I don't think he's moving any needles.

Overall: If you notice, no one's dropping any Zingers.

This may be because Romney sent word he wanted a Serious and Sober campaign. It may be because the media mau-maued the Republicans about their nonexistent connection to tropical storm (now downgraded) Isaac.

It could be both.

Now, if you're wondering what's missing, I think it's the Zingers. Even when they're kind of dumb (and they usually are), they're an important part of the flow and crowd energy of a convention.

And this one has almost none.

I wouldn't call this a "mistake" so much as a "choice" I don't prefer. You can go this route, and try to project (in my mind) an overly serious image. I suppose you get something from that.

But I think you lose a lot. The crowd just isn't amped up and in a party frame of mind, and I think that's because so much of the convention's fare is Nutritious Vegetables.

You need wine & dessert for a party.

The media will, by the way, characterize it as "dour" (the negative version of sober and serious), but that's no big deal, since if it were entertaining and light they would have called it "raucous and filled with fluff and cheap gags."

So, we're not going to win there, no matter what happens.

Still... any chance Ann Coulter can dash off a series of 20 good barbs for speakers to incorporate into their speeches?

Posted by: Ace at 04:12 PM | Comments (567)
Post contains 260 words, total size 1 kb.

Good for her.

Dennis Miller meanwhile notes that Chris Matthews, far from being post-racial, is in fact "reflexively racial."

You don't need me to tell you the Democrats are running on race.

I've warned them about this, but they, of course, won't listen.

They are turning the "racist" charge into a joke. People are rolling their eyes. If everything is racist, then nothing is.

Of course there is actual racism -- but the Democrats are demeaning that by claiming a Golf Joke is a racist dog-whistle.

Gwen Ifill vigorously defended David Chalian, the guy who was fired for saying "They're having a party and don't care about black people drowning," or whatever it was. She claimed he was: "God's gift to political journalism."

He's the tops, huh? The apex predator? Then we've got a bigger problem than I imagined.

Shortly thereafter she retweeted this.

We're playing the race card? While Obama's minions stoke up claims of racism and "They gon' put y'all back in chains" just because they're afraid the black community is, rightly, not enthusiastic about voting for more of this horror show?

As you know, with the exception of Nikki Haley, MSNBC embargoed all minority speakers from its coverage. And I don't really think she's a racial minority. Religious, maybe, by heritage. So she's "safe" for MSNBC.

And it's not just MSNBC, NBC's wacky uncle of a network. In a listing of notable speeches, NBC.com "forgot" to mention Artur Davis' barn-burner.

And remember, this has nothing to do with Obama's need to stoke his base with fear and hatred to gin up enthusiasm for his reelection.

Oh: Rand Paul is speaking now.

Posted by: Ace at 03:35 PM | Comments (247)
Post contains 290 words, total size 3 kb.

in Romney's favor:
Obama 43%
Romney 43%

Down from a seven point lead for the President in the last poll.
Of note: this is a likely voter poll versus the registered voter sampling most firms had been using for much of the summer (Reuter's 49-42 Obama lead was amongst 1000 registered voters). I think we are seeing the switchover now from RV to LV which will cause a shift in any existing "leads" for the President. Don't be surprised if analysts attribute the "bounce" to this shift in sampling, but at least we are getting a clearer picture of the race from more and more companies now.

Let's see what else shakes out this week.

Posted by: CAC at 02:37 PM | Comments (325)
Post contains 127 words, total size 1 kb.

So, that's something.

Romney had a 43-percent favorable and 44-percent unfavorable rating in nine battleground states heading into the convention, according to an average compiled by Real Clear Politics.

A survey conducted by Wilson Perkins Allen Opinion Research in nine battle ground states Tuesday evening found RomneyÂ’s favorable rating among likely voters had jumped to 48 percent. His unfavorable rating dipped to 39.

The argument people are having is a rather nice one to have: Did Chris Christie's speech help Romney more, or did Ann Romney's speech more?

