By Alan
Caruba
It has long
been a tradition in American politics to speak of voting blocs, but in an era
of 24/7 news and instant communications, that may be less likely as an
indicator of who votes for who.
For example,
The Jewish Press, the largest orthodox Jewish weekly, came out with a strong
endorsement of Mitt Romney, but the political pundits keep wondering how
Jews—usually Democratic and liberal—will vote on November 6.
In point of
fact, Jewish voters are a minority at best and not likely to move the dial
except in South Florida, and urban centers such as New York, Los Angeles, and
their environs. What can be said is that Obama’s hostility to Israel is going
to play a role in how Jews vote. Traditionally Democrats and liberals, they are
generally close observers of the political winds and, while not all Zionists,
they have a strong attachment to the Holy Land.
In a similar
way, not all Catholics oppose abortion and they can be found in both political
parties. The notion, however, that the government demands that their
institutions like hospitals act counter to the Church’s fundamental beliefs
has surely angered many Catholics. Hispanics, generally Catholic, tend toward a
more conservative point of view, but the thought that they will vote as a bloc
also seems a reach. Hispanic citizens come from many different places and
cultures. And evangelicals could care less at this point that Mitt Romney is a
Mormon. They know a man of faith when they see one.
The current
wisdom regarding blacks is that they will support Obama, but it is also widely
believed among observers that many will simply not vote in the dramatic numbers
of 2008. Blacks are said to be disappointed with Obama regarding the economy
and offended by his support for gay marriage. Overall, the African-American
community has seen few gains, if any, in an economy gone south.
Women are
regarded as a major factor in the election and both the Obama and Romney camps
are said to be making a big effort to secure their vote, but I suspect women
will either vote within their party affiliation if they are Democrats or cross
party lines because of economic issues—lack of employment opportunities, the
rising cost of food and gas, children who graduated college this year and are
still living at home, et cetera. The Democrat’s farcical “war on women” has no
traction.
Political
consultants and advisors make their living reading the tea leafs of a campaign,
but this one will come down to the economy, jobs, and inflation. These issues
affect people no matter what religion, race or gender.
The Wrath of
the Seniors
There is one very large group about which and from whom little has been heard.
They represent all the other voting blocs and can be regarded as one
themselves; senior citizens.
In 2008 the CIA Fact
Book estimate of the number of senior citizens, age 65 and older, represented 12.7
% of the population; males 16,263,255 and females 22,426,914. There are more
now because baby boomers are entering the ranks of seniors in the millions
these days. In 2011 the first of 79
million Americans born between the end of World War II and the mid-1960s
will turn 65, swelling the ranks of Medicare and Social Security recipients.
A lot of the seniors, no
matter race, gender, or political affiliation are very worried about Obamacare
and they should be. Many already know that Obama took over half a trillion out
of Medicare to fund Obamacare and you can be damned sure they are not happy
about it.
At
the other end of the age cycle Generation Opportunity.org, a non-profit group
devoted to mobilizing young Americans (18-29) on important economic issues,
reports that its polling says 76% of Millennials plan to vote.
Fully 89% say
that the current state of the economy is impacting their lives and not in a
good way. The youth unemployment rate is 11.8% and, for blacks it is a whopping
21%. The declining labor force participation rate has created 1.7 million young
adults who are not even counted as
unemployed; bad news for a candidate who promised hope and change four
years ago.
No doubt exit
interviews and other post-election studies will reveal trends, but if, like 23
million Americans, you’re out of a job, still looking after several months, or
just stopped looking, you have plenty of motivation to go to the polls and cast
your vote for the only real “hope and change” available, the election of Mitt
Romney.
One factor in
the election has received little attention, but it should not be overlooked. A
lot of states where energy reserves, particularly coal, represent a significant
economic factor, have little reason to reelect Obama. An estimated 90 percent
of coal reserves are concentrated in ten states, but it is mined in 27 states.
Even though the U.S. coal reserves represent as much energy as all the oil in
Saudi Arabia, Obama has waged a war on this valuable resource.
According to
the U.S. Energy Information Administration, coal production has fallen 6.5%
during the Obama years. So that is one promise he’s kept; largely due to
draconian EPA regulations. The EIA expects 8.5% of coal-fired plants will retire
by 2016 and 17% by 2020. Coal has fallen to 32% of net electricity generation
from 48% when Obama took office.
While
indicting the oil industry, the Obama administration has managed to squander
billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars on uncompetitive wind and solar companies,
electric car production, and at one point he was advocating algae—pond scum—as
a source of energy.
Instinctively,
Americans know that the U.S. must maintain a strong defense and they know that
is not the case these days. They love their fighting forces and their veterans.
Obama does not.
For me, the
most interesting aspect of the 2012 campaigns has been the total absence of
blather about “global warming” and only a few references to “climate change” by
either candidate. When Al Gore and John Kerry ran, they were all over this like
a doggy chew bone. President Obama who has unleashed the Environmental Protection
Agency to impose an insane list of economy-killing regulations has had little
to say about an issue that we have been told for decades was the most serious
one of all.
While I am
still fearful about the apparent close divide in the polls—which are trending
now toward Romney—I keep thinking that Obama is going to crash and burn on
November 6th. Even people who are not glued to the news channels or
who refuse to process negative information about Obama now know he is a
pathological liar and the administration’s response to the killing of a U.S.
ambassador and three others in Benghazi, Libya put this on full display.
At least
Democrats could believe Bill Clinton when he said he felt their pain, but Obama
makes no effort to even pretend he cares about them. He’s fixated on
“millionaires and billionaires.” He’s concerned that Muslims not be offended.
He’s offering four more years of the worst economic conditions Americans have
endured since the Great Depression.
Poor Obama,
he can’t blame his failures on George W. Bush any more.
© Alan
Caruba, 2012
3 comments:
Unfortunately I know a few idiots who think Obama cares more about them than Romney. We know he doesn't give a darn about anyone other than himself.
Also, I think a lot of people will vote on what their news channels reports. I turned to CNN this morning and on the bottom text is running and when the subject "politics" came up all of it was either pro Obama or anti Romney. I'l call this the TV channel voting block.
It should please all to know that I have 2 close female relatives who have never voted in their lives and they both have early voted for Romney!
Well, Hugh, there goes the woman's vote for sure!
It took a person as horrible as Barak Obama to motivate these two to vote.
He should be forced to step down as liars cannot be trusted!
Post a Comment