Daily Kos/SEIU Poll: Romney Beats Obama 50-46
The left-leaning Public Policy Polling does regular weekly polling for the extreme left-leaning Daily Kos and SEIU, and the numbers this morning have probably stopped the hearts of leftists everywhere. Nationally, the poll shows Romney up four, 50-46%. In the swing states, the news is just as bad with Romney up three, 50-47%.
In this particular poll, the movement
towards Romney nationally is a net gain of two points. In the swing
states, Romney overcame a four-point deficit. Two weeks ago he was
losing to Obama, 50-46%. That's a seven-point shift.
Daily Kos released the daily numbers in
this three-day rolling poll. Friday and Saturday averaged out to a tie,
but on Sunday, Romney walloped Obama by twelve points -- 55-43%.
Obviously, that's a fluke, but the question is, how much of one? Was
there a real momentum shift of some kind? Daily Kos claims that nothing
in the news can account for this, but that's debatable.
What we might have seen on Sunday was
Biden's ugly debate performance and the Libya uproar that came as a
result finally coming home to roost. Again, I don't think Romney's up
55-43%, but you can make a case that a Sunday shift in momentum towards
Romney does make sense.
The main takeaway in this poll is that
in the swing states and nationally, Romney is now proving he has the
ability to poll at or above 50%. This is a new phenomenon and one we're
seeing in other polls, as well.
On the flip-side, Obama is starting to
lose his ability to hit 50, even in swing states where he currently
holds a slight edge over Romney. This is terrible news for any incumbent
three weeks out.
The bottom line is that this poll
confirms what we're seeing everywhere else: slow but certain movement
towards Mitt Romney at every level.
 |
| Wayuu Purse Bag |
NEED TO REACH OUT TO THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY? INN REACH SB DR
Sens. McCain, Graham, Ayotte: Buck Still Stops with Obama
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton fell on her sword on Monday and took "responsibility" for the lack of security in Libya leading up the terrorist attacks. In response, Republican Senators John McCain (AZ), Lindsay Graham (SC), and Kelly Ayotte (NH) said while Clinton made a "laudable gesture" with her remarks, the buck still stopped with President Barack Obama at the White House.
The Senators, in a statement, said if Obama had not been aware of the rising threat level in the Middle East, especially in Libya, then they have "lost confidence" in the administration's national security team. But if Obama had known about the threats against U.S. interests in Libya, the Senators said "he bears full responsibility for any failures that occurred."“If the President was truly not aware of this rising threat level in Benghazi, then we have lost confidence in his national security team, whose responsibility it is to keep the President informed," the Senators said. "But if the President was aware of these earlier attacks in Benghazi prior to the events of September 11, 2012, then he bears full responsibility for any security failures that occurred. The security of Americans serving our nation everywhere in the world is ultimately the job of the Commander-in-Chief. The buck stops there."
The Senators also said the American people deserve to know why the Obama administration insisted that the "attack in Benghazi was the result of a spontaneous demonstration triggered by a hateful video, long after it had become clear that the real cause was a terrorist attack."
"The President also bears responsibility for this portrayal of the attack, and we continue to believe that the American people deserve to know why the Administration acted as it did," they wrote.
The Senators also noted that Americans
“must remember that the events of September 11 were preceded by an
escalating pattern of attacks this year in Benghazi, including a bomb
that was thrown into our Consulate in April, another explosive device
that was detonated outside of our Consulate in June, and an
assassination attempt on the British Ambassador.”
Earlier, during a visit to Peru, CNN reported Clinton
said she took "responsibility" and tried to absolve Obama and Vice
President of blame for the lax security in Libya because Clinton was "in
charge of the State Department's 60,000-plus people all over the world,
275 posts."
"The president and the vice president wouldn't be
knowledgeable about specific decisions that are made by security
professionals," Clinton said. "They're the ones who weigh all of the
threats and the risks and the needs and make a considered decision."
