Gallup Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

• Romney 46%
• Obama 46%

Each seven-day rolling average is based on telephone interviews with approximately 3,050 registered voters; Margin of error is ±2 percentage points.

Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

• Obama 47%
• Romney 44%

Above Numbers Are For a Rolling Three Day Average of 1,500 Likely Voters.

The second installment of the Race42012 Electoral Map is upon us, and already we are seeing a little positive momentum for Governor Romney. Most notably in this edition is the Tar Heel State turning light red (sorry, UNC fans) and Wisconsin changing from Lean Obama to a solid tossup:

North Carolina was a pretty easy call to shade red this week: two polls came out of the state which averaged together gave Romney a three and a half point lead there. However, making it an even easier decision was the fact that one of those polls had Obama only up one point – with a sample that was over seven points more favorable to Obama than the actual electorate in 2008. When that happens, it’s pretty easy to say Obama is in trouble in North Carolina.

Wisconsin was a little more difficult to switch — in an effort to be cautious, I almost didn’t pull the trigger on labeling it a tossup. But adding all the ingredients together — the state’s recent history of incredible close Presidential contests (a 0.2% margin in 2000, and a 0.4% margin in 2004), the Walker recall election and the passion of the state GOP, and the three polls that all showed the race tied or very close to tied — I had to flip the Badger State into the tossup column. The current poll average in Wisconsin is 47.3 – 45.7 for Obama, a margin of just 1.6%. When pressed, Wisconsin still falls to Obama since no polls have shown an actual Romney lead there as of yet, but if trends continue…

Arizona also turns dark red on this map, as old polls drop off the average and the newer ones show Romney with a sizable lead. Arizona is a conservative enough state foundationally that Romney isn’t hurt as much by the GOP Hispanic struggle there like he is in other swing states (i.e. Colorado, Nevada, and especially New Mexico).

Obama does get some good news on this map as he swings New Hampshire into the blue column after a poll gave him a ten-point lead in the Granite State. However, since that poll was from notoriously unreliable PPP, I shaded the state light blue — I think the race there is much closer than that at the moment. Also trending a deeper shade of blue this week is Maine’s second congressional district, a just-unreachable goal for GOP candidates for quite some time now.

Florida remains a tossup, leaning slightly in Romney’s favor. And with no new polling out of Virginia and Ohio, those two states remain leaning Obama for now. Obama enjoys a 48.7 – 44.0 lead over Romney in Virginia and a smaller 46.3 – 43.0 lead over Romney in Ohio. That means Ohio is on the cusp of falling into the tossup column, but so far the state has proven resistant to Romney’s positive trends elsewhere around the country. Here’s some food for thought for this week: even if Romney pulls out a victory in FL, VA, NC, and OH, he will still need one of the following states to get to 270: WI, CO, NV, IA, or NH. A few months ago, I would have said New Hampshire would be his best bet for the state to put him over the top. Now, it’s looking like Wisconsin might be worth some heavy investment from Team Romney.

If it weren’t so disastrous a strategy, President Obama’s urging Europeans to abandon current attempts at “austerity” in favor of returning to their old policies of creating more public debt through “job creation” spending, would be laughable. Mr. Obama, now finding his soul-mate in new socialist French President Hollande and his economic ideas, is not without a political purpose, however. He is trying to hold off the collapse of the euro currency, and possibly the European Union itself, at least until the U.S. presidential election in November. A European economic catastrophe would have much impact on the U.S. economy in the long run, and it would dash any chance of U.S. economic recovery in the short tun, the latter almost certainly precluding Mr. Obama’s already problematic re-election.

Mr. Obama’s recommendation to Europe could be likened to a proposal that, after the Titanic had struck the iceberg that cold night in the north Atlantic, the Titanic crew should have destroyed the few lifeboats they had for the purpose of making firewood.

After more than a century of central government entitlement spending in the various European nations, and after two horrific world wars of violence and self-destruction, “austerity” is a complicated public policy to follow in Europe. To be fair, European politicians, especially in the smaller member nations which have more limited resources, have a genuine dilemma. It is especially difficult, and its measures are especially painful and shocking to those populations which know no other way of life. When you fully realize that one-quarter of adult employable Spaniards are out of work, for example, you have some true perspective on the extent of the economic crisis on that side of the Atlantic.

Compared to Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy, the French are much more capable of enduring a program of austerity. The French economy is not in as bad shape as many others on the Continent. But, for now, the French seem turned in the wrong direction. Germany is the strongest economy in the European Union. Chancellor Merkel is being heavily pressured to abandon austerity measures, not only from the Obama administration, and her EU partners, but from restless German voters, some on the left and some of whom no longer want to bail out the rest of Europe.

The indelibly simple reality of world economics today, however, and especially in Europe, is that forms of “austerity,” sacrifice, “biting the bullet,” and adjustments of entitltements, are the only way out of the economic crisis. The longer it takes to happen, the more severe it will be on the populations of Europe and its member nations. The idea that the problem can be solved by “job creation” and more public spending is delusional. It is also a residue of the socialistic ideas born in Europe almost two hundred years ago, and practiced there to various degrees and in various forms since.

