democratic primary caucus process," he said. 

"What I did not want to do is run as a third party candidate, take votes away from the Democratic candidate and help elect some right-wing Republican. I did not want responsibility for that. So what I said at the beginning of the campaign is that I was not going to run as an independent. And I say it now, that if I do not win this process I will not run as an independent."

Politics can be an ugly business and sometimes things are said in the heat of battle that can nurture anger and distrust long after an election is over.

But at the end of the day Bernie Sanders is a good and decent man. And if by some chance he wins the nomination I will support him 100%.

So let us remember, as we argue for our candidates in the primaries, that we ALL have one goal in common, and that is to make sure that the next President of the United States is NOT one of the passengers from that GOP clown car.

Jim Webb drops out of the Democratic presidential primary. May run as Independent.

"Hey, you won't have Jim Webb to kick around anymore. Or ignore during debates."

Courtesy of CNN:  

Jim Webb ended his bid for the Democratic presidential nomination at a press conference Tuesday, telling reporters he will consider an independent bid. 

Speaking at the National Press Club in Washington, Webb argued the Democratic Party has moved away from "millions of dedicated, hard-working Americans." 

"For this reason, I am withdrawing from any consideration of being the Democratic Party's nominee for the presidency," he said. 

"The very nature of our democracy is under siege due to the power structure and the money that finances both political parities," Webb said, adding later that it is "time for a new Declaration of Independence -- not from an outside power but from the paralysis of a federal system that no longer serves the interests of the vast majority of the American people."

Okay so Jim "Can somebody please call on me" Webb is out of the running for President. Since we already know that third party challengers have about as much chance of winning the election as Bristol Palin has of identifying the sperm donor for her current baby bump.

However as underwhelmed as I was by Webb's candidacy, he does make a good point about our broken political system.

And the only way to fix it is to pass aggressive campaign finance reform laws and get a handle on this free for all that has been going on since the Citizen's United decision.

People in other countries are starting to look at America NOT as a shining beacon of democracy, but more like a never ending disaster movie with brief cameos by reality TV stars and rodeo clowns.

So it's official. The Alaska Independent candidate and Democratic candidate have joined forces to defeat the scourge of Sean Parnell.

Former Democratic candidate Byron Mallott, with Bill Walker in the background.

Courtesy of The New York Times:

The race for governor of Alaska took a decided turn into the wild on Tuesday when the Democratic candidate, Byron Mallott, said he would withdraw and run instead for lieutenant governor alongside an independent candidate, Bill Walker. 

The decision means that for the first time since Alaskan statehood in 1959, no Democrat will be on the ballot for governor. 

Mr. Mallott said he became convinced, after days of soul-searching and analysis of the polling data, that reshuffling the deck was the only path to victory over Gov. Sean Parnell, a Republican who is seeking his second term. 

The unity ticket with Mr. Walker was announced in Anchorage on Tuesday afternoon after a weekend of negotiations between the campaigns, and hours before the deadline for changes to the November ballot. 

On Tuesday night, Lt. Gov. Mead Treadwell, a Republican, granted the emergency declaration of a ballot change requested by Mr. Walker and Mr. Mallott. But it is possible that the decision could be challenged.

Of course Parnell's spokesman  claimed that they were not troubled by this and quickly accused Walker of being a Democrat all along.

However I think Parnell IS worried about this, and I think he has good reason to be.

Alaska has been under the influence of the Palin for almost a decade now, and we desperately need to get somebody in control of the state who is not governing under the influence of the Wasilla Wendigo.

Alaska gubernatorial candidates may merge campaigns to ensure defeat of Sean Parnell. I give this idea the IM stamp of approval.

Courtesy of the Fairbanks Newsminer:  

Democrat Byron Mallott and independent candidate Bill Walker were in their second day of discussions Monday about whether they would run as a bipartisan or non-partisan ticket, Mallott spokeswoman Laury Scandling said in an email to The Associated Press. 

A formal statement was expected by noon Tuesday, said Scandling, who added that she plans to leave the campaign at the same time. 

Any changes to the ballot have to be made by Tuesday. 

