Why I think we need Sarah for 2012

By Chrissy the Hyphenated

Click on graphics to embiggen for easier reading.

I hope you all don’t mind what I’m going to do here … I started to write a comment in Wednesday’s Path, but it ended up so LONG that I think it really should just be a blog post unto itself. So I’m going to polish and post it here, after which all y’all can continue discussing potential candidates for 2012 and point out where I’m wrong.

I believe what I say here, but I thought McCain could win right up until he didn’t. So I take even my strongest opinions (especially about politics where I am a total newby!) with a pound of salt.

My gut feeling is that no man can win against Obama, especially not a white man. And I don’t see any viable Republicans of color at this point. Down the road, sure. But not for 2012. All the people they’re talking about are doughy white guys.

One thing I do in my poll watching is look at how much of the country inhabits Obama’s true base – i.e., the ideologically Hard Left. I see numbers between 11% and 15% over and over for Hard Left, plus another 10% or so for the Soft Left that will vote reliably Democrat no matter how dumb or unethical the candidate is.

These numbers show up especially clearly and often in the one issue I’ve tracked the longest – abortion.

CSB @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2941788060056011884MEoLDp

The Democratic Party’s platform supports the Hard Left – i.e., legal abortion for any reason up to the moment of birth (and make Pro-Life taxpayers foot the bill, please). The Soft Left draws the line at viability after which even they can’t see abortion as anything but what it is — early infanticide. The Hard Left, however, supports abortion so blindly that they object to health inspections at abortion centers and, back when Obama was in the Illinois Senate, he personally shot down a bill that would have required medical and comfort care be provided to abortion survivors.

In other words, the Hard Left’s attitude is not “Safe, Legal and Rare,” but “Free, Legal and Lots.” Or as I like to put it: “Kill Babies, Kill!”

I heard Gianna Jessen (famous abortion survivor, pro-life advocate) say she has had people come up to her and practically spit in her face that she has No Right to Be Alive! Can you imagine? That is the face of the Hard Left. And Obama is their leader.

I admit that, what with Libya, the Gulf oil spill, and his occasional forays into actually breathing the same air as Republicans without barfing on their shoes, Barack Obama has lost some approval points among the Hard Left. But face it. That won’t matter a whit in 2012. They’re mad at him for not being Left enough. Neither they nor their slightly less odious companions among the Soft Left are ever going to vote for anyone who is to the Right of Obama. The best we could hope for with this bunch is that some of them are too stoned or hung over to remember to vote.

So let’s just concede that Obama has the 25% ideologically, close-mindedly Left all sewn up. Fine. Forget them! We only need 50.1% to win. Maybe not even that much; Bill Clinton won with only 43% of the vote. Not that I want to see another 3-candidate race, but when Perot siphoned off the Conservative vote, the results were:

• Clinton 43.0% v. GHW Bush 37.5% v. Perot 18.9%

Now take a look at this:

CSB @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2991174480056011884bHeNAs

The McCain-Palin ticket scored 45.7% of the vote. A bunch of them were willing to give the new president a chance. But it wasn’t long before they all planted themselves firmly in the Disapprove and Strongly Disapprove section. These people are NOT going to vote for Obama NO MATTER WHO RUNS AGAINST HIM.

And vice versa. That 44% who Strongly Approved on Inauguration Day may have dropped in overall enthusiasm, but they’ve held steady in Obama’s camp. I don’t see them shifting sides, particularly not so long as the MSM continues to force-feed them pro-Obama news and entertainment. And oh golly … isn’t 44% pretty darn close to the 43% who voted for Clinton the first time?

And here’s another thought. After the Democrats got creamed on HillaryCare and Clinton wisely started governing from the middle (which Obama is not doing), his job approval numbers went way up.

CSB @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2852954620056011884HulDdM

Obama’s job approvals have been below 50% for a long time. When Clinton ran for re-election, his were well above 50%.  But check out the election results:

• Clinton 49.2% v. Dole 40.7% v. Perot 8.4%

Despite very high job approval numbers, Bill Clinton only wooed about 6% more to vote for him the second time around than had voted for him the first time.

Obama’s approvals stinks, but let’s be realistic and just give him the 44% Kool-aid vote. We’ve got the 46% who voted for McCain in 2008 locked down (rounding up for ease).

I’m thinking that, given a two-party race, about 90% of voters are already decided and will not be much affected by who does or does not run on the Republican ticket. I think the GOP establishment that enjoys big government and fat earmarks is going to do what they have done before – i.e., try to convince us to run a “mayo and cucumber” moderate. You know … because we need to get someone who won’t OFFEND the critical middle.

I don’t agree. Yes, the voters we need to focus on are the 10% that are not on board with either side. But we’ve got 46% already; we only need 5% of the middle to win.  These people did vote for Obama last time, so let’s take a look at who they might be and who might best appeal to them.

