The media are swooning about everything Obama. But there are many details that have emerged since the election about who Obama really is and what this election really meant. Here are 22 observations now that the dust has settled:
1) The huge voter turnout predicted by the media did not happen. That was pro-Obama media hype. The final vote total was 126 million or just 3.8 million more than 2004. All those “10 million voters” that the Democrats allegedly registered didn’t show up and probably never existed, along with the hordes that were supposed to turn out for this “historic” election.
2) Obama did not win the landslide that the media were cheering for. That was more spin. Obama/Biden got 52.7% of the popular vote, or 66.35 million votes, while McCain/Palin got 46% or 58 million. The margin of victory thus was 6.7 points, which is a modest victory in a year when Democrats were supported to win in a tsunami (which is 15 points or more). Ralph Nader got only 691,000 votes, or .5%, while libertarian Bob Barr got only 507,000 or .4%.
3) Obama won the election because a small group of very powerful media organizations and media titans chose him, promoted him and protected him. They include The New York Times, The Washington Post, Newsweek, Time magazine, the TV networks, the New York media industry, Hollywood, Jay Leno, David Letterman and all the rest. If they had not propped up and protected Obama while trashing McCain, Palin and all the other Republicans, Obama would have lost.
4) Two separate CNN reports on November 10/11 said that Obama had an “approval rating” of 64% and 75% when only 52.7% of people voted for him. This is how the media elected Obama, with nonsense like this. And since when does a president-elect get “approval ratings”?
5) After the media savaging of Palin, it turns out that Biden was the real embarrassment of the campaign. Don’t expect to see Biden in an Obama White House. He will be locked away because he is basically incompetent.
6) Obama was catapulted into the White House by one thing – the economic crisis. If it had not happened, McCain probably would have won. This shows how weak Obama really was. And Obama still won despite the fact that one of the key factors in the economic meltdown was the collapse of Fannie Mae, which was closely associated with Obama and the Democrats. Again, the media totally covered for Obama. If McCain and the Republicans had had those same connections to Fannie Mae, it would have been all over the news.
7) Democrats were expected to win this year anyway because of a natural cycle of politics described even by Thomas Jefferson, where the public gets tired of one party and chooses change. And with Obama’s huge money advantage, the Iraq war, nationwide media attacks on Bush/Cheney/Republicans, voter fraud, and the economic meltdown, it was no surprise that the Democrat won. What was surprising was how small Obama’s victory was.
8) According to Scott Rasmussen – one of the few serious pollsters whose work is fairly accurate – 55% of Americans still believe that tax cuts are good for the economy, which directly contradicts Obama’s far-left Chicago Democrat political philosophy. Still Obama ran on tax cuts.
9) For those who say that the Republican philosophy took a beating this cycle, here’s more interesting news: Rasmussen found that 31% of voters believed that Obama would cut their taxes, while only 11% believed McCain would, and that this was a key to Obama’s victory. This was his clearest message in the close of the campaign… tax cuts. But with Obama’s F rating from the National Taxpayers Union, it is a charade. Obama may possibly give some token tax relief, but in the end he will raise taxes as much as he can possibly get away with.
10) The last Democrat to win on the tax-cutting issue was Bill Clinton. Yet when Clinton got into office, he reneged on a middle-class tax cut and did everything he could to raise taxes, which the media covered up.
11) A Rasmussen survey conducted October 2 found that 59% agreed with the idea of Ronald Reagan that “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” Only 28% disagreed. The same poll also found that fully 44% of Obama voters agreed with Reagan’s assessment while McCain voters overwhelmingly did.
12) Rasmussen also found that 43% of voters view it as positive to be compared to Reagan, while just 26% consider it a negative. Being compared to Reagan rated higher among voters than being called “conservative,” “moderate,” “liberal” or “progressive,” Rasmussen found. Among only Democrats, however, 51% viewed the Reagan comparison as negative
13) Many conservative states like Montana that went for McCain now have 2 Democrat US senators and a Democrat governor. This has happened for several reasons, one of which is that many of the people moving to Montana are East Coast/West Coast upper-income, college-educated wine-and-cheese Democrats who go to Montana for “lifestyle” reasons.
They voted for Obama because he is trendy. And these voters then can say that they “care about the poor” and “care about the environment”. Democrat Montana governor Brian Schweitzer was re-elected with 65% of the vote compared to 32% for Republican Boy Brown. Schweitzer ran on a relatively conservative platform of increasing oil and gas production, homeowner tax rebates, job creation and a freeze on college tuition. This election shows that Democrats who are getting elected are often preaching conservative ideas, as Obama did with his tax-cut proposals.
14) The state with the best economy in America – Texas – went 56% to 44% for McCain.
15) The state with the worst economy in America – Michigan – went 58% to 41% for Obama.
16) Other states with really bad economies that went overwhelmingly for Obama were Massachusetts, Vermont, Rhode Island, Illinois and New York.
17) Once-conservative Virginia, which also has 2 Democrat US senators and a Democrat governor, went for Obama in part because pro-Obama entrepreneurs have moved into Northern Virginia, bringing with them many wine-and-cheese Democrats. This actually is a good sign for Republicans, however. It means that even the Democrat party finally is supporting economic growth and business.
18) The richest man in America, Warren Buffett, supported Obama.
19) New Hampshire, once reliably conservative, is one state that now is trending distinctly liberal. In the November 4, election, Democrat governor John Lynch was re-elected to a third 2-year term with 70% of the vote, while Democrat Jeanne Shaheen defeated incumbent Republican US senator John Sununu 52% to 45%.
This is unfortunate, because New Hampshire for most of the 20th century was a conservative pro-business state. Snooty Ivy League New Englanders used to laugh at New Hampshire as a nutty, right-wing enclave until they all started to move there because New Hampshire had the only strong economy in New England.
Now tens of thousands of socialists from Massachusetts are continuing to pour into New Hampshire, bringing their politics with them, rather than seeing the failing Massachusetts economy as being a result of its far-left policies.
20) Obama has no intention of doing all the things he promised. Just 5 days after the election, the Obama campaign’s transition website was scrubbed clean so that nobody can say that Obama promised this and that.
21) Many suburbs are increasingly ‘blue’ because the wealthy baby-boom generation and beyond has been made complacent about wealth creation through years of indoctrination in the media, the universities etc. Many of these suburbanites are big-time environmentalist voters, which is ironic since they choose to live in wealthy man-made places with all the comforts of modern life while worrying themselves sick about the bears and the wildflowers. They also use large amounts of energy for their lifestyles while voting to block energy production. This is part of the absurdity of modern-day socialism.
22) The Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 9625.28 on election day November 4. By Wednesday, November 12, the Dow was 8282.66 at the end of trading for a drop of 1342.62 points after Obama was elected. Yet we were told that Obama was supposed to be an uplifting figure who inspired confidence and optimism.
It does not look like he inspires confidence at all. Which many knew he wouldn’t.
Is he really going to be Jimmy Obama?
Please visit my website at www.nikitas3.com for more.