These ideas clothed in the language of idealism, compassion and egalitarianism (e.g..,”redistribution of wealth,”) have in practice brought to Europe cynicism, violence, suffering and depravity for more than a century.

____________________________________________________________________________

Copyright (c) 2012 by Barry Casselman. All rights reserved. Please visit Mr. Casselman’s personal site. 

Hat-Tip: The Argo Journal

Vanderbilt Tennessee 2012 Presidential Poll

• Mitt Romney 47% (42%)
• Barack Obama 40% (39%)

Survey of 756 registered voters was conducted May 2-9, 2012 by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. The margin of error is +/- 4 percentage points.  Results from the poll conductedFebruary 16-22, 2012 are in parentheses.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

Gallup Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

• Romney 46%
• Obama 45%

Each seven-day rolling average is based on telephone interviews with approximately 3,050 registered voters; Margin of error is ±2 percentage points.

Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

• Obama 46%
• Romney 44%

Above Numbers Are For a Rolling Three Day Average of 1,500 Likely Voters.

From the official release:

I am heartened and relieved that Chen Guangcheng and his family are on their way to the United States and out of China. I commend the U.S. diplomats and officials who worked to ensure that the Chinese government followed through on its commitments. This episode underscores the need for the United States to forthrightly stand up for the human rights of the Chinese people.

Gallup Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

• Romney 47%
• Obama 44%

Each seven-day rolling average is based on telephone interviews with approximately 3,050 registered voters; Margin of error is ±2 percentage points.

Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll

• Obama 46%
• Romney 45%

Above Numbers Are For a Rolling Three Day Average of 1,500 Likely Voters.

And now there are 7 on the VP List!!!

Are your hands sweaty? Is your heart pumping? Do you find yourself needing to check Race42012.com more than ever to catch the latest VP buzz? If you answered to the affirmative on all those questions consider yourself officially a political junkie. You also can consider yourself a wise political junkie for staying close to R4’12 because I will continue to give you the “buzz before the buzz.”

On Wednesday,  The Rumor Mill ended the column with these very carefully chosen words…

“I will be forwarding you all a very special rumor that is currently making the rounds about a certain southern Governor whose political future might have him taking trips to Boston in the months of August, September, October and November.

Who is the Governor?

Why would he need to take the trips to Boston?

Stay alert, and stay close to Race42012…”

Since Wednesday, there has been lots of buzz about “that certain southern Governor.” Who was “that certain Southern Governor” that I was alluding to?….. Of course, the answer is non other than the current Governor of Louisiana, Bobby Jindal!

On Thursday, Matthew E. Miller wrote a piece titled “More Jindal Movement”, which included recent columns written by Grover Norquist & Phillip Klein which declared Bobby Jindal the best candidate for Vice President among all other possible candidates.

Now today, The Rumor Mill can officially announce that Bobby Jindal has been contacted by Beth Myers and has been notified that there is interest Gov. Mitt Romney in Gov. Jindal joining the ticket. According to “The Eagle”, Jindal being was contacted by Beth Myers in late April. However, Jindal has reportedly not been given the “Information Packet” which was given to other Veep prospects such as Portman, Christie, and Ayotte.  In the case of Gov. Jindal (and one of the two other new VP candidates who I will get to later in this article) the term “Biographical Information” was used instead. Team Romney asked for “Biographical Information” from Jindal and has already received the information back, which could very well could be the origin of this rumor being leaked. However, there is a possibility that the “Biographical Information” requested is the same information as the “Information Packets”. It may just be the case of different terms being used to describe the same documents due to different sources of information/leaks “The Eagle” has spoken to in the last month. I can only report the exact words whispered to “The Eagle.” For those who have been wishing for this day to happen, the day that you knew Jindal could be in the running for the Vice Presidential nod, you can be sure your day has finally arrived. Congrats to all the “Bobby for VP12” supporters out there. Stay tuned…more is coming.

I have the name of two more VP candidates that Beth Myers has reportedly contacted. But before I get to those other two names, I just wanted to draw our attention to an article that “The Hill” has posted this week, “Romney begins vetting veep picks.” Please take special note of this part of the article:

The team for Beth Myers, the Romney adviser leading the search for the GOP’s vice presidential nominee, has already contacted potential running mates, according to a source close to the Romney campaign.

By beginning the process early, the Romney camp hopes to avoid the mistake of John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign, when that campaign found itself unprepared for the onslaught of public attention that greeted Sarah Palin.

If you’ll recall, The Rumor Mill informed it’s readers a month ago that the VP Search was officially underway and way ahead of Team McCain’s 2008 schedule.