Allah notes, as the poll does, that people say Christie's speech helped more.

Here's my argument against that: People like to think of themselves as being about "substance" and Chris Christie's speech certainly played to that cherished, and often erroneous, self-conception.

Oh -- and this idea he "flopped"? Nonsense. He gave a speech about tough choices and how each generation must rise to its moment of crisis, and spoke of grandchildren reading the history books about us. The speech was sound and strong.

But I do think Ann Romney' speech was more effective in humanizing Romney. Bear in mind, the polls reflect a jump in personal favorability, not position on issues. Christie did in fact speak to that -- courage and truth-telling are aspects of personal likability, after all -- but Ann Romney' speech was all about the personal.

She did something I haven't seen any would-be first ladies do (as far as I can remember, and honestly, my memory on this is not strong). She offered a hard sell, not a soft one, and made specific promises, guarantees, that Romney would not fail the public.

Now think about buying a car. Or a TV. You're torn between two models. Now someone -- even a salesman -- steps up and says I personally guarantee you'll be happier with this model than the other one.

When people are making decisions, they want to know they made the right decision, first and foremost.

Parse my words because I intend them to be parsed: They want to know they made the right decision. Not "they want to make the right decision." They want to know they made the right decision, because it's a big decision, and they don't want to get it wrong.

They want reassurance that this is the right decision. Car, shmar. At the end of the day, what they really want is not live in doubt about their purchase and always be wondering about that other car.

Sales are not ultimately about the object being sold. They're about the feeling that attaches to the decision. Obviously, it's easier to engender a positive feeling with a good product than a shit one, but end of the day, it's about the product the customer is more comfortable with.

This is where I think Ann Romney really helped out her husband. A personal testimonial, delivered with utmost conviction, putting her own honor and word on the line -- Yes, she's a horribly biased source, but then, she gave the guarantee.

People like guarantees.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 02:17 PM | Comments (188)
Post contains 528 words, total size 4 kb.

It's a corker.

Video at the link. When noted race-baiter Martin Bashir finds your proposition dubious, perhaps you've over-stepped.

MARTIN BASHIR: We have seen an early draft of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s forthcoming oration. Can I quote something from you? “For four years, Barack Obama has been running from the nation’s problems, he hasn’t been working to earn re-election. He has been working to earn a spot on the PGA Tour.” How about that?

LAWRENCE O’DONNELL: Well, we know exactly what he’s trying to do there. He is trying to align to Tiger Woods and surely, the — lifestyle of Tiger Woods with Barack Obama. Obviously, nothing could be further from the truth. They find every way they possibly can to –

BASHIR: Lawrence — don’t you think — don’t you think that what he’s really trying to do is to suggest that the president is not paying attention to the central issues that come with the responsibility he has? Is he really – Mitch McConnell really making a connection with Tiger Woods who, of course, has become infamous for chasing various cocktail waitresses around Las Vegas and so on?

O’DONNELL: Martin, there are many, many, many rhetorical choices you can make at any point in any speech to make whatever point up want to make. If he wanted to make the point that you just suggested and I think he does want to make that point, they had a menu of a minimum of ten different kinds of images that they could have raised. And I promise you, the speech writers went through, rejecting three or four before they land order that one. That’s the one they want for a very deliberate reason. That — there’s – these people reach for every single possible racial double entendre they can find in every one of these speeches.

Via @rbdpundit

Posted by: Ace at 01:37 PM | Comments (277)
Post contains 330 words, total size 2 kb.

I was joking that Chris Matthews is the racist who hates Obama because he's the one trying to keep him in a job he's obviously unsuited for and hates.

Meanwhile, I'm the guy looking out for Obama. All I want for Obama is a cushy fundraising position in an organization with noble-sounding but extremely vague goals where people can just love on him all day, where he doesn't have to actually do anything. You know, like his blessed life before he won the election.

