Hola! Me llamo Tomas Tancredo. Soy de Colorado.

In a previous post, dated July 24, 2010, Yours Truly predicted that Scott McInnis would be Colorado’s Republican candidate for governor, despite charges of plagiarism. I also predicted that Tom Tancredo would not end up running as a third-party candidate and that, ultimately, Colorado would be saddled with another liberty-killing, job-killing, tax-and-spend, regulating liberal, current Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper.

Months later, it turns out that I was wrong on just about every count. And, my final prediction about Hickenlooper’s ascension to the governor’s mansion is increasingly coming into doubt. A recent poll shows Tancredo only four points behind Hickenlooper, which is within the margin of error, especially considering that six percent said they were undecided.

Meanwhile, Dan Maes, who won the Republican primary, is dropping into oblivion, fighting his own round of ethics problems. What those are, I’m not sure, but it is certain that Republicans are having buyer’s remorse and are moving in droves back to Tancredo.

In late August, the same Rasmussen poll had Maes at 31 percent and Tancredo at 18 percent. Now, Tancredo’s at 38 and Maes is down to 12, which shows that just about anything can and will happen in this election. Therefore, I apologize for my earlier post, which simply repeated the conventional wisdom.

Tancredo is well known as practically a one-issue candidate. Whatever the policy issue being debated, Tancredo is almost certain to bring it back around to illegal immigration. He’s been laser-focused on this issue for as long as I can remember, before, during and after his time as a U.S. Congressman.

Ironically, what has been Tancredo’s Achilles heel may actually be a boon in 2010. The Obama administration and the left in general have been so transparently dishonest about immigration that even Hispanics are starting to question the motives behind framing illegal immigration as a racial issue. It may not be a great idea to tell Hispanics who are playing by the rules to essentially step to the back of the citizenship line since we have tons of people breaking the law who are more deserving. And why are they more deserving?  My guess is that they represent a gigantic and uneducated voting bloc that is less likely to starve the oxygen that feeds the fire of today’s Democratic Party: dependency and grievance mongering. Ignorance is the political elixir that keeps progressive/leftist ideology from completely falling out of favor in America.

Like me, a lot of people are exhausted by the constant racially-divisive demagoguery. Look around you; it’s 50 years after Jim Crow! Can we please move on and judge people by the content of their character, rather than this childish insistence on defining people by their ethnicity, sex or whatever the identity du jour might be? Progressives are wearing the ideological equivalent of plaid polyester as they, with dramatic irony, refuse to progress past 1972.

As usual, I digress, and will continue to digress in upcoming posts that officially endorse other candidates across our great land. Next time we’ll discuss the race in the 37th Congressional District in Los Angeles County where Star Parker is poised to help break the shackles of those toiling under the yoke of Uncle Sam’s Plantation

redux: hope and change

On November 11, 2009, in Politics, by Henshaw

Passing the horrible health care bill in the House by five votes late on a Saturday isn’t going to help the Democrats. The perception is growing that the party is out of touch with mainstream Americans. The only bipartisan support was against the bill. According to Gallup, registered voters prefer Republicans for the House, 48% to 44%. Rasmussen’s generic ballot shows a six-point preference for Republicans.
A year is an eternity in politics, but the current priorities for Democrats are anything but independent-voter friendly. The Democrats are never going to turn on Obama like the Republicans did with Bush, but the independent voters haven’t been swept away by the cult of personality. As time goes on Obama’s ego is going to become an albatross. The man can’t get over himself. It’s so bad that Narcissus is rolling over in his grave!
An American president gives a video speech about the Berlin Wall and doesn’t mention Margaret Thatcher or Ronald Reagan. Why was it more important for Obama to give a speech in Berlin