48% view Obama's views as extreme, whatever that means

Forty-eight percent (48%) of U.S. voters now regard President Obama’s political views as extreme. Forty-two percent (42%) place his views in the mainstream, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

By comparison, 51% see the views of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as mainstream. Thirty-five percent (35%) think Clinton’s views are extreme. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided.

Among five top contenders for the White House in 2012, only former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is viewed as more extreme than the president. Just 38% say Palin’s views are mainstream, while 55% regard them as extreme.

Mitt Romney, the ex-Massachusetts governor who unsuccessfully sought the Republican presidential nomination in 2008, is considered mainstream by 45% and extreme by 33%. Twenty-two percent (22%), however, are not sure about his views.

Forty-four percent (44%) say the views of former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, another unsuccessful 2008 GOP hopeful, are in the mainstream. Thirty-eight percent (38%) think Huckabee is extreme, and another 18% are not sure.

It’s important to note that the questions did not define “mainstream” or “extreme.”

Mitt Romney takes the Vacationer-in-Chief to task on growth

IT’S NOT happening the way President Obama had planned. Unemployment blew past his 8 percent ceiling and hasn’t looked back. Private sector investment in new jobs and capital has languished. Even the head of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers, Christina Romer, has resigned.

Almost every action the president has taken has deepened and lengthened the downturn. The private sector has retreated, frightened by his agenda and paralyzed by the uncertainty, lack of predictability, and outright hostility he has engendered.

His policies are anti-investment, anti-jobs, and anti-growth. Raising taxes — with a 15 percent hike on certain small business corporations, new taxes to pay for ObamaCare, and an increase on the dividend tax from 15 percent to nearly 40 percent — depresses new investment throughout the economy. Promoting an open-ended cap-and-trade tax dissuades expansion by employers in the energy sector. Bowing to the demands of unions to tilt the table in their favor — with proposals for card check and mandatory arbitration as well as the installation of a labor stooge at the National Labor Relations Board — chills new hiring.

Hostility toward foreign trade — by delaying agreements with Colombia and South Korea and by threatening punitive taxes on US businesses that compete abroad — stalls opportunities for new jobs at home. The so-called stimulus that focused on government spending and bailing out states and unions has boosted GDP only modestly and temporarily; the latest stimulus reincarnation will likely do no better. All the while, the president’s failure to address the looming deficits, national debt, unfunded entitlement liabilities, ballooning Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae liabilities, and incalculable government pension obligations causes employers and investors to ask whether the dollar will be worth very much in the future, and thus, they hold back. The policies of the president and congressional Democrats are job killers.

Thanks to the innovative, can-do spirit of the American people, the economy will recover, even with the burdens the president has put upon it. But to speed the recovery and to ensure its long-term ascent, it is time to adopt a bipartisan growth and jobs agenda. Republicans made mistakes when we were in charge, yes, but Democrats pointing that out doesn’t absolve them for the mistakes they are making today. Job and income growth can only come from a growing, successful private sector. Of course, government can create innumerable public sector jobs, but in doing so, it supplants the private sector and ultimately depresses the prosperity of its citizens.

A pro-job, pro-prosperity government works to create the conditions that enable businesses of all sizes to grow and thrive. These should include aligning corporate taxes with those of other developed economies, eliminating special corporate tax breaks that lobbyists have inserted over the years, and preserving the Bush tax cuts — especially for small business.

To give an immediate boost to jobs and investment, permit businesses to write off in 2010 and 2011 the capital investments made in those years rather than over time. Aggressively negotiate and sign trade agreements with other nations to promote American exports. Adopt an energy policy that will actually eliminate our dependence on OPEC and hostile states. Preserve our balanced labor-management rules and regulators. Rather than raising the tax on investment dividends, eliminate it and the tax on capital gains and interest for all households earning less than $250,000 a year.

Reshape government programs to ultimately put spending in balance with revenues. Restructure entitlements to make them fiscally sustainable, honoring our commitments to seniors. Rather than opening the door to ever-increasing demands from states for bail-outs, take action to enable the states to solve their unfunded pension obligations. And tame the growth of government by limiting the political power of public employee unions.