The Alaska Dispatch News reports discussions would have Walker as the gubernatorial candidate and Mallott as lieutenant governor. 

The current lieutenant governor candidates for the campaigns would have to drop out. 

Polls have suggested for months that Republican Gov. Sean Parnell would win a three-way race against Mallott and Walker, but would face a more difficult challenge against a single candidate, especially Walker. 

Some Democrats and Republicans who oppose Parnell have been pushing Mallott and Walker to join forces. 

"I can say comfortably there's a common desire in both camps to not see the governor re-elected," said Tom Begich, a high-level Democratic party volunteer who has been promoting the merger.

I have to admit that I am kind of on the fence when it comes to Walker, after all he switched from Republican to Independent just for this race, however many of my progressive friends seem to think he is a good guy. And the unions up here seem to love him. 

However my bottom line is to vote for ANYBODY that might win and keep Parnell out of office.

It is WAY past time for Captain Zero to hit the bricks. 

Americans overwhelmingly disapprove of Karl Rove's attacks on Hillary Clinton. Well, except Republicans of course.

Courtesy of the Washington Post:

Two-thirds of Americans in a new Washington Post-ABC News poll disapprove of the Republican strategist raising questions about Clinton's age and health in advance of her potential presidential run. The lopsided negative reaction to Rove's commentary -- just 26 percent approve of his topic of criticism -- includes majorities of every age group as well as Democrats and independents. Republicans split evenly on the issue, with 45 percent approving and 46 percent disapproving of Rove broaching the issue.

In the overall category, combining all political groups it was 66% to 26% disapproval. For Democrats  it was 84 to 11 percent. Independents 64 to 27. And of course as pointed out in the above paragraph only the Republicans were evenly split on the issue.

Of course since most Republicans will undoubtedly vote against Clinton based simply on principle, and every other demographic is turned off by this, it is probably not something that the rest of the GOP should adopt as a viable method of attack against Hillary.

Of course this information comes too late to stop a certain Grizzled Mama from stuffing her Naughty Monkey pumps into her gaping maw.

Iowa Senate candidate: "I will blow your balls off with my Glock." Well there's a cheery campaign slogan.

Courtesy of TPM:  

Iowa Independent Senate candidate Bob Quast has a new ad out in which he waves around a Glock gun and threatens to "blow your balls off." 

The ad, tuned to cheery music, is called "#GotBalls Vote for Bob Quast" and features Quast, a long-shot candidate in the race, arguing about term limits and the Second Amendment. 

"If you are the sexual predator and sociopath who murdered my sister Lynette and you come to my front door to do harm to my girls, I'm going to use my Glock. To blow your balls off," Quast said smiling. 

Quast takes a jab at another eye-catching ad, by state Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) in which she touted her experience castrating pigs. 

"Now please do not confuse me with Iowa's Republican candidate for Senate," Quast said before snapping his fingers. The video then shows a picture of a pig.

Oh yeah, THAT'S the kind of mental stability one would expect from their Senator. 

Personally I was very confused about the reference to his murdered sister so I did some digging around.

It turns out that he did indeed have a sister who was killed by her husband:  

In 1999, Thomas Craft pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the brutal murder of his wife, Lynnette, who is Quast's sister. Police found pieces of Lynnette's body scattered across the Ann Arbor, Mich., area. But under a plea deal, he was released from prison in 2011. He is now under supervision at a halfway house in Ohio. 

The fact that this man is not in prison has been of great concern to Quast, and somehow that seems to have reinforced his pro-gun stance. 

I can certainly empathize with this man's anger over his sister's murder, but I also think that it might have made a rather unfortunate impact on his own mental health.

Flashing a gun around in a commercial, and using that opportunity to threaten somebody with having their balls shot off, is not just poor politics, it signifies somebody dealing with unresolved feelings of rage and fear.

Not only should somebody like that not be Senator, I would be somewhat concerned that they have access to firearms as well.

So let's see so, we have now met a Senate candidate who wants to shoot balls off, and one who brags about cutting balls off. Wow, Iowa aren't you enjoying an embarrassment of riches!

If Sarah Palin leaves the Republican party she has no place to go. To put it bluntly NOBODY wants her.