On April 23rd, we had already told our readers some of the candidates that had been contacted by Beth Myers (per information given to us by “The Eagle”). There were some readers who did not believe this could possibly be true, just looking at the calendar… Also, there were no other sources/sites that were publishing this information at the time. I am quite confident that the first VP candidates were contacted by Beth Myers’ office during the week of April 14th – April 19th. I believe history will be quite kind to us when it is written just when, who, and how these VP candidates were contacted. This particular “Hill” article is just the first “brick being laid” in this regard…

But enough with my “tooting my own Purple Viking horns.” We have 2 more VP candidates that we will be officially added to the Rumor Mill VP list today who are being vetted by Beth Myers. The next name is a shocker, but it’s happening, according to the rumor given to me by “The Eagle”. Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington State has been contacted by Beth Myers and, again, “Biographical Information” was asked for and received from Rep. McMorris Rodgers. The source who gave “The Eagle” the information regarding Bobby Jindal included the name of Cathy McMorris Rodgers. This addition the list is quite a shocker for me personally because I have come to the belief Team Romney wanted only “Day 1 Ready” candidates on their list. It may be that Team Romney does see Cathy McMorris Rodgers as ready, however, and I’m not giving her potential VP candidacy the respect it deserves. I’m very interested to see the reaction from R4’12 readers on this. But because Rodgers name was given by the same source that divulged Jindal’s addition, there is no way that I can dismiss it.

Now we save the best for last. Last night in a phone call from “the Eagle”, he gave me no notice of what he was about to say… He just spoke these words: ”Pawlenty is in play!”

WHAT????……I asked, not believing what I had just heard.

“Pawlenty is in play”, “The Eagle” repeated back to me.

I then asked how and when did you come up with this info?

“The Eagle” answered, “I will not answer, and you should not ask”.

Why “The Eagle” chose to answer my question in the manner that he did is a subject for another discussion. For now I am too excited over the news to look at the future implications for my favorite Governor.

Well, now I more fully understand this exchange between Andrea Mitchell & Tim Pawlenty on MSNBC.

ANDREA MITCHELL: Have you heard from Boston, from Beth Myers or anyone in the campaign asking you for your background information?

TIM PAWLENTY: The Romney campaign has a policy, and I’m a national co-chair of the campaign, that we don’t talk about the vice presidential policy in terms of timing whether it relates to me or anyone else or the aspects of that, so that’s something that we’re going to leave for another day and time. Not because I’m trying to be coy with you Andrea, that’s just the campaign policy. We don’t discuss the details of that process.

So where are we at this point in the VP search?

I am confident that, according to my sources, the following candidates have been contacted by Beth Myers  for inclusion in the Veep selection process:

• Senator of Florida – Marco Rubio
• Senator of Ohio – Rob Portman
• Senator of New Hampshire – Kelly Ayotte
• Governor of New Jersey – Chris Christie
• Governor of Minnesota – Tim Pawlenty
• House of Representative of Washington State – Cathy McMorris Rodgers
• Governor of Louisiana – Bobby Jindal

Has Team Romney casted their VP nets wider than these 7?

Could any of these 7 make it on to the shorter VP list as it narrows?

Stay alert… And say tuned for my next installment…

___________________________________________________________________________

-Gregory J. Flugaur can be contacted at flugempire@hotmail.com.

The question has been raised recently; should the Romney Campaign attack Barack Obama on his long-time association with Jeremiah Wright, former pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ where Obama was a member for twenty years? Mitt says no. Others say yes.

In this I agree with Mitt. He should not use Jeremiah Wright to attack Obama. My reasoning has little to do with what is right or wrong, or high road versus low road. It is really more strategic than anything else. Let me explain.

First, let’s take a stroll down memory lane together and revisit the just recently concluded primaries.

Think back. How many times did we hear during the primaries the lament from the ABR supporters that “if only someone would really take RomneyCare and stick it to Romney, he would fail”? Well, various opponents tried, and they all failed. And yet the lament continued to be heard. “Why doesn’t anybody nail Romney on RomneyCare?”

The problem lies in the fact that MassCare was old news. People had long heard about it, and it was already part of their opinion of Romney. It was baked into the cake, as the saying goes.

I remember several occasions on this board where I likened the idea that “finally” vetting Romney for RomneyCare would hurt him to that old definition of insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. “This time it will be different. This time it will hurt him.” It never did. Yet still they insisted that it would.

So it is with Rev. Wright. That line of attack might have been useful four years ago when it was still a fresh topic, but for whatever reason John McCain refused to go there. The moment was lost. The good reverend is now baked into the Obama cake. All the harping in the world about Wright will likely now move the needle against Obama no more than a point or two. It’s old news. People have moved on.

To those who say, “it may only move the needle a point or two, but any amount will help”, one must ask, “Yes, but at what cost?” What will it cost us to do so? Mitt has worked hard over the past six years to maintain the high road, and he has largely succeeded. Do we want to throw that advantage away? And then there is the fact that if Romney brings up Rev. Wright, that attack legitimizes any and all attacks on Mitt’s religion, and the religions of his supporters. All this for just a slight twitch of the needle?

No, I don’t think so. Let’s leave that can of worms on the shelf unopened.

That doesn’t mean Obama’s long association with Rev. Wright is of no used to us, though. On the contrary, it serves as a very nice counterweight to the Democrats’ desire to make Mitt’s Mormonism an issue. “Oh, you wish to talk about Romney’s religion, do you? Let’s talk about Rev. Wright, shall we?”

Few Democrats will want to go there once that consequence becomes well established.

Pew Research Poll on Iran’s Nuclear Weapons Program

Thinking about Iran, would you favor or oppose Iran acquiring nuclear weapons?