The president said last week that Republicans have no economic ideas other than lowering taxes on the wealthy. This brief agenda is not the only refutation: Republicans in Washington and in states like New Jersey and Texas are promoting and implementing economic policies that do what the president has not: grow jobs and shrink government. It’s time for a growth and jobs agenda to replace the special interest political agendas that we have endured over the past decades. So much is at stake — a strong economy provides for the strong defense which preserves our liberty and promotes peace.

Zogby: Romney surpasses Palin and Huckabee in head-to-head test against Obama, leads by 11 points among independents

Former Bay State Gov. Mitt Romney is a “major player” nipping at the heels of President Obama and stands as the GOP’s best shot to reclaim the Oval Office in 2012, a new national poll shows.

“In many ways, he’s arguably the establishment front-runner,” pollster John Zogby said of a new poll showing Romney trailing President Obama by just 2 percentage points. “He’s got name recognition, he’s been through it before, and he did credibly in 2008. He’s a major player in the race.”

The Zogby poll of 8,487 likely voters showed Obama edging Romney out 45 to 43 percent.

Romney’s potential GOP opponents, Sarah Palin and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, both fared far worse against Obama. Palin trailed the president by 11 points while Huckabee was behind by 9 points, the poll found.

Romney has yet to say if he’s running again, but the wealthy venture capitalist has been traveling the country raising money for Republicans and handing out endorsements in state races.

“Gov. Romney’s focus is on helping Republicans win in 2010,” Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom said. “We don’t want to get off track with speculation about future hypothetical races.”

The poll also found Romney leading the president among independents 47 to 36, which Zogby called “very significant.”

Romney was also stronger among GOP voters than Palin or Huckabee. Republicans favored Romney over Obama 81 percent to 6 percent while 73 percent favored Palin or Huckabee over the president.

“At least as of now, Romney does a better job bringing Republicans in and a significantly better job among independents,” Zogby said.

Would a Romney nomination kill O-care repeal?

Just as John McCain was able to win the Republican nomination in 2008 despite his problems with the conservative base, Romney may be able to overcome his health care record in the primaries. And perhaps there are circumstances under which he could beat Obama by emphasizing economic and foreign policy issues. But win or lose, Romney would not be able to credibly campaign against the national health care law. And as a result, were he the Republican nominee, it would kill the movement to repeal ObamaCare.

Cato goes after Romney on Massachusetts plan

An influential conservative think tank is firing a broadside at ex-MA Gov. Mitt Romney (R), criticizing the potential WH'12 contender for a health care plan they say looks identical to Pres. Obama's.

"When you run down this list of elements in the Obama plan and the Romney plan, they are all identical," says Michael Cannon, the Cato Institute's director of Health Policy Studies, in a new video running on the group's website. "Both the Romney plan and the Obama plan are essentially a government takeover of the health care sector of the economy."

Romney's signature achievement during his tenure in the Bay State, CommonwealthCare, has now become a serious liability for a potential WH'12 bid. Romney's approach was controversial among think tank conservatives then; now, with the spotlight on health care, some are convinced it will be a deal-breaker.

"As Pres. Obama himself has pointed out, Romney is the guy who created the prototype for Obamacare," said Cato executive VP David Boaz. "How can he lead the charge against a health care plan that is modeled on his own?"

Romney has pushed back hard, dismissing comparisons between the 2 plans as inaccurate.

"Pres. Obama has tried to compare Gov. Romney's plan to his own but there are important differences. Gov. Romney's plan is different because it didn't include a tax increase, and it didn't cut care to seniors, and most importantly, it is based on the premise that states should be free to pursue their own healthcare solutions," said Eric Fehrnstrom, a senior advisor to Romney's Free and Strong America PAC.

"Under Gov. Romney, Massachusetts solved the problem of the uninsured without raising taxes. Other states are free to copy what he did, or improve on it, or chart their own course, but we should reject a federal one-size-fits-all plan," Fehrstrom added.