Courtesy of US News:  

Former vice presidential candidate and Gov. Sarah Palin, R-Alaska, openly mulled leaving the Republican Party in a Saturday interview on Fox News, citing her "libertarian streak." The Libertarian Party, frequently a refuge for renegade Republicans, isn't sure that she would be a good fit – and the Reform Party, too, says it has "zero interest" in Palin. 

"[W]hile a few of Sarah Palin's views are aligned with those of the Libertarian Party, her pro-interventionist foreign policy, her support of the 2008 Republican-led bailouts, her loyal support of Big Government Republicans, her social conservative agenda and her lack of concrete backing for any serious downsizing of Big Government runs afoul of the Libertarian Party's goals and most Libertarians' views," the Libertarian Party's executive director, Carla Howell, told U.S. News. 

Palin could conceivably find a home in the Constitution or Reform parties - but the Reform Party, which had its heyday in the 1990s, is entirely uninterested. 

"The Reform Party would probably have zero interest in Sarah Palin," Reform Party Chairman David Collison told U.S. News. "The primary reason is that we are not really as closely aligned with the tea party as people would think." 

Collison said his party aspires to be viewed as centrist, and embraces activists affiliated with the Occupy Wall Street movement. "Palin would basically torpedo that," he said.

As if that was not bad enough I had heard in the past that even Alaska's AIP party was keeping their distance. Essentially Palin is  poison and just about everybody knows it.

And the misses just keep on coming for Palin as the Washington Post examined her claim that Hispanics are against an immigration bill and gave her three Pinocchios for being such a dumb ass. 

However Buzzfeed might leave the biggest mark on her punditry pinata as they discover that before Palin was against passing immigration reform which contained amnesty for illegals, she was for it.

Well she wanted people to pay attention to her again, and they certainly are.

81% of Republicans support background checks for gun ownership. You know once Obama is out of office that is.

Courtesy of Talking Points Memo:

A whopping 81 percent of Republicans favor background checks for private gun sales, according to a Pew Research poll released Thursday. 

But just 57 percent of Republicans said they wanted a background checks bill to pass. 

“Many of those who have reservations about the bill express concerns that it includes other restrictions beyond background checks, or that it opens a ‘slippery slope’ toward more government power,” the survey concluded. 

In other words they would be all for the idea of background checks if there was somebody else besides that "Socialist Muslim Commie" in the White House.  After all they are convinced, despite every thing he has ever said, that he is coming to take away their guns so they cannot protect themselves against the great government take over.


Overall, 81 percent of Americans support broader background checks, the survey said. The partisan differences were minimal: 83 percent of Democrats and 80 percent of independents. 

But a majority of the public, 56 percent, has soured on the prospects of Congress passing new gun control laws this year.

So essentially the Republicans have done what they set out to do, which is to slow the process down until they have out lasted the public's passion for stricter gun laws after the Sandy Hook massacre.

Their success should make ALL of us sick to our stomachs and get us fired up to replace these obstructionists with politicians who are not working for the NRA but rather for the American people.

Is Mark Begich still a Democrat? Update!

So I was notified by a friend of mine that on Mark's website he now has the heading you see above.

This after he voted to allow the filibuster against the background checks, and after I recently heard a political advertisement of his play on conservative talk radio stations bragging about the fact that he helped to block the Democratic budget proposal.

So does that mean he is not willing to go "full retard" and become a Republican, but that he IS willing to become an Independent in order to distance himself away from the party that put him into office? Or am I over analyzing this?

When I postulated earlier that our lone Senate Democrat might be about to switch sides I received some blow back from his State Director Susanne Fleek-Green telling me I was mistaken.

If I am indeed mistaken about Mark's political affiliations perhaps she, or somebody else, could explain exactly what IS meant by the heading above, his recent votes, and that fact he seems to be campaigning on how much he is NOT like the Democrats.

Because as a REAL Alaskan Democrat I would really like to know.

Update: For those wondering, Mark Begich will face NO challenge from any other Democrat in 2014:

Alaska Democrats have endorsed U.S. Sen. Mark Begich for re-election. 

The endorsement is somewhat unusual in that the party typically doesn't announce its support for any one candidate in a primary. 