• Favor 2%
• Oppose 94%

(If opposes Iran acquiring nuclear weapons) Do you approve or disapprove of tougher international economic sanctions on Iran to try to stop it from developing nuclear weapons?

• Approve 80%
• Disapprove 16%

(If opposes Iran acquiring nuclear weapons) In your opinion, which is more important … preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, even if it means taking military action OR avoiding a military conflict with Iran, even if it means they may develop nuclear weapons?

• Preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, even if it means taking military action 63%
• Avoiding a military conflict with Iran, even if it means they may develop nuclear weapons 28%

Among Democrats

• Preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, even if it means taking military action 61%
• Avoiding a military conflict with Iran, even if it means they may develop nuclear weapons 31%

Among Republicans

• Preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, even if it means taking military action 79%
• Avoiding a military conflict with Iran, even if it means they may develop nuclear weapons 15%

Among Independents

• Preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, even if it means taking military action 58%
• Avoiding a military conflict with Iran, even if it means they may develop nuclear weapons 33%

Survey of 1,011 adults was conducted March 20 – April 4, 2012. The margin of error is ±3.5 percentage points

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

Rasmussen Nebraska 2012 Presidential Poll

• Mitt Romney 53% (52%)
• Barack Obama 39% (35%)
• Some other candidate 6% (10%)
• Undecided 3% (3%)

Do you have a very favorable, somewhat favorable, somewhat unfavorable, or very unfavorable impression of Mitt Romney?

• Very favorable 20%
• Somewhat favorable 36%
• Somewhat unfavorable 23%
• Very unfavorable 18%

How would you rate the job Barack Obama has been doing as president?

• Strongly approve 24% (19%)
• Somewhat approve 18% (19%)
• Somewhat disapprove 9% (11%)
• Strongly disapprove 47% (50%)

Survey of 500 likely voters was conducted May 16, 2012. The margin of error is +/- 4.5 percentage points.  Results from the poll conducted March 5, 2012 are in parentheses.

Inside the numbers:

Romney holds a double-digit lead among both male and female voters in the state. As in other parts of the country, Obama is ahead among voters under 40, while their elders prefer the Republican. Most married voters support Romney; a plurality of unmarrieds likes the president.

Both candidates carry roughly 80% of the voters in their respective parties. Voters not affiliated with either of the major parties prefer the president by four points.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal

Last year, Representative Dan Boren (D-OK) made the surprise decision to not run for re-election in 2012. The seat, described to me by one person as “the most Republican seat held by a Democrat” in the country, was immediately crowded with a myriad of candidates all vying to be the Republican nominee to represent the 2^nd District of Oklahoma.

One of these candidates is George Faught. A longtime business owner who runs a carpet cleaning company with his son Jamison, George is a state representative with a strong conservative record. (Full disclosure: Jamison is a friend of mine, and this friendship led to a discussion late last year with the Faught campaign about my possibly working for them as a press secretary.) He sat down with me this morning for a phone interview to discuss the campaign and some of the national issues he would address as the 2^nd District’s Representative.

Dustin Siggins (DS): So how is the campaign going? How many people are in the race? Obviously, the Republican primary winner is going to take the open seat, so what are you doing to win?

George Faught (GF): Things are going well. It’s a huge district – 26 counties, 7.5 hours from north to south, from Kansas to Texas – and there are 6 Republicans in the race, so I have a lot of work to do. We feel very positive after Huckabee endorsed us two weeks ago. We’ve had 50 endorsements since we launched the campaign, including Concerned Women for America, the Family Research Council and Gary Jones. Gary is the Oklahoma state auditor and a former GOP chairman. He’s also the first statewide officeholder to endorse anyone in the race, and so we’re honored to have his backing.

This race is really interesting because the district has a 70% Democratic registration advantage, yet every state elected office is held by Republicans. Of the national politicians, the only Democratic-held seat in the state is Representative Boren’s, and he’s retiring without endorsing anyone on either side of the aisle.

We’re using the Huckabee endorsement to advertise on radio, and we are scheduled to air ads on TV in June. Our fundraising is on schedule, and things are looking great.

DS: Why did you get into the race? When we talked last year, you said it was literally a last-minute decision.

GF: Well, it wasn’t quite last-minute; it’s more that I didn’t know that Dan Boren was going to leave office until he actually announced it. I wasn’t planning on running against an incumbent – I enjoy being a state representative and a business owner  – but with the opportunity to make a difference with the national debt and trying to shrink the size of the federal government, I decided to step in and run.

DS: Earlier this week you were involved in a few minor controversies, including rejections of endorsements. Can you explain a little about that?

GF: Sure. I’ve been campaigning since last July. With control of both chambers in GOP control, we are expected to push entirely on principle. We had a personhood bill that turned into a resolution instead of legislation, and we all know that resolutions are useless. We as a Republican caucus weren’t pushing the personhood legislation, tax legislation, education legislation and other issues forward enough. So I put out a press release criticizing my colleagues and the governor for not standing up for principles.