My take:

The first graf of this piece insinuates that Massachusetts copied, or borrowed heavily from, Obamacare. In fact, Massachusetts enacted its plan several years ago. Congress enacted Obamacare this year.

There's another slant to this story that intrigues me. Perhaps Obama's handlers tailored Obamacare after the Massachusetts plan so as to make a presidential run by Romney difficult, if not impossible. If so, their scheme has succeeded. While Romney has survived his difficulty to this point, and still appears to be a viable candidate, that could change when the presidential primary campaign heats up and his rivals go after him.

This theory assumes more intelligence and skill than I believe the Obama team possesses, but it is plausible.

To see a video of the Cato attack on Romney, go here: http://www.cato.org/pressroom.php

Romney and Huckabee have crossover appeal, but Palin and Gingrich are better liked by Republicans

Our monthly look ahead to the 2012 Presidential race finds Barack Obama more or less tied with all four of the leading candidates for the Republican nomination. He trails Mike Huckabee 47-45 and Mitt Romney 45-44, ties Newt Gingrich at 45-45, and leads Sarah Palin 47-45. This is the weakest performance Obama's posted in these 13 monthly surveys and a pretty clear indication that passing health care has not done anything to enhance his political standing, at least in the short term.

It's not that any of the Republican candidates are particularly popular, or even that Obama's approval numbers have declined. But whereas in previous months a good number of the voters disapproving of his job performance weren't ready to commit to voting Republican in 2012 yet, now 85-89% of them do in each of these hypothetical contests. That suggests that even if Obama's overall unpopularity has not increased, the intensity of it has. For instance among voters who disapprove of Obama but also have an unfavorable opinion of Sarah Palin, she leads him by 22 points in a head to head contest. That wasn't necessarily the case in previous months.

Palin and Gingrich are the most popular among Republican voters...and the least popular overall. 71% of GOP folks have a favorable opinion of Palin but thanks to putrid numbers with Democrats and independents her overall favorability is 38% with 52% of voters having a negative opinion of her. For Gingrich 62% of Republicans see him positively but with similarly bad standing among voters outside the party his total favorability is 34% with 47% of voters expressing negative sentiments toward him.

Romney and Huckabee are less popular within their own parties than Palin and Gingrich but have better overall favorability numbers because they're less toxic to Democrats and independents. There is a real potential in the GOP race if all these folks run to put voters in a situation where they have to decide between who they like best and who they think has the best chance to defeat President Obama.

Mitt won straw poll by 1 vote so he gets the arrows

Some people who accuse former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and his retread 2012 Presidential campaign or being a bit phony may have a case. Not only did Romney and various political organizations he underwrites spend tens of thousands on bulk book sales to push his book, No Apology, onto the bestseller list, he loaned an organization, "Evangelicals for Mitt," which claims to have no direct ties to Romney, his political action committee's e-mail list so that the evangelical group could mount a straw poll campaign for him at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans.

Romney won the straw poll by a single vote over Rep. Ron Paul, who also subsidized a campaign at the conference. Romney supporters received free copies of his book, buttons, and bumper stickers in return for their votes. Some event organizers estimate he spend close to $15 per vote.

It's another Romney mirage," says a Republican political consultant who worked for Mike Huckabee in 2008. "The man simply believes he can buy his way to a nomination. I wonder why he isn't handing out free copies of that Romneycare health care plan he was so proud of three years ago."

How Mitt Romney can get out of his political box

Memo to Mitt Romney:

You and your campaign staff undoubtedly are trying to figure out how you can get out of the political box in which you find yourself. As governor of Massachusetts, you  sponsored a health care reform that bears some similarities to Obamacare. How can you win the Republican presidential nomination when Obamacare is reviled by most Americans and is likely to be the most powerful argument against the Democrats in the November election?

Here's how:

1. Focus on the process, not the result. Obamacare was bought and paid for by the Obama administration. Money that belonged to all Americans was used to bribe members of Congress to vote for a bill that most Americans opposed. Even so, Obamacare was enacted with minimum Congressional support.