So I'm pushing for funding for the Barack H. Obama International Center for Humanity & Golf Course. His office could be just to the right of the pro shop. And there could be a half-shell ampitheater near the 18th hole (call it the 19th Hole, get it?) where fading rock stars can jet in to entertain him.

Bono can have his own special suite of apartments, for example.

I don't hate the guy. I think I'm the only one who actually gets him.

Here's some evidence he's actively trying to lose this thing, coming to an ad campaign near you.

You asked for a miracle? I give you BHO.

via @slublog.

Yup:

"As an acknowledgement of your []son's []daughter's supreme sacrifice, you may have already won a dinner and photograph with Barack and Michelle."

By Cicero.

Posted by: Ace at 01:02 PM | Comments (254)
Post contains 236 words, total size 2 kb.

Eastwood?

A well-placed Republican source tells Townhall that Oscar-winning director and actor Clint Eastwood will travel to Tampa, Florida to attend Mitt Romney's nominating convention this week. As the news media scrambles to identify the so-called "mystery speaker" scheduled to address GOP delegates on Thursday evening, some have speculated that the iconic Hollywood figure could fit the bill.

I have a couple of caveats about this story: First, it's just one source. People think they know things, but then they don't.

Two, it was filed at 3:04 am. Liquor may have been involved. On one hand, liquor loosens tongues; on the other hand, liquor loosens everything.

It's a nice idea but I wouldn't get too invested in it.

Here's one reason to think it's real: Clint Eastwood doesn't talk a lot about politics, but one thing that really steams his beans is entrepreneurial litigation, under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The racket here is that lawyers hire disabled people to go to businessplaces, to see if there is any grounds for suit. They're looking for a reason to sue -- to greenmail a business owner and make a quick buck, usually by settlement.

Now if you combine that feeling he already has, having been a victim of such entrepreneurial litigation, with Obama's "You didn't build that" -- something which resonates strongly with anyone who's ever owned a business -- and it becomes pretty believable that Clint Eastwood had a "Do you feel lucky, punk?" moment over Obama.

It's all well and good to speak of the deleterious effects of regulation on businesses in the abstract. It's another thing to speak in detail about your own real life horror stories.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 11:59 AM | Comments (257)
Post contains 291 words, total size 2 kb.

Just got back from Mitt Romney's speech to the American Legion.

As you'd expect the speech was heavy on veterans issues (especially health care and the VA) as well as national security.

I'm going by memory at this point so these aren't exact quotes.

First Romney began by noting some might not have expected him to be here since he was in Tampa yesterday and will be heading back for a little speech tomorrow.

IÂ’ll be heading back to Florida later today. And you may be wondering why IÂ’m not down there right now, practicing and polishing the final draft of my speech. My answer is this: When our nation called, you served. And I consider any opportunity to address our nationÂ’s veterans a privilege not to be missed.

This was a not so subtle jab at Obama who sent a video message yesterday. You see he was too busy overseeing hurricane relief planning campaigning at a college campus yesterday to show up.

Romney then when into his fairly standard stump speech about Obama abdicating leadership abroad but then tied it together with the impending sequestration debate (see my earlier post on that) and what it would mean for veterans...200,000 less servicemen and women (100k from planned budget cuts plus that number again under sequestration) means 200,000 new patients for an already overloaded VA system which would be facing cuts under sequestration.

We are now just months away from an arbitrary, across-the-board budget reduction that would weaken the military with a trillion dollars in cuts, severely shrink our force structure, and impair our ability to meet and deter threats. President Obama’s own Secretary of Defense has warned that these reductions would be “devastating.” And he is right.

The devastation will be felt here at home, where up to 1.5 million jobs could be lost. GDP growth could fall significantly. These cuts will place further stress on an already stretched VA system, and impair our solemn commitment that every veteran receives care second to none.

