Tea Party Express Chair Amy Kremer: 'we need to crush Obama'

H/T Skeez in the comment section of this post for the link to this report showing Tea Party Express chair Amy Kremer making it clear that their movement will back any GOP candidate that wins the GOP nomination to run against Barack Obama.

They will not back a third party candidate because that would split the vote and guarantee an Obama win in the 2012 presidential election.

Kremer also wants to put to rest the idea the Tea Party would support a third party candidate, insisting the Tea Party can work from within the democratic and republican parties.

"There is no way that we are going to support a third party candidate. It would split the vote and it would guarantee reelection for Obama, and we need to crush Obama we have to get him out of the White House," says Kremer.

I think "Crush Obama in 2012" is a wonderful campaign idea.

.

Is "The Donald" Serious?

[Update 4/14/11] Donald Trump To Make Announcement On Presidency Run On Season Finale Of Celebrity Apprentice

The one word answer is yes. We believe Trump is very serious and plans to announce his candidacy once his television show finishes the season. Now before you instantly proclaim that this is just a publicity stunt consider that this theory does not explain what he has done so far. We have been involved in many political campaigns as even a candidate five times (won four out of five) and as a congressional campaign manager a few times. If Trump had asked our advice (he hasn't), we would advise him to do exactly what he is doing. You need to get the attention of the base of the Republican Party on issues that resonate with them. You need to convince the base that you are one of them. If this was a publicity stunt he would not being wooing the evangelicals. These folks are hardly an audience for his television show or his business deals.

For a candidate with no previous political experience, you have to do what the other candidates with such experience have been taught never to do. You have to take the bull by the horns and do things that the other candidates would not touch with a mile long pole. The "birther" issue is a case in point. No one else would touch that issue because the mass media has made mincemeat out of anyone who has tried to make an issue of it. Thus those people cannot get the time of day from the mass media. They are not "The Donald". He is just about the only person on the planet who can push the issue and make the media cover it precisely because he is "The Donald". Right away he breaks out of the pack by doing something they would never do. Of course, anyone else doing this would kill any chances of their winning any election. Trump only gets a huge jump with the Republican primary voters by doing this.

Many of you will say that even if this view is correct, he has killed his chances in the general election with this "stunt". You are assuming that Trump will continue to push the idea that Obama was not born in the United States and that it was the biggest con in the history of the world. Well it was the biggest con in history but not because Obama was not born in Hawaii. It does not matter whether Obama was born in Hawaii or not because even if he was born in Hawaii and he probably was, he is not a natural born citizen of the United States as required by the Constitution. Native born is not the same thing as natural born. Being born in the United States makes you a native born citizen even if both your parents are citizens of Mexico. That is the whole thing behind the anchor baby issue.

You have to have both parents be citizens of the United States to be natural born and you can be natural born even when your were not born in the United States. John McCain was born in Panama but both of his parents were U. S. citizens so he is still a natural born citizen. Obama's father was a British and/or Kenyan citizen so there is no way Obama can be a natural born citizen. You can bet that Trump knows this difference and will pivot to this position later in the election process after he has milked the "not even native born" issue for all it is worth. In the meantime, he has the mass media playing right into his hands because they are giving him unprecedented coverage thinking they are destroying him over the "ridiculous" birther issue. However, that same coverage allows him to tear Obama to ribbons on every other issue under the sun. This is a brilliant public relations ploy but what else would you expect from a man who is a master of publicity?

When the dust settles, Trump will have a reputation of being willing to take any issue right to Obama and make the mass media cover it. You can ignore any other contender on any particular issue but it is hard to ignore "The Donald" on any issue. As Trump continues to hammer on all of the things that have gone wrong in this country and tie Obama to every one of them whether deserved or not, he will point out that his background gives him the experience to "fix" these problems. Right now the economy is the big issue and Obama's ratings on his handling of the economy are in the toilet. Along comes Trump and says I believe I know something about economics so you can believe me when I tell you I know how to fix these problems. Is that so hard to believe? Trump has proven he knows how to do business and Obama looks like he has no clue because he has no track record in business.