Party spokesman Zack Fields says the party can endorse in limited circumstances. He says Alaska Democrats felt it important to get their support for Begich on the record early, given the flood of outside money that's expected in the race.

So there you have it. Even if Begich refers to himself as an Independent, he will still be the only Democrat-like candidate for Alaskans to choose from.

The issue on guns in this country may drive voters to the polls in 2014, but not in the way that the Republicans are hoping.

Courtesy of TPM:  

Women who don’t usually vote in midterm elections — the same women who generally drive Democratic victories — will turn out in 2014 over the issue of guns, according to a recent poll. 

The survey released by Women Donors Network, a self-described progressive “community of women philanthropists,” found that a subset of women voters who usually don’t vote in midterm elections are more likely to vote in 2014 on the issue of gun violence. 

The survey, which was conducted by Democratic pollster Diane Feldman and Republican pollster Bob Carpenter using live phone calls to 1,500 women, found that “women who may not ordinarily vote in a non-presidential year are among those most engaged with issues of gun violence.” The group also posted a PDF slide deck presenting the poll’s findings. 

Feldman explained in an interview with TPM on Wednesday the results mean guns could be good politics for Democrats. 

“As we approach the 2014 congressional elections, the question will be to what degree do single women, lower income women, persons of color participate since that’s the Democratic edge,” she said. “And this is an issue that can encourage them to participate.” 

Strong support for universal background checks on firearms purchases and a focus on mental health and reducing violence in schools could rally these women the polls in unexpected numbers in 2014, Feldman said. They also happen to be part of President Obama’s proposals following the Newtown, Conn., school massacre. Feldman called the potential increase in minority and lower income women voters “significant.” And that could change the dynamics of the election (thought it would also have an impact dependent upon the demographics of given congressional districts.) 

I know what you are thinking, "But won't the pro-gun people be mobilized as well?" Pollster Diane Feldman already considered that possibility:

Obviously, gun rights supporters have been rallied by the talk of gun control as well. One only needs to look at the empty shelves at the local gun store for evidence of that. But Feldman noted that the stereotypical hardcore gun rights supporter — an older, white man — already votes in big numbers in the midterms. Also, the NRA’s objections to expanded background checks doesn’t have the ability to pull out their base, she said, because so many of the NRA’s members also support universal checks. 

“Do i deny an NRA constituency? Of course not.” Feldman said. But, she added, “background checks are not a mobilizing issue for their members.”

You know sometimes I think that President Obama might be a political wizard on sabbatical from his professorial duties teaching at Hogwarts. He seems to have the uncanny ability to recognize when the country is ready to support a piece of legislation once considered to polarizing to introduce.

He managed to get the Affordable Care Act passed, he got rid of DADT, and now he is positioned perfectly to have a real impact on the number of gun deaths in this country, and by doing so even bring more Democratic voters to the polls.

And another thing working in the President's favor is the fact that Republican politicians are essentially eating their own, and their constituents have lost confidence in them.

By the way I have NO problem believing that women feel very strongly about this gun control issue and are mobilized politically. On my Facebook page, on Twitter, and on this blog the women are the MOST strident pro-gun control voices that I hear.

If I were the NRA I would be changing my tactics today, and if I were a Republican politician I would run, not walk, as far away from that organization as possible until they do.

Romney is losing ground with both the conservative base and independents. I don't think he should hold out much hope for the Democrats either.

"How can people not want me for President? I LOOK like I came from central casting!"

Courtesy of Pew Research Center:

Three months ago, a slim majority (53%) of Republican and Republican-leaning voters said Mitt Romney was a strong conservative. Today, 42% see him this way, while the number who say he is not a strong conservative has jumped from 33% to 50%. 

This growing skepticism about Romney’s conservatism is most pronounced among Tea Party Republicans. Among Republican and Republican-leaning voters who agree with the Tea Party, just 29% say Romney is a strong conservative, down from 51% three months ago. Fully 68% of Tea Party Republicans say Romney is not a strong conservative.

This does not bode well for a guy who desperately needs the conservatives to turn out in large numbers if he expects to have ANY chance against Obama.

But as bad as that news is, it only gets worse when you look to the demographic that both Romney and Obama are hoping to woo to their side of the ideological fence in this year's election.

The Independents.

Over the course of the campaign, Romney’s image among independent voters has suffered substantially. Most notably, the number who believe he is honest and trustworthy has fallen from 53% to 41%, while the number who say he is not has risen from 32% to 45%. 

And even on his qualifications for the office – Romney’s strong suit – he has lost ground among independents. In November, a 58% majority of independents said Romney was well-qualified to be president, while just 31% said he was not. Today, 48% say he is well qualified, while 41% say he is not.

Oooh, that HAS to sting!

Without the independents, Romney has about as much chance of getting elected President as a Palin family member does of having tied the knot BEFORE they have cut an umbilical cord.

And to make matters worse, as if they could get much worse, it appears that Romney now has himself a Santorum-like problem.

And the revenge of Seamus Romney continues.

Stupidest idea EVER!

So there is this new website that has decided that the best chance for Obama to win a second term is to organize Democrats and Independents to help elect Sarah Palin as the Republican nominee in 2012. 

The group is call Primaries for Palin, and this is their Mission Statement:

PrimariesForPalin.com aims to nominate Sarah Palin as the Republican presidential candidate by encouraging Democrats and Independents to purposefully vote for her in state primaries. In head-to-head polls with President Barack Obama, Palin consistently fares worse than other possible Republican candidates because of her divisiveness. If Palin is nominated, Obama has a much better chance of winning reelection in November 2012.

Now either the individuals behind this group are suffering from a terminal case of "head-up-our-ass-itis" or they are some Pro-Palin group using this transparent half-assed excuse to convince Independents and Democrats to vote for Palin in the primary. 

You know they DO seem a little overly defensive about this second scenario.  This from their site:

Are you secretly a pro-Palin organization?

No, but we recognize that some may see us as supporters of Palin through “reverse psychology.” We are a group of liberal individuals that wishes to have Obama reelected in 2012. We routinely post highly critical stories about Palin. While a pro-Palin organization could also post anti-Palin stories, thus using “reverse psychology” deception, we also post numerous poll results that show she would be severely trounced by Obama in the general election. If anything, it is these poll results that should prove our intentions: Numbers don’t lie.

Uh huh.  Well if this movement is NOT some Palin panty sniffers pathetic attempt to trick liberals into backing Palin, than it is some spineless Obama supporters pathetic attempt to stack the deck in our President's favor because they lack confidence in his ability to win the election in 2012.  Either way these imbeciles should be ignored and marginalized until they get a clue and shut down their ridiculous enterprise.

Look Obama is going to destroy ANYBODY the Republicans put up against him in 2012. Believe it!

When people start to use deception to win an election, THAT is when a sure thing suddenly becomes a near miss.  Obama will win, count on it, but we can fuck that up by trying to game the system or attempting to outsmart the Luddites who still support the Republican party.

There were progressives who pulled that crap in Alaska, and they damn near delivered the vaguely bearded Teabagger candidate Joe Miller right onto the Senate floor.  And as others have pointed out, there was another Republican candidate that the Democrats felt would ensure an easy victory for their sitting President as well.

In late 1978, Ronald Reagan, himself a former governor and media star, was considered a has-been politician who had tried for the presidency in 1976 and had fallen short. Reagan was ridiculed, like Palin, for his alleged lack of intelligence and his alleged extremism. Yet, in 1980, Ronald Reagan beat President Jimmy Carter and became the 40th President of the United States.

Now Sarah Palin is NO Ronald Reagan, but my point is why take the chance in allowing the worst possible candidate imaginable to get THAT close to the White House.

Obama's amazing list of accomplishments will serve him well in the 2012 Presidential contest, and the memory of the last time a Republican President sat in the Oval Office will hang around the neck of their next candidate like a rusty anchor.  That should be enough to give the Democrats confidence in their President.

Sarah Palin has lost virtually all of her credibility with the American people, so why give her even the semblance of electability by faking a groundswell of support.  Remember the lesson of Dr, Victor Frankenstein and Senator John McCain.

Sometimes, the creature gets loose.