Romneycare, on the other hand, started out as your bill, but was embraced by Massachusetts legislators from both parties and had little opposition. The record is rife with statements of bipartisan praise. Use them.

2. Why did you propose the reform? Because Massachusetts businesses were forking over $1 billion a year to the state to finance medical care for the uninsured. This was driving up the costs, and worsening the competitive standing, of Massachusetts businesses.  A significant slice of the Massachusetts economy is made up of health-related businesses. You did not want to see their prospects damaged by their support for the uninsured.

It is in your interest to keep attention focused on these two matters because a big majority of Americans perceive the Obamacare enactment as unacceptable at best, and unconstitutional at worst.

Romney's loss on mandate may be Pawlenty's gain

MN Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) defied recommendations made to him by advisers twice in the last 6 years about working to install individual mandates for health insurance coverage -- and in doing so may have stockpiled some points he can use to score with the GOP base.

The likely '12 WH contender has been avidly opposed to the health care legislation signed into law by Pres. Obama last week and maintains that it should be repealed. He has kept up a harsh critique of individual mandates - a piece of the issue that separates him from likely '12 WH GOP rival/ex-MA Gov. Mitt Romney.

Pawlenty appointed ex-Sen. David Durenberger (R) to chair the Citizens Forum on Health Care Costs in '03 largely to advise him on cost containment. Later, Pawlenty empaneled a Health Cabinet. In the report Durenberger and his team issued to Pawlenty on Feb. 23, '04, he noted that the state's uninsured rate of 5.4% was among the nation's lowest, and that state residents understood the need for buy-in.

If health care issue fades, Romney could run

No, Mitt Romney is not toast, contrary to some arguments I have read.

The dilemma that jeopardizes his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination may go away before it trips him up.

Judicial review might strike down parts of Obamacare, such as the individual mandate to buy health insurance, that seem likely to hobble Romney.

The White House is betting that the furore over Obamacare will subside, and polls show that is already happening as Americans adjust to the new reality. By convention time in 2012, Republican delegates may be choosing a candidate who differs little from Obama on the question of health care reform because it has become a nonissue.

That is the best possible outcome for Romney, who, as governor, initiated a health care reform in Massachusetts that has some of the same characteristics as Obamacare.

If, on the other hand, outrage against Obamacare remains at fever pitch among Republicans, Romney will be toast, or at least what passes for toast among the handsome, intelligent and rich. In that event, Republicans could look for a fire breather who would denounce both Obama and Romney for setting the nation on the road to ruin.

In the meantime, Republicans should mobilize promptly to seek repeal of Obamacare. If the Democrats have too much time, they will file their own appeal before a carefully chosen judge who hates conservatives and is about to embark on a one-year sabbatical to study rain forests.

David Frum assesses Mitt Romney at CPAC

At one point, Romney’s text read: “the government doesn’t create jobs … only the private sector can do that.”

Romney pronounced the phrase as written, then paused. Problem: It’s not true. Romney spontaneously corrected himself: “in a lasting way.” Meaning: Yes, government purchasing can create employment, but only the private market can sustain economic expansion.

(snip)

There are dozens of countries where people can start businesses, compete with the rich and rise above their origins.

In fact, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development just this year released a detailed study of social mobility. Among developed countries, the United States actually ranks toward the back of the pack for social mobility, barely better than supposedly class-bound Britain. A child born poor in Canada, Australia, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, France (!) or Germany has a better chance of escaping poverty than a poor American.

There is evidence too that America has less social mobility today than it did a generation ago.

This information is not unconservative. Indeed it is conservatives who have identified some of the most important causes of America’s ossifying class structure: bad schools in poor areas, immigration policies that favor the unskilled.

(snip)

Romney’s unscripted self-edit revealed a man who knew and cared about the difference between fact and fantasy. In a conservative world distracted and deluded by the Sarah Palins and the Glenn Becks, that self-revelation is desperately needed –and desperately welcome.