A year ago, President Obama told your national convention that, “We cannot, we must not, we will not, balance the budget on the backs of our veterans.” I thought I finally agreed with him on something – but now, he is on the verge of breaking that promise.

The Obama administration is set to cut defense spending by nearly a trillion dollars. My administration will not. Working together with my running mate, Paul Ryan, I will make reductions in other areas and install pro-growth policies to make sure that our country remains safe and secure. There are plenty of places to cut in a federal budget that now totals well over $3 trillion a year, but defense is not one of them.

You can see why sequestration is such a mess. It has so many known and unknown second order effects that run counter to saving money.

Romney then hit on something that draw applause and unexpected excitement from the crowd (based on the noises from people sitting around me). If a vet has to wait a certain period of time to get care they will be able to go to a Tri-Care provider and the VA will have to pay for it.

Another popular line was Romney opposing Obama's hikes in Tri-Care fees and funding ObamaCare on the backs of vets.

The Obama administration has also requested $12 billion in TRICARE fee increases. I will not ask our wartime military to shoulder more sacrifices while the rest of government grows. I will not ask our service members – active or retired – to pay more for their health care to free up room for Obamacare.

Paul Ryan got 2 or 3 shoutouts and was warmly received by an audience who in the main are at or near Medicare eligibility. Take that anecdote for what it's worth.

Mitt Romney chatting with a Marine on the rope-line

In short, it was solid speech that was well received. In fairness this was an easier speech in some senses to give because it was a politician promising to spend more and make government services more generous. Of course when it comes to conservatives, we are generally on board with defense and veterans spending so there's not much to complain about.

more...

Posted by: DrewM at 11:59 AM | Comments (64)
Post contains 847 words, total size 5 kb.

Racism!

Racism!

RACISM!!!

...racism...!

Update: From Gwen Ifill on twitter:

One mistake does not change this. @DavidChalian is God's gift to political journalism. #IStandwithDavid

Tipped by commenters.

Posted by: Ace at 11:30 AM | Comments (377)
Post contains 29 words, total size 1 kb.

The best speech given yesterday wasnÂ’t by Ann Romney, Chris Christie or even Arthur Davis. With all due respect to them (I mean that sincerely, not snarkily), the best speech given yesterday wasnÂ’t even delivered in Tampa. It was delivered to the American Legion here in Indianapolis by Lt. General John Kelly (USMC).

“The Real 1%” wasn’t the title of Genera Kelly’s address but it could have been. In a speech that was alternatively motivating and moving (it wasn’t allergies, I was tearing up), the General covered a wide variety of topics. From the continuing War on Terror (it’s in Africa, Asia, and elsewhere, not just Afghanistan) to the nature of the enemy we fight (“I don’t know why they hate us and I don’t care”) to the dark side of the focus on “diversity” the General covered a wide range of topics.

The most moving part of the GeneralÂ’s talk was when he addressed the disparity in the burdens born by the 1% who volunteer to serve (and their families) and the vast majority who have no direct contact with anyone in the military. An even smaller subset have paid the most frightful price imaginable.

One of the reasons I jumped at the chance to come to LegionÂ’s convention is in my early time here at the HQ a lot of what we were doing focused on Iraq and Afghanistan. My first post as an Open Blogger was about Scott Beauchamp and it was something I felt very strongly about, as did most of the readers here. Since Vietnam the leftwing in this country has sought to downplay the heroism and virtue of the military. More dangerously, they sought to portray veterans as dangerous and damaged people who were victims. Only the faults of the few were to be discussed, never the virtue of the many. Well, the playing field has changed with the advent of alternative and online media. Now we have a platform to push back against the liberal narrative and to highlight the courage, sacrifice and valor of those who willingly serve our nation.

As General Kelly explains, itÂ’s important to those who serve that we who benefit from their protection realize the source of our security. more...

Posted by: DrewM at 08:30 AM | Comments (467)
Post contains 536 words, total size 4 kb.