My timing wasn’t the best, and I lost a couple of endorsements from non-leadership Republicans in the state house who thought that I should have focused solely on the failure of our party’s leadership to take the lead on these issues. I would point out it’s the non-leadership Republicans who should push leadership into passing legislation, and I would also point out that I have been campaigning for the past 10 months and am keenly aware of how our GOP voters want us as a party to be advancing these important issues. I have had overwhelming support from grassroots, every-day Republicans who are telling me that “it’s about time someone said” what was in the press release.

DS: Earlier this week, Speaker Boehner said he told the President there would be no debt ceiling increase unless we cut spending. Do you think this will actually happen? Do you support this strategy by the Speaker? Do you have a plan to cut spending?

GF: We should not increase the debt limit; we need to decrease spending. We need a new strategy. We can’t continue on the same policies of the last few years and decades. One of the problems with drawing a line in the sand is that you can erase it and draw a new one. If we refuse to make cuts we are drowning your generation and future generations with debt. Boehner has to stand and not blink this time. He should draw the line in concrete so it can’t be erased and redrawn. We can’t blink. Let’s do this legitimately, and stop the gimmicks.

DS: Where would you cut? Would you consider the elimination of tax loopholes to reduce the deficit?

GF: I think the tax code can certainly be changed. There are a lot of loopholes. We’ve worked on eliminating some of these at the state level. If you can eliminate loopholes and put the extra revenues towards deficit reduction, that’s fine. Tax simplification is extremely important for economic growth and fairness.

On the spending side, let’s look at government agencies and see if some of them can probably go away and those responsibilities come down to the states.

What I prefer are tax incentives, to get people to make investments first instead of doing what the federal government did with Solyndra and saying “Here’s the money! Good luck!”

I’d rather prove it can be done first, then incentivize. Force companies to make the investment first.

DS: Following up on your comment about cutting departments, you could cut out the Department of Education, the Department of Energy and the Department of Transportation without really making much of a dent in the federal deficit. About three-quarters of the federal budget consists of Medicare, Social Security, CHIP programs, Medicaid, defense spending and interest payments on the debt. Can I get you on the record regarding where in the above areas (except for interest payments, obviously, since that would cause a default on our debt) you’d look at cuts?

GF: Well, [Oklahoma’s] Senator Coburn has found waste and abuse in the Defense Department, and I think every department in the federal government has extra spending we can get rid of. I’d certainly be in favor of going through and establishing where spending is being done inefficiently.

Regarding the entitlement programs, we need to change mindsets on how retirement should work. Social Security was never designed to be the sole source of retirement income. We need to get back to a society where we have people working hard to make sure they have personal savings and work-related retirement pensions. The only way to have these retirement programs survive is to change mindsets.

And, yes, some people won’t like the changes. But we’ve done a lot of reforms at the state level that could work, such as putting in accountability for Medicaid, increasing personal responsibility, etc. We can do that on the federal level – prevent abuse of the system.

When it comes to Medicare, Paul Ryan has talked about increasing the retirement age for those under 55. Obviously the media and Democrats are saying he’s getting rid of Medicare when in fact he’s trying to save it. As much as I hate to use the phrase, ignoring the problem so we can “kick the can down the road” is simply irresponsible. Gradually increasing the retirement age should definitely be on the table.

[This post was originally published at HotAir.com]

Gallup Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

• Romney 46%
• Obama 45%

Each seven-day rolling average is based on telephone interviews with approximately 3,050 registered voters; Margin of error is ±2 percentage points.

Mason-Dixon Presidential Poll

	Obama	Romney
All	44	47
Men	40	53
Women	47	41
Dems	80	11
Reps	4	89
Inds	41	47
18-34	56	39
35-49	46	44
50-64	39	50
65+	40	52

1,000 likely 2012 general election voters were interviewed nationwide from May 10 through May 14, 2012 by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research, Inc. of Washington, DC. The margin for error is ±3%.

With Gov. Mitt Romney now the presumptive nominee of our party, we can jump fully into the veepstakes. Here are the latest rankings:

1. Rob Portman, U.S. Senator from Ohio

The junior senator from Ohio is fast becoming the consensus choice among political professionals inside the party.  Elected to seven consecutive terms in the U.S. House, Portman would go on to serve as both U.S. Trade Representative and OMB Director under President George W. Bush before becoming a senator.  His extensive knowledge of policy and government and his popularity in his home state make the Ohio senator a solid, safe choice for the Romney campaign. Given Gov. Romney’s desires to choose someone prepared to be president over making a “big splash” selection, one would have to consider Portman at the top of the prepared-on-day-one list.

2. Marco Rubio, U.S. Senator from Florida

This choice seems to be the most obvious on paper. Sen. Rubio is uniquely both the darling of the Tea Party and a rising star in the GOP establishment. Groomed for years as the protégé of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Rubio became a Tea Party sensation in 2010 with his defeat of moderate Gov. Charlie Crist in both the GOP primary and general election. Rubio has gone on to meticulously manage his national image in much the same way Sen. Hillary Clinton did prior to launching her presidential bid.  Rubio’s youth, Cuban heritage, popularity with the base, and home state are all seen as adding significantly to the GOP ticket’s potential. However, his lack of experience, similar to then Sen. Barack Obama’s back in 2008, could be a key liability.