Okay, assume for a moment that our analysis is right and Trump is very serious. Why is he doing this? Is it just for the attention and to prove he can get elected? Those are surely part of his reasons. How about because Trump is convinced that his businesses will go down with the ship of the country if the economy is not fixed and soon? Trump is convinced he can straighten out the mess and save his businesses from going over the cliff. He has convinced himself that he has no choice but to try because he is convinced no one else has a clue about how to fix things so that leaves him. Since he can fund the campaign out of his assets, raising money is not a problem and he can match Obama dollar for dollar. The Obama folks are gleeful at the thought of Trump as the Republican candidate. We suggest that he is more likely to be their worst nightmare.

Republican 2012 Presidential Candidate

In a previous article entitled Who Will be President in 2013, we discussed what the impact of reapportionment will have on the next Presidential Election. We never really answered the question of which individual will be President in 2013. That is because in large measure, it depends upon who will be the Republican candidate in 2012. The hard fact of the matter is that you cannot beat somebody with nobody and the Republican candidates are pretty much a collection of nobodies. Other than Romney, Huckabee and Palin, the rest of the candidates do not have enough name recognition to get elected.

Palin has the strongest base support but unless things change radically, she would lose as badly as Goldwater did in 1964 for the exact same reasons. Goldwater was successfully painted as a racist and too stupid to become President by the mainstream media. This was in spite of the fact that Goldwater's book, Conscience of a Conservative, was a best seller. Likewise Sarah Palin has best seller books but that will not help her when her approval levels are seriously upside down. They have gotten worse since the shooting in Tucson even though she had nothing to do with the shooter. It is a sad commentary that intelligent, brave and principled people can be so easily marginalized by the mainstream media but it does not change the results any.

That leaves us with Romney and Huckabee who might be able to beat Obama. Right now, neither of them could do that. The only polling firm that has been steadily testing various Republican possibilities by state is Public Policy Polling. They are a Democrat oriented firm but their polls are generally reliable and show little signs of partisan bias. As we pointed out in our last article, everything depends upon what happens in the new battleground states. If the election were held today, Obama would carry the same states he did in 2008 with the possible exception of Indiana and be easily re-elected as the following table demonstrates:

