For the last two weeks we have been treated to the narrative that Barack Obama is surging at the polls, Mitt Romney is in trouble and unless there is a massive change in direction it is all over.
Simply put this is a lie.
Of all the polls you have seen, there is one poll that has gotten no attention, it is a poll that has been taken monthly, it is a poll that Doug Ross spotted and promoted on his site. It is the Rasmussen Poll of party identification.
They have party identification results online dating back to 2004.
Here are the recent numbers:
Voter identification by party
It’s a 3-4 point advantage for Republicans.
Da Tech Guy continues:
At no time during the year do the Democrats have a registration advantage vs republicans, the gap closes in July & re-separates in August. The low point for the GOP was July for 34.9 and the high August at 37.6 For democrats the high was 34.0 in June & July the low was 32.4 in Feb
What does this mean for November? It means a lot.
The Democrats won 2 election in this period 2006 & 2008 with a 6.9 advantage in 2006 & a 7.6 advantage in 2008.
There is no example of the Democrats winning since 2004 with an advantage less that 6.9.
The GOP won two elections in this period 2004 with a -1.6 disadvantage & 2010 with a 1.3 advantage. This means the GOP has proven it can win with not only a small lead but with an actual disadvantage. Additionally with an advantage of only 1.3 they pulled off the biggest house swing in my lifetime.
Can these number change? Well the biggest 1 month swing I’ve seen is 4.2 Oct-Nov in 2010 the biggest 3 month swing was Dec 2007-Feb 2008 6.9 in favor of Democrats at the rise of Obama.
Tell me with the economy in the tank, and the new trouble in the Middle East, what is the prospect of a swing of that size to the Democrats happening again right now? Moreover even if that record registration swing repeated itself right now this would give democrats an advantage of only 2.6 points.
I’ve covered a lot of national polls on this site over the last year and all those polls ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX have one thing in common.
Not a single one of those polls had a sample with a GOP advantage.
And here’s what the mainstream media have been doing with their polls:
Mainstream media oversampling Democrat voters
Only the Rasmussen Reports poll is accurately sampling voters based on party identification.
That’s why Obama looks like he’s winning. He’s not.
The killings of the US ambassador to Libya and three of his staff were likely to have been the result of a serious and continuing security breach, The Independent can reveal.
American officials believe the attack was planned, but Chris Stevens had been back in the country only a short while and the details of his visit to Benghazi, where he and his staff died, were meant to be confidential.
The US administration is now facing a crisis in Libya. Sensitive documents have gone missing from the consulate in Benghazi and the supposedly secret location of the “safe house” in the city, where the staff had retreated, came under sustained mortar attack. Other such refuges across the country are no longer deemed “safe”.
Some of the missing papers from the consulate are said to list names of Libyans who are working with Americans, putting them potentially at risk from extremist groups, while some of the other documents are said to relate to oil contracts.
According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and “lockdown”, under which movement is severely restricted.
Mr Stevens had been on a visit to Germany, Austria and Sweden and had just returned to Libya when the Benghazi trip took place with the US embassy’s security staff deciding that the trip could be undertaken safely.
Recall that foreign policy and counter-terrorism are not as important to Obama as campaign fundraising and playing golf. And why not be a slacker? The American news media is there to cover for him. The only thing you’ve heard about the embassy attack in the news is that Romney “committed a gaffe”. That’s all you need to know, according to the mainstream media.
For weeks the President tried to ignore the film, no doubt hoping that it would go away. Unfortunately for Obama, the film has continued to gain momentum. It has been seen by more than 2 million people, earned more than $27 million, and become the second biggest political documentary of all time. So now he has decided to come out with guns blazing.
Yet what a clumsy, ill-aimed and misleading blast this is. It begins with a quotation deploring “smear journalism”. We read that this quotation is from the “Columbia Journalism Review on2016: Obama’s America.” Yet the Columbia Journalism Review article was published in September 2010, nearly two years before the film came out! It turns out that the magazine was critiquing one of my earlier books The Roots of Obama’s Rage.
Apparently relying on a range of left-wing discredited sources, Obama lists what it takes to be four “flat-out falsehoods”. Let me list and address them in turn.
First, “D’Souza falsely claimed that President Obama said he didn’t believe in American exceptionalism.”
Oh really? Obama was asked in 2009 whether he believed in American exceptionalism. He replied that he did, just as the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks in Greek exceptionalism. The clear implication of Obama’s remarks is that if everyone thinks they are exceptional, no one really is.
Read President Obama’s remarks about US, British and Greek exceptionalism here.
Second, “D’Souza falsely asserted that President Obama funded $2 billion in Brazilian oil exploration.” The Obama team claims that Obama had “nothing to do with the loan.”