Okay Mitt - some voters will give you another look

The mystery man who was tossed off an airplane for allegedly attacking Mitt Romney has finally been revealed — it was one of the guys from LMFAO … and he claims Romney is the one who got physical first!

It all went down shortly after the two parties boarded a flight from Vancouver to Los Angeles on Monday.

According to a video confessional from LMFAO’s Sky Blu, it all started when he leaned his seat back while the plane was still on the tarmac … and Romney, who was sitting behind him, started yelling at him to put his seat back up.

Sky Blu claims Romney then reached forward and grabbed his shoulder … so he slapped the Presidential wannabeen’s hand away. Shortly after, authorities boarded the plane and escorted Sky Blu off the flight … and the other member of LMFAO got it all on tape.

Is Romney too presidential?

Mitt Romney should be looking good right now, having the strongest claim of any prominent Republican to the title "turnaround expert." That term fits exactly the specifications of many conservatives for the post-Obama president. That raises a serious question. If Romney had decked this guy he'd have a leg up even in some blue states. Why didn't he? It was an opportunity missed.

"Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney was threatened by a violent passenger on a flight out of Vancouver on Monday night. Romney and his wife, Ann, were sitting in economy, waiting for takeoff, when the man in front of Ann reclined his seat. When Mitt asked the man to make it upright, the man became “physically violent” and, according to some reports, tried to hit Romney. The passenger was then removed from the plane."

Palin, Romney strong in Newsmax-Zogby poll

A recent Newsmax Media-Zogby poll showed former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin leading the Republican field as the party’s preferred candidate for president in 2012.

And a breakdown of demographic and other data from the survey offers some interesting insights on current Republican thinking about GOP candidates in the next presidential election:

Sarah Palin, who grabbed 22.2 percent of the vote in the poll, is more popular in the East than anywhere else in the country. Interestingly, she has been described as a Western and Southern candidate, but our Zogby poll found that 25 percent of Easterners supported her. The West, in fact, gave her the lowest figure — 20 percent.

Palin is not as strong with 65-plus voters — her percentage there dropped to 19.7 percent. She seems to be popular with younger voters, with 23 percent of those between ages 18 and 29 supporting her.

Newt Gingrich came in at 12.4 percent, but he seems to skew with stronger support among males, 14 percent, while female Republican voters gave him 11 percent.

Palin skews favorably with women, with 23.3 percent of Republican women supporting her compared to 21 percent of Republican men. She also does very well in the 55-to-69 demographic group, where 24 percent of Republicans back her. That number drops dramatically to just 14 percent in the 70-plus group.

Mike Huckabee seems to be a favorite of black Republicans, garnering 24.2 percent of the vote, more than any other candidate in the field.

Palin draws exceedingly well with born-again and Evangelical Christians, pulling a strong 28.4 percent of their vote. She also gets strong support from less educated voters — 28.6 percent of those who said they did not have a college degree voted for her, while those with a college degree gave her just 18.5 percent.

Mitt Romney had consistently strong poll numbers across all demographic groups. Interestingly, although he is a Mormon, he led the pack among Catholic voters, even beating out Palin, 23.6 percent to 21.1 percent.

Romney also seems to be very favorably viewed by Jewish Republicans, gaining a remarkable 32 percent of their support.

Mitt Romney's economic recovery plan

To get people back to work as rapidly as possible and to restore America's economic vitality, the nation must change course. Here's the advice I would give:

• Repair the stimulus. Freeze the funds that haven't yet been spent and redirect them to immediate, private sector job-creation priorities.

• Create tax incentives that promote business expansion and hiring. For example, install a robust investment tax credit, permit businesses to expense capital purchases made in 2010, and reduce payroll taxes. These will reignite construction, technology and a wide array of capital goods industries, and lead to expanded employment.

• Prove to the global investors that finance America's debt that we are serious about reining in spending and becoming fiscally prudent by adopting limits on non-military discretionary spending and reforming our unsustainable, unfunded entitlements. These are key to strengthening the dollar, reducing the threat of rampant inflation and holding down interest rates.