First, there was a significant number of fad-fans, mostly young “Rock the Vote”rs who were juiced about Obama’s youth and really wanted to vote for The First Black President. These people rarely vote in any serious election, though. And they are notoriously fickle about their celebrities, have the attention spans of gnats and … oops, Obama’s not only gotten gray, but also has been such a media hog that he may have over-exposed himself and become Boring and Last Year.

Frankly, I doubt if he can count on the youth vote for 2012. However, I do think that this type of unreliable “only if it’s fun” voter could be revved up about voting for The First Female President.

Another big Obama bloc was Voters of Color. They’re holding hard to their First President, but I have a feeling his Black support is quietly eroding with the spread of the movie Maafa 21 and the rising up of devout Black clergy who are taking their churches back from the pro-abortion Left and recommitting them to Jesus Christ. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, check out: http://www.maafa21.com/.

I think we could make real inroads in that group with a no-apologies, no-compromise, mother of five, evangelical, Bible thumpin’, Grizzly Mama, Pro-Life candidate. But, like the youth vote, the Black vote is unreliable.  They don’t vote so much when they’re not revved up about the candidate. And I really don’t see them getting excited about any of the mealy-mouthed male Republicans out there, most of whom are only slightly to the Right of the “personally opposed to abortion but” Democrats.

And have you ever seen Tyler Perry’s Madea? Blacks adore that feisty Mama Grizzly! And the message of all of Perry’s extremely popular plays and movies is that Blacks need to Take Responsibility for Their Lives! Perry is enormously popular with the Black community and he’s a seriously devout Christian. In 2008, he was pro-Obama. But one of these days, if He hasn’t already, God’s going to get through to that man about Black Genocide and we’re going to have a powerful ally in the Black community. Pray for him, please.

The other big Obama bloc was the herd of Mushy Middle Sheeple, those nice, but deluded folk that the Left is so good at guilting into voting Democrat. We’re converting them slowly (hey, look at me!) and we need to keep at that. But again … another white guy just isn’t going to overcome melanin-induced guilt for many of them on election day. Not so a First Female President who has proven street cred in areas that NICE people relate to … raising a disabled child, supporting a teen out-of-wedlock-pregnant daughter, married to a smart, manly hunk who absolutely ADORES her.

Besides, Sarah is also very much associated with the Tea Party, which the Left obviously fears or they wouldn’t be blatting about that biased, “47% unfavorable” CNN poll. (More on that in another blog.)

CSB @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2059361280056011884XQkODT

LOOK at these numbers! 71% of Adult Americans say we should at least listen to the Tea Party. And 26% of Democrats and 46% of Independents say Tea Party ideas are Very Important!

The RINO elite who have been hand-in-glove with the Dems for decades, expanding government and scarfing down the pork, are going to tell us we have to nominate someone like John McCain, a centrist who will be palatable to the Soft Left. But that’s STOOOOPID. Who were we really working for in 2008? Huh? Not nice, doughy, white male John McCain that the MSM pimped right up until he was nominated and then, oh boy, he couldn’t even get an opinion piece printed. He is a good man, for sure. A war hero, no doubt. But he never was the serious Conservative or inspiring, charismatic leader Sarah is.

We NEED Conservatives on board and charged up about the Republican candidate. With Sarah Palin at the top of the GOP ticket, we would have the Right-wing not only sewn up, but the Tea Party Conservatives fired up and OUT THERE campaigning! Besides, the media is going to crucify our candidate no matter what. So let’s get someone who has proven she can deal with it by writing Hi Mom! on her hand and waving at the cameras.

When Clinton won the first time, the GHW Bush + Perot vote added up to 56%. The second time, the Dole + Perot vote added up to 49%.  Taking those Obama v. Clinton job approval ratings into consideration, let’s just say that we could easily count on that latter, lower 49%.  We would only need to capture another 2% to win. And that’s not two percent of Adult Americans (the group surveyed by Gallup in the graphic above). It’s 2% of VOTES and Likely Voters routinely poll to the Right of Adult Americans.

Basically, I believe that we can’t win a 2-party race with any of the viable white males out there and that, with the size and power of the Tea Party, a RINO nomination could get us another Perot-style 3-party race that will hand a second term to Obama. But as I was writing, it occurred to me that an Obama v. RINO v. Tea Party race is not the only 3-party possibility. What if Hillary Clinton decides to run as a 3d candidate?

Would we still need Sarah? I think we would. In fact, I think a race like that would be fascinating to watch. For example, what if the focus was not on Obama’s skin color any more, but on which of the two women, Left or Right, was going to be our First Female President? My but we do live in interesting times!

(And my apologies AGAIN. My “comment that got too long” got even longer and acquired graphics when I tried to polish it into a blog posting! LOL)