Well, the undisputed fact is that the Export-Import Bank awarded more than $2 billion in loans and loan guarantees to Brazil. The Export-Import Bank is a U.S. government agency and policy for the agency is set by the Obama administration. So how can the Obama administration escape responsibility for its own policies?
Moreover, we know that Obama himself approves of the policy. In 2011, Obama went to Brazil, a country where, as he put it, “the legacy of colonialism is still fresh.” There, on March 19, 2011, he reminded the Brazilians of American support for Brazilian oil exploration and added, “We want to help with technology and support to develop these oil reserves safely, and when you’re ready to start selling, we want to be one of your best customers.”
Moreover, Obama’s Brazil subsidy is not an isolated case; the Obama administration has—again through the Export-Import Bank—awarded billions to Mexico and Colombia for oil drilling and refining in those countries.
My wife and I went to see a showing of the film at the Regal theater in Winter Park Village. It was about three-quarters full. We didn’t go with a group but noticed that many in the audience came in groups of more than just a single couple. There were also examples of grandparents, parents and children. At the end of the film, the audience broke into loud and spontaneous applause. Was this only due to the film “playing to the choir”?
In part perhaps, but in the next few weeks I predict it will reach the audience we most need to reach -young voters -and are the most avid movie goers and the least likely to be reached by more traditional methods.
[…]Dinesh D’Souza is an engaging, attractive dark skinned immigrant from India whose life and career follows in parallel with Obama’s – born and married in the same years and able to judge American institutions and values from a third world perspective.
The film does not accept any of the more controversial attacks on Obama’s biography but seeks to explain how his own words and thoughts cited continually throughout the film from the President’s autobiography ‘Dreams From My Father’ are a thread running through his policies and are at the core of what motivates him and makes him intent on downsizing, disarming, and apologizing for America, abandoning out allies such as Great Britain, Israel and Poland, fawning and bowing before Muslim despots, and seeking to create a society where individual initiative, ambition and self-reliance are replaced by the collectivist goals that have failed all over the world.
[…]2016 examines Barack Obama’s relationship with his absent father who was an activist in the anti-colonial struggle against the British, and following independence became part of that elite clique who fostered a one party bureaucratic, socialist state in Kenya that crushed all local government and free initiative resulting in a downward spiral of economic stagnation and poverty shared by Obama’s half-brother in the slums of Nairobi.
[…]We follow the President’s life in where his mother remarries a local Indonesian man (also a Muslim, Lolo Soteiro), who eventually becomes a successful businessman and in so doing, alienates Obama and his mother who believe they are betraying the socialist and collectivist legacy of Barack Obama Senior.
This psychological portrait is one that makes sense and can be understood and appreciated by many young people who are themselves the product of homes in which there is divorce and remarriage.
The President’s endorsement of the “Occupy Wall Street” movement extends to the world stage in which the antagonists are portrayed as the 99% – the occupied and the exploitative 1 % – the occupiers.
Obama emotionally sympathizes with all those he places in the category of the victims of the colonialist white European nations (the one-percenters), returning the bust of Churchill, the gift of the British government, praising Islam as a progressive force while denying its oppression of women, children, non-Muslim minorities, his policies towards third world nations such as Mexico and Brazil whom his policies have encouraged to develop their oil industries while retarding our own, secretly supporting Argentina in its attempt to seize the Falkland Islands from Britain by force, pressuring Israel (regarded too as “occupiers”) to retreat from defensible borders, total passivity in failing to support the millions of demonstrators in the street against the tyrannical regime of the mullahs in Iran, etc.
Most damning of all are the close associations of the President and his most important mentors ignored by the media and Senator John McCain’s campaign in 2004 – convicted terrorist Bill Ayers, the “Reverend Wright (God Damn America and its “Liberation Theology” church in Chicago) and long-time Communist party member Frank Marshall Davis.
This is a powerful film that will exert a profound influence. As the billboards and advertisements on television proclaim… Love Him or Hate Him, you need to see this film.
Does that sound good or what? There’s a lot of talk about how this election needs to be about grown up ideas. I think that these long form arguments elevate, rather than lower, the debate. We need to have adult conversations about who Obama is and what his policies are intended to achieve – what is his end game?
Trailer 1 of 3:
Trailer 2 of 3:
Trailer 3 of 3:
Here’s Dinesh explaining what his movie is about at CPAC 2012:
Keep in mind that Dinesh is a Christian apologist and has debated people like Christopher Hitchens. This is his newest project.
Go see it!
UPDATE: Reformed Seth sent me this interview with Dinesh D’Souza. He’s being interviewed by Stanley Fish.
WINTERY KNIGHT 