• Close down any talk of carbon cap-and-trade. It will burden consumers and employers with billions in new costs. Instead, greatly expand our commitment to natural gas and nuclear, boosting jobs now and reducing the export of energy jobs and dollars later.

• Tell the unions that job-stifling "card check" legislation is off the table. Laying new burdens on small business will kill entrepreneurship and job creation.

• Don't allow a massive tax increase to go into effect in 2011 with the expiration of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. The specter of more tax-fueled government spending and the reduction of capital available for small business will hinder investment and business expansion.

• New spending should be strictly limited to items that are critically needed and that we would have acquired in the future, such as new military equipment to support our troops abroad and essential infrastructure at home.

• Install dynamic regulations for the financial sector — rules that are up to date, efficient and not excessively burdensome. But do not so tie up the financial sector with red tape that we lose a vital component of our economic system.

• Open the doors to trade. Give important friends like Colombia favored trade status rather than bow to protectionist demands. Now is the time for aggressive pursuit of opportunities for new markets for American goods, not insular retrenchment.

• Stop frightening the private sector by continuing to hold GM stock, by imposing tighter and tighter controls on compensation, and by pursuing a public insurance plan to compete with private insurers. Government encroachment on free enterprise is depressing investment and job creation.

GOP needs a shadow president who's an expert at rescuing failing enterprises: that's Romney

With the Republican Party riddled with self-doubt, uncertain of its future path, and lacking a broadly accepted leader, it's time for one of its presidential aspirants to take a bold step forward.

For want of an established post, let's call him the shadow president. If he were to perform well, he would get a leg up on the field of Republican candidates for the presidential nomination in 2012.

While it is not my purpose to pick the shadow president, the Obama administration's performance to date points to one man, Mitt Romney. The son of one-time Michigan Gov. George Romney, who also was an auto industry executive, Mitt Romney became rich and famous by recognizing undervalued assets and liberating things of value in failed or failing corporations.

Doesn't that sound like a good job description for the next president?

The situation is so dire, after all, that officials of two relics of Communism, Russia and China, are urging the U.S. government to exercise caution as it piles up previously unthinkable levels of debt

Along with its nuclear arsenal, Russia's partnership with the United States on space exploration is one of its few remaining claims to world status.

For China, the United States is a major market as well as a source of stolen military advances, such as the stealth propellor system for submarines. China also is the leading buyer of U.S. bonds, and that investment becomes more risky as the U.S. debt, and the chance of default, grows at an unprecedented rate.

Whether China values the United States most as a market, or as a mahufacturer of advanced military systems that China can steal, is not clear.

In the absence of a shadow president, the most effective political class spokesman for conservatism has been former vice-president Dick Cheney. But Cheney's strengths are military and foreign affairs, and he is unlikely to retain an official role in future years.

So who do we have who can revive a damaged and dispirited nation that will not have recourse to a bankruptcy court?

The obvious choice is Romney, whose academic career surpasses President Obama's and who earned a fortune as a skilled scavenger prowling through the boneyards of corporate America. Estimates of his net worth run as high as $500 million. Liberals will pillory him for that, but respect for success may make a comeback as the prospect of America's failure looms.

A graduate of Brigham Young, where he was valedictorian, Romney subsequently earned a joint doctoral/master's degree from Harvard's law and business schools. Success in business led, in early 1999, to a summons to rescue the failing 2002 Olympics Winter Games in Salt Lake City. With Romney at the held, the Olympics recovered from a huge deficit to earn a profit of $100 million.

Romney donated his $825,000 salary to charity.

The turnarnound led to a successful campaign for governor of Massachusetts, where he served one term before seeking rhe Republican presidential nomination in 2008.

Now that American business is falling more and more under the heavy hand of an arrogant, fascistic government that is running up trillions of dollars in new debt, perhaps it's time for a new approach to candidate selection.

Let the job that is to be done define the candidate. As of now, the job at hand points to an experienced, successful turnaround specialist.