Party	State	2008 Margin	2010 Margin	Obama Poll %	Huckabee Poll %	Romney Poll %	2012 Votes	Party Totals
D	District of Columbia	85.74%					3	3
D	Hawaii	45.26%	24.57%				4	7
D	Vermont	37.01%	32.54%				3	10
D	Rhode Island	27.85%	18.46%				4	14
D	New York	26.69%	21.20%				29	43
D	Massachusetts	25.81%	27.70%				11	54
D	Maryland	25.44%	26.93%				10	64
D	Illinois	25.10%	7.14%				20	84
D	Delaware	25.00%	15.74%				3	87
D	California	24.06%	10.81%	54%	39%	36%	55	142
D	Connecticut	22.37%	18.97%				7	149
D	Maine	17.32%	12.07%				4	153
D	Washington	17.18%	6.75%				12	165
D	Michigan	16.47%	7.68%				16	181
D	Oregon	16.35%	3.99%				7	188
D	New Jersey	15.57%	0.64%	53%	36%	37%	14	202
D	New Mexico	15.13%	3.32%				5	207
D	Wisconsin	13.90%	11.90%	46%	41%	42%	10	217
D	Nevada	12.49%	6.90%	51%	41%	46%	6	223
D	Pennsylvania	10.32%	0.53%	46%	44%	42%	20	243
D	Minnesota	10.24%	2.04%	47%	40%	42%	10	253
I	New Hampshire	9.61%	6.88%				4	257
I	Iowa	9.53%	13.12%	47%	43%	41%	6	263
I	Colorado	8.95%	5.27%	47%	42%	41%	9	272
I	Virginia	6.30%	12.57%	48%	44%	43%	13	285
I	Ohio	4.54%	11.75%	45%	44%	42%	18	303
I	Florida	2.82%	20.70%	46%	44%	44%	29	332
I	Indiana	1.03%	18.78%				11	343
I	North Carolina	0.33%	11.78%	47%	45%	44%	15	358
R	Missouri	0.13%	19.71%	42%	49%	47%	10	180
R	Montana	2.26%	26.57%	41%	51%	50%	3	170
R	Georgia	5.21%	31.29%				16	167
R	South Dakota	8.41%	2.23%	41%	47%	46%	3	151
R	Arizona	8.52%	12.46%	44%	48%	49%	11	148
R	North Dakota	8.63%	9.81%				3	137
R	South Carolina	8.98%	16.14%	43%	49%	49%	9	134
R	Texas	11.77%	34.72%	42%	55%	49%	38	125
R	West Virginia	13.12%	13.21%	37%	54%	50%	5	87
R	Mississippi	13.17%	10.02%				6	82
R	Nebraska	14.93%	40.02%	38%	51%	49%	5	76
R	Kansas	14.96%	31.45%				6	71
R	Tennessee	15.07%	28.75%				11	65
R	Kentucky	16.23%	28.41%				8	54
R	Louisiana	18.63%	33.79%				8	46
R	Arkansas	19.85%	17.28%				6	38
R	Alaska	21.54%	38.44%				3	32
R	Alabama	21.58%	43.03%				9	29
R	Idaho	25.43%	27.82%				4	20
R	Utah	28.18%	31.29%				6	16
R	Oklahoma	31.29%	35.27%				7	10
R	Wyoming	32.24%	45.94%				3	3

On the other hand, Romney and Huckabee are within striking distance in the battleground states. Romney pulls better in the blue states but not enough to carry them. As a practical matter, right now Huckabee does better in the purple states and is the only Republican who might beat Obama in those battleground states. Obviously all of this could change and we would like to see Rasmussen poll these purple states and do match-ups between Obama and the leading Republican candidates as a cross check on Public Policy Polling.

The column marked 2012 Margin is the margin that the Republican candidates collectively got in the various states. As you can see, those Republican candidates even carried some blue states like Michigan, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Nevada and Pennsylvania. That explains the huge number of seats that the Republicans picked up in 2010. Still notice that the Obama margin always beats the House margin in the blue states. That is because the minorities that tend to support Democratic candidates turn out poorly in midterm elections but do show up much better in Presidential elections. On the other hand, the purple states have the House margin better than the Obama margin except in New Hampshire and Colorado.

If Huckabee could do as well as the Republican House candidates did, he would eek out an electoral college win 272 to 266. That would mean he would have to carry Iowa in addition to the Republican leaning states of Virginia, Ohio, Florida, Indiana and North Carolina. The PPP poll results show that Obama is ahead by only three points in Pennsylvania 47 to 44% so that is another possibility. A lot will depend on who is the Republican candidate against Senator Bob Casey in Pennsylvania and right now only Rick Santorum has any chance and he is behind 48 to 41%. The open Senate seat in Virginia favors the Republicans and a win there might put Huckabee over the top. Likewise if Jeb Bush will run against Senator Nelson in Florida, that could likewise help Huckabee in Florida. It is also possible that Senator Lugar will help Huckabee in Indiana since he should win easily. North Carolina does not have a senator up for election in 2012 so a strong showing by Republican House candidates will be required there.

Who Will Be President in 2013?

The obvious answer is that it depends upon what happens between now and then. A better question is which party will win the presidential election in 2012 because that is a lot easier to answer than which individual will win. The reason that is true is because as the 2000 presidential election reminded us, it is all about electoral votes. The electoral votes have changed since 2000 thanks to the 2010 census which transferred electoral votes from blue states to red states on the whole making it easier for a Republican to win.