Clinton also said that "in the fog of war, there's always
going to be confusion" and "I think it is absolutely fair to say that
everyone had the same intelligence. Everyone who spoke tried to give the
information that they had. As time has gone on, that information has
changed. We've gotten more detail, but that's not surprising. That
always happens."
Senators McCain, Graham, and Ayotte said Clinton made "a
laudable gesture, especially when the White House is trying to avoid any
responsibility whatsoever."
INVEST SAFELY IN BANCO SOCIAL...UP TO $10k @ 2 Mos.
La crisis de misiles en Cuba: Hace 50 años al borde de una guerra nuclear
Esta semana hace cincuenta años, el mundo estuvo al borde de una guerra nuclear.
El 14 de octubre de 1962, los responsables políticos de Estados Unidos se enteraron de que la Unión Soviética estaba construyendo en Cuba bases para misiles que habrían permitido a Moscú atacar cualquier lugar del territorio continental de Estados Unidos en cuestión de minutos. A esto le siguió una crisis internacional y aunque la crisis no terminó en un enfrentamiento nuclear, es importante que los responsables políticos de Estados Unidos nunca olviden las lecciones que esa crisis nos enseñó.Los aliados con armas nucleares son una cosa pero los enemigos con armas nucleares son otra muy distinta. A medida que Irán forja sus capacidades nucleares, las lecciones de la Crisis de los Misiles de Cuba resuenan de nuevo.
Y la más importante es que es muy difícil tratar con un aliado una vez que tiene armas nucleares.
Hoy, la Fundación Heritage vuelve la vista a esa crisis de hace 50 años con una serie de artículos acerca de las lecciones a sacar sobre sobre defensa antimisiles, liderazgo presidencial, administración de una crisis y sobre cómo evitar una escalada de la tensión.
Por ejemplo, los expertos de la Fundación Heritage Michaela Bendikova y Baker Spring nos recuerdan que “Fidel Castro y el Che Guevara animaron a los soviéticos a usar misiles balísticos estacionados en Cuba para atacar a Estados Unidos”.
Peter Brookes y Audrey Beck examinarán el liderazgo del presidente John F. Kennedy durante la crisis, “un excelente ejemplo de un liderazgo firme (bajo una intensa presión) que pudo haber evitado una apocalíptica guerra nuclear”. Esto sirve además de serio recordatorio de que este tipo de crisis recae sobre los hombros de los presidentes.
Mientras que a los escolares se les estaba enseñando a “agacharse y cubrirse” bajo los pupitres en caso de ataque, la Crisis de los Misiles de Cuba “inculcaba en dos generaciones de responsables políticos americanos una inquietud acerca de la posibilidad de una escalada fortuita en la tensión y de una guerra accidental”, como explica nuestro experto Dean Cheng.
Estados Unidos afronta ahora mismo un buen número de crisis por todo el mundo. Desde Siria y Turquía hasta Libia y Afganistán, pasando por Irán, “las políticas de actuación de la administración Obama respecto al control de armas nucleares, el desarme y las capacidades defensivas limitadas están sirviendo de manera involuntaria para socavar el paraguas de seguridad de la OTAN y para incrementar las ansias de tener armas nucleares por parte de países aliados”, observan Bendikova y Spring.
Aunque puede que hayan pasado 50 años, hay muchas y peligrosas similitudes entre aquel momento y ahora. Como advierte Ray Walser:
La nociva mezcla de armas nucleares, la furia contra Estados Unidos y una disposición a adoptar el martirio en favor de una causa (ya sea sagrada o secular) representa un peligro para el mundo de octubre de 2012 igual que lo era para el de octubre de 1962.Reflexionar sobre las crisis que hemos capeado nos proporciona lecciones clave para administrar las crisis de hoy en día y evaluar a los líderes políticos de nuestro país. Como observó JFK, “La política nacional sólo puede derrotarnos; la política exterior nos puede matar a todos”.