3. Paul Ryan, U.S. Representative from Wisconsin

The Wisconsin congressman has become a hero to the conservative intelligentsia and his reform proposals have become the center of much of the political debate in Washington. With the debt and entitlement crisis hanging over the election, Ryan’s plans will likely become a focus of the campaign at some point with or without him on the ticket.  Many feel that Rep. Ryan would bring the experience and budget knowledge of Sen. Portman along with the Tea Party excitement of Sen. Rubio, making the congressman the better all-around choice.  

4. Chris Christie, Governor of New Jersey

The brash New Jersey governor has become one of Mitt Romney’s most trusted and powerful surrogates. In some cases, he seems to make a better case for Romney than Romney has himself. Christie’s attitude and tough talk have earned him rave reviews among both establishment republicans and conservatives. However, in many corners of the conservative movement, Christie is viewed as a moderate, and pairing him with Romney could turn off these voters. But a Romney-Christie ticket could potentially realign the map, putting into play states like Pennsylvania and New Jersey that have not gone to the GOP since 1988.

5. Bobby Jindal, Governor of Louisiana

The young Louisiana governor has been a rising star in the GOP for a few years now, despite his fumbled State of the Union response speech.  Jindal, at just 40, has amassed an amazing resume of varying experience; governor, congressmen, state secretary of health and hospitals, and president of  the Louisiana University System.  He has reformed and revitalized one of the most corrupt states in the country and has impressed many in both the establishment and the conservative movement with his brilliant grasp of policy. And he has proven a capable leader in times of crisis, handling natural disasters in his state with all of the competence that his predecessors lacked during Hurricane Katrina.  As the nation’s first Indian American governor, Jindal would also bring diversity to the ticket.

6. Bob McDonnell, Governor of Virginia

The Virginia governor is currently one of the most popular politicians in the country, hailing from one of the key general election states, and carrying with him a solid record on jobs and the economy.  A strong social conservative with the ability to attract independent voters and Reagan Democrats, McDonnell has positioned himself strongly for the VP nomination. Along with his statewide experience in the legislature, the attorney general’s office, and now as governor, McDonnell also brings 21 years of military service, which would make him the only veteran on either ticket.

7. Kelly Ayotte, U.S. Senator from New Hampshire

The junior U.S. Senator from New Hampshire just might become the top female choice for Vice President should Gov. Romney decide to select a woman as a running mate. Sen. Kelly Ayotte is both highly accomplished and a close ally of the former Massachusetts governor. The Senator is also the most experienced of the fresh-faced crop of potential female candidates.  Her academic, legal, and public service credentials are very similar to other popular VP contenders, like Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey and Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia, both elected in 2009. Should Romney value adding a woman to the ticket, this mother of two would certainly have both the stature and experience to fit the bill.

8. Tim Pawlenty, former Governor of Minnesota

The former Minnesota governor has been through the Vice Presidential vetting process before and doesn’t seem eager to go through it all again. However, the fact that he has already been highly vetted and is an experienced Midwestern politician could boost his prospects this time around. Since dropping out of the race and endorsing Romney, Pawlenty has become a top surrogate for the campaign, proving he could fit seamlessly into the VP role.  Pawlenty would seem to fit the same role Rob Portman would, except that he is better tested on the national stage and is just as accomplished.

9. Mitch Daniels, Governor of Indiana

Gov. Daniels passed on an opportunity to run for president in 2012 despite being heavily recruited to do so, and it seems could be just as stubborn when it comes to the Vice Presidency. The Indiana governor gives the standard denials that most VP contenders give, but the political class seems to believe his odds are far higher than meets the eye.  Daniels, like Portman and Pawlenty, would instantly pass the qualification test and wouldn’t be a threat to overshadow Romney. His record as governor and his mastery of budgetary matters would also help the GOP message on debt and deficits.

10. Mike Huckabee, former Governor of Arkansas

Once Romney’s most bitter rival, the former Arkansas governor is now a much buzzed about option for VP.  Huckabee and Romney are said to have buried the hatchet from their tough 2008 campaign and now members of Romney’s team are rumored to be actively discussing the Fox News host as a running mate. With the president flip-flopping on gay marriage, some feel Gov. Huckabee would help energize evangelical voters as well as blue collar voters for the Romney ticket.

Honorable Mention:  Cathy McMorris Rodgers, John Thune, Susana Martinez, Pat Toomey, Nikki Haley, Jeb Bush

Last evening conservative favorite Ted Cruz, the insurgent candidate in the Republican Texas Senate Primary who is closing the gap as we hit less than two weeks from primary voting day, gave me 15 minutes of his time for a few questions about taxes, term limits, immigration and Sarah Palin’s endorsement. Below is our conversation, which was originally posted at HotAir.com

Dustin Siggins (DS): 12 days out, you’re closing in the polls, Sarah Palin endorsed you…what are your thoughts on how things are going?

Ted Cruz (TC): The campaign is going extraordinarily well. The momentum is off the charts. Sarah Palin endorsed us last week  and we had a thousand contributions come in within 48 hours. We have conservatives of all stripes backing us: grassroots leaders, Republican women – everyone is coalescing behind our campaign.