First you need to forget just about everything you think you know about winning a presidential election because it is a whole new ballgame as a result of the change in electoral votes and therefore which states are battleground states. The answer to which party will control the White House comes down to a mere handful of states. You can forget about polling nationwide for which party will win the Presidency in 2012 because you only need to poll the new battleground states to know the answer.

Let's begin by looking at the revised electoral vote picture for the 2012 election:

Presidential Elections in a Nutshell

Party	State	2008 Margin	2004 Margin	2000 Margin	00-08 Margin	2012 Votes	Party Totals
D	District of Columbia	85.73%	79.84%	76.21%	80.59%	3	3
D	Massachusetts	25.81%	25.16%	27.30%	26.09%	11	14
D	Rhode Island	27.84%	20.75%	29.10%	25.90%	4	18
D	Hawaii	45.27%	8.75%	18.33%	24.12%	4	22
D	New York	26.69%	18.29%	24.98%	23.32%	30	52
D	Vermont	37.01%	20.14%	9.93%	22.36%	3	55
D	Maryland	25.45%	12.98%	16.39%	18.27%	10	65
D	Connecticut	22.37%	10.36%	17.47%	16.73%	7	72
D	Illinois	25.10%	10.34%	12.02%	15.82%	20	92
D	California	24.06%	9.94%	11.08%	15.27%	55	147
D	Delaware	24.99%	7.60%	13.06%	15.22%	3	150
D	Maine	17.33%	8.99%	5.12%	10.48%	4	154
D	New Jersey	15.57%	6.68%	15.81%	12.69%	14	168
D	Washington	17.17%	7.18%	5.58%	9.98%	12	180
D	Michigan	16.47%	3.42%	5.13%	8.34%	16	196
D	Oregon	16.35%	4.16%	0.44%	6.98%	7	203
D	Pennsylvania	10.32%	2.50%	4.17%	5.66%	20	223
D	Minnesota	10.24%	3.48%	2.41%	5.38%	9	232
D	Wisconsin	13.91%	0.38%	0.22%	4.84%	10	242
I	New Mexico	15.13%	0.79%	0.06%	4.80%	5	247
I	New Hampshire	9.61%	1.37%	1.27%	3.24%	4	251
I	Iowa	9.54%	0.67%	0.31%	3.06%	6	257
I	Nevada	12.50%	2.59%	3.54%	2.12%	6	263
I	Ohio	4.54%	2.10%	3.51%	0.36%	18	275
I	Colorado	8.95%	4.67%	8.36%	1.36%	9	257
I	Florida	2.81%	5.01%	0.01%	2.21%	28	248
I	Virginia	6.30%	8.20%	8.03%	3.31%	13	220
I	Missouri	0.14%	7.20%	3.34%	3.56%	11	207
I	North Carolina	0.33%	12.44%	5.53%	5.88%	15	196
R	Arizona	8.52%	10.47%	6.29%	8.43%	11	181
R	West Virginia	13.12%	12.86%	6.33%	10.77%	5	170
R	Tennessee	15.07%	14.27%	3.87%	11.07%	11	165
R	Georgia	5.21%	16.60%	11.69%	11.17%	16	154
R	Arkansas	19.86%	9.76%	5.45%	11.69%	6	138
R	Indiana	1.04%	20.68%	15.64%	11.76%	11	132
R	Louisiana	18.63%	14.50%	7.67%	13.60%	8	121
R	South Carolina	8.97%	17.08%	15.94%	14.00%	9	113
R	Montana	2.26%	20.51%	25.08%	15.95%	3	104
R	Mississippi	13.81%	19.69%	16.92%	16.60%	6	101
R	Kentucky	16.23%	19.86%	15.13%	17.07%	8	95
R	South Dakota	8.41%	21.47%	22.74%	17.54%	3	87
R	Texas	11.77%	22.87%	21.32%	18.65%	38	84
R	Alabama	21.58%	25.62%	14.91%	20.70%	9	46
R	Kansas	14.96%	25.38%	20.80%	20.83%	6	37
R	North Dakota	8.63%	27.36%	27.60%	21.20%	3	31
R	Nebraska	14.93%	33.22%	29.00%	25.72%	5	28
R	Alaska	21.53%	25.55%	30.95%	26.01%	3	23
R	Oklahoma	31.30%	31.14%	21.88%	28.11%	7	20
R	Idaho	25.43%	38.12%	39.53%	34.36%	4	13
R	Wyoming	32.24%	39.79%	40.06%	37.36%	3	9
R	Utah	28.17%	45.54%	40.49%	38.07%	6	6

The first thing to notice is that if the states vote the way they did on average between 2000 and 2008, the Republicans win 275 to 263 electoral votes as shown in the last column. To see if that is likely we need to look at any trends between 2000 and 2008 to see if the state is showing a steady trend of moving from one party to the other one in the purple or contested states. It would appear that among the states that are shown as Republican that Colorado is drifting towards the Democrats which would throw the election to the Democrats 272 to 266. To make up for this loss, the Republicans would have to carry one of the next four purple states: Nevada, Iowa, New Hampshire or New Mexico. Since all but New Hampshire is trending to the Democrats, the Republicans would need to carry New Hampshire to make up for losing Colorado.

The next consideration is that undoubtedly the Democrat candidate will be President Obama and he made deep inroads into the Republican states so we must ask if he can repeat this feat. Therefore we need to look at the states he won that he might not be able to carry in 2012. If he won by better than a 5% margin then those states are a real problem for the Republicans. Virginia and Colorado were lost by more than that. As you look at what states might make up for Virginia, you will see that all of the states that are blue in the last column were lost by a greater margin than Virginia so if Obama carries Virginia in 2012, he wins re-election. If he carries Colorado which he won by 8.95%, he must lose New Hampshire which he carried by 9.61% or Iowa which he carried by 9.54%. Virginia, Colorado, Iowa and New Hampshire will decide the election because the Republicans must carry either Colorado or either Iowa or New Hampshire in addition to Virginia.

It goes without saying that the Republican candidate must also carry the other four states they lost by less than 5%. Thus polling those eight states will tell you who will win in 2012. The Republicans must be ahead in five of them and ahead in either Colorado, Iowa or New Hampshire. So what do we know about the Republican chances in those eight states? Here is what the 2010 House races told us in those eight states plus the next four just to make sure we are not missing any bets:

State	2008 Margin	2010 House Margin	Average Margin
North Carolina	0.33%	14.44%	7.06%
Indiana	1.04%	28.20%	13.58%
Florida	2.81%	30.45%	13.82%
Ohio	4.54%	19.30%	7.38%
Virginia	6.30%	19.45%	6.58%
Colorado	8.95%	8.00%	0.48%
Iowa	9.54%	18.86%	4.66%
New Hampshire	9.61%	12.90%	1.65%
Minnesota	10.24%	2.65%	6.45%
Pennsylvania	10.32%	6.14%	2.09%
Nevada	12.50%	9.84%	2.66%
Wisconsin	13.91%	17.07%	3.16%
New Mexico	15.13%	2.50%	8.82%

If the voters repeat what they did in the 2010 House races, Obama is toast. Even if they wind up half way between what they did in 2008 and 2010, the Republicans win because they carry Iowa, New Hampshire and Wisconsin which more than makes up for losing Colorado. If you want to know which party will control the White House in 2013, poll Colorado. If a generic Republican candidate is ahead of Obama, the Republicans will win 2012. If Obama is ahead in Colorado, poll Iowa and New Hampshire. If the generic Republican is ahead in either state, the Republicans will win but if the generic Republican is behind in both states, Obama will win. For an even cheaper answer, just poll Wisconsin. If the generic Republican is ahead, Obama is all through. Yes, it really is that simple.