DS: In a recent interview with Kathleen McKinley at Smart Girl Nation (transcript posted at RightWingNews.com), you said you opposed Democratic amnesty proposals as well as “Democrat-lite” proposals from Republicans. Can you elaborate upon this a bit?

TC: We have a crisis on illegal immigration. Neither party is serious about stopping it. I strongly oppose illegal immigration. I categorically oppose amnesty. I support legal immigrants who come here supporting the American Dream.

I come from the perspective of someone who spent much of my adult life in law enforcement. In a post-9/11 world, it is absolutely unacceptable that we don’t know who comes over our borders. We need to do everything humanly possible to secure the borders. Electronic surveillance, a wall, helicopters and, most importantly, boots on the ground. If elected, the first thing I will do is triple the U.S. Border Patrol.

We should celebrate legal immigrants. No matter the party or the politician, I oppose amnesty. Amnesty is contrary to the rule of law and is unfair to legal immigrants who wait years or decades to come here legally.

When it comes to illegal immigration, conservatives often feel like Charlie Brown and Lucy with the football. The 1986 amnesty was allegedly to secure borders in exchange for amnesty, but the borders were never secured. We should not fall for that again.

A better immigration system is both possible and simple. First, we enforce the law – securing the borders will stop the inflow. Second, put in place a strong E-Verify program. The lack of jobs will dry up the magnet for being here and illegal immigrants will leave. America MUST remain a nation of the rule of law, and non-enforcement of illegal immigration undermines that.

DS: What is your reaction to the Senate budget battles this week, especially with four GOP budgets being voted against by four GOP Senators, one of whom was Dean Heller (R-NV)?

Last year, this nation hit two major marks: first, our credit rating was downgraded. Second, our national debt exceeded GDP. We are on the path to Greece, and the Senate and President Obama aren’t doing anything about it. The fact is that the Obama budget got zero votes in the Senate, there is no Senate Democratic budget…and Democrats don’t want to focus on the problem that is our national debt.

We have politicians in both parties who won’t stand up and get serious about cutting spending. What is critical in 2012 is electing strong, free market, constitutional conservatives. This is absolutely important. Right now we have six or seven strong conservatives in the Senate. If we can double that to a dozen or more, that would be a strong step towards balancing the budget.

There are only five truly strong fiscal conservatives in the Senate. They are Jim DeMint, Rand Paul, Pat Toomey, Tom Coburn and Mike Lee. Not coincidentally, all five back me. All five have also said they are outnumbered by Democrats and Republicans in the Senate. If we can get that number of strong fiscal conservatives up to 12 or 15, especially in leadership, I know the rest of the Republican Senators will follow them in the right direction.

DS: Your website says you support a flat income tax. Are there any credits or loopholes that should be kept in the code? Charitable donations and the mortgage interest deduction, for example?

TC: Those two should stay. They are necessary in order to get a flat tax enacted.

The current IRS code needs to be entirely revamped. It’s designed to keep politicians in power. Lobbyists go to career politicians to manipulate the tax code for special exemptions, and then career politicians say “Of course I’ll help you out. When I am finished doing that, can you please come to my fundraiser?” This breeds enormous power for elected officials and for lobbyists. I want politicians who say “No, build a better mousetrap and succeed in the marketplace instead of manipulating the tax code.”

DS: You’ve come out in support of term limits, specifically no more than three terms in the House and two terms in the Senate – the same term limits Senator Coburn has self-imposed. Will you  impose these limits upon yourself?

TC: I have pledged to help lead the fight to get that constitutional amendment passed – no more than three terms in the House and two terms in the Senate. This should be applied equally across the board. Unfortunately, the Senate shot down term limits with Republican support, much as it shot down an earmark ban with Republican support. Term limits are critical to getting career politicians out of D.C.

DS: To clarify, would you hold yourself to the aforementioned term limits if the Senate does not pass such a law?

TC: I have not pledged to unilaterally disarm. If all conservatives hold to term limits, and liberals don’t, we have a disadvantage. I will fight to make term limits apply equally across the board.

Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

• Romney 46%
• Obama 44%

Above Numbers Are For a Rolling Three Day Average of 1,500 Likely Voters.

American Crossroads hits President Obama for inserting himself in the biographies of other presidents and for the inflated view he has of his own record. Funny stuff.

The first general election ad for Mitt Romney has released.

What will a Romney Presidency be like?

Day one:

• “President Romney immediately approves the Keystone pipeline, creating thousands of jobs that Obama blocked.”
• “President Romney introduces tax cuts and reforms that will reward job creators, not punish them.”
• “President Romney issues order to begin replacing Obamacare with commonsense health care reform.”

That’s what a Romney Presidency will be like.

*** Update ***

What suggestions can you come up with for President Romney for his first day? I’ll get started with one of my own:

• Fumigate the Oval Office to rid it of the stench of tobacco.

Gallup Romney Favorables

(May 2012)	Favorable	Unfavorable
All	50	41
Democrats	18	72
Republicans	87	7
Independents	48	43
(February 2012)	Favorable	Unfavorable
All	39	47
Democrats	17	70
Republicans	65	28
Independents	37	44
(Change)	Favorable	Unfavorable
All	+11	-6
Democrats	+1	+2
Republicans	+22	-21
Independents	+11	-1

Results for this USA Today/Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted May 10-13, 2012, with a random sample of 1,012 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.

For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points.

Disclaimer: I have problems with the “favorable/unfavorable” metric for predicting elections.  It works as a simple “what are your general impressions of the candidates” question, but it is way too inexact and subject to far too many variables to predict an election with any real degree of accuracy. I much prefer the straightforward “whom will you vote for” question for that purpose.

Having said that, Mitt’s doing well, especially when you consider how hard Obama and the Democrats have been trying lately to negatively define him. It hasn’t been working.

Gallup’s latest Obama favorables are 52/46 compared to Mitt’s current 50/41. There’s not enough difference to be meaningful, which should concern the camp of the “more likeable” (well, that’s what we’ve been told, isn’t it?) Barack Obama. If Team Obama continues their character attacks on Romney, and Team Romney continues replying with just the facts, things should change in Mitt’s favor.

PPP (D) North Carolina Poll on Gay Marriage 

Do you think same-sex marriage should be legal or illegal?

• Legal 34% {34%} (32%)
• Illegal 58% {57%} (57%)

Among Democrats

• Legal 50% {43%} (40%)
• Illegal 40% {46%} (48%)

Among Republicans

• Legal 10% {19%} (16%)
• Illegal 85% {76%} (74%)

Among Independents 

• Legal 41% {42%} (34%)
• Illegal 53% {51%} (50%)

(more…)

PPP (D) Iowa Poll on Gay Marriage

Do you think same-sex marriage should be legal or illegal?

• Legal 44% (41%) {46%}
• Illegal 45% (48%) {45%}

Among Democrats

• Legal 69% (66%) {67%}
• Illegal 21% (26%) {25%}

Among Republicans

• Legal 14% (18%) {20%}
• Illegal 77% (72%) {74%}

Among Independents

• Legal 49% (36%) {50%}
• Illegal 37% (48%) {37%}

(more…)

From the official release:

Boston, MA – Today, Romney for President, Romney Victory, and the Republican National Committee announced fundraising totals of over $40.1 million in April. The campaign and RNC have $61.4 million cash on hand.

“We are pleased with the strong support we have received from Americans across the country who are looking for new leadership in the White House,” said Romney Victory National Finance Chairman Spencer Zwick. “Along with the hard work of the Republican National Committee, we will continue to raise the funds necessary to defeat President Obama in November.”

“Voters are tired of President Obama’s broken promises,” said Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus. “Mitt Romney has the record and plan to turn our country around – that is why he is receiving such enthusiastic support from voters across the country. Along with the campaign, we will work to provide the resources so that we can defeat President Obama and change the direction of the country.”

FAST FACTS About Romney For President, Romney Victory, and RNC Fundraising:

· Over $40.1 Million Raised In April
· 95% Of All Donations Received In April Were $250 Or Less
· $10.1 Million Raised By Donations Under $250 In April
· 259,836 Donations Received Under $250 In April
· $61.4 Million Cash On Hand
· Contributions Received From All 50 States And Washington, D.C.

More from NPR:

The campaign for GOP presidential contender Mitt Romney and the Republican Party together raised $40.1 million in April, just shy of the $43.6 million that President Obama and the Democratic Party took in.

This is the first monthly report since Romney effectively wrapped up the Republican presidential nomination. And because money is one way to keep score during a presidential campaign, the news is getting a great deal of attention from the political media this morning.

Politico points out that “it’s a strong showing for Romney and his allies as they move into the general election. The clearer test of the Obama-Romney fundraising match-up will come with the May money reports, since that’ll be the first time both candidates will be raising campaign and victory money for the entire month.”

The Los Angeles Times says the April figures signal that Romney is beginning to “chip away” at Obama’s fundraising advantage.

Full story here.

New Romney web ad jumps on Biden’s Delphi gaffe. The Romney team has demonstrated they have a ton of video at the ready to attack and counter-attack anything the Obama camp throws at them.

Rasmussen Nebraska Senate Race

• Deb Fischer (R) 56%
• Bob Kerry (D) 38%
• Undecided 3%
• Other 2%

This Nebraska survey of 500 Likely Voters was conducted May 16, 2012 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 4.5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

IBD/CSM/TIPP 2012 Presidential Poll

• Barack Obama 43% (46%) {46%} [46%] (47%)
• Mitt Romney 40% (43%) {38%} [41%] (41%)

Among Men

• Mitt Romney 43% (46%) {42%}
  
• Barack Obama 41% (43%) {44%}

Among Women

• Barack Obama 45% (49%) {48%}
• Mitt Romney 37% (40%) {35%}

Survey of 778 registered voters was conducted May 9-16, 2012. The margin of error is +/- 3.6 percentage points. Party ID: 37% (38%) Democrat; 31% (31%) Republican; 27% (27%) Independent/Other. Results from the poll conducted April 27 – May 4, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted March 30 – April 5, 2012are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted March 4-11, 2012are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted January 29 – February 4, 2012 are in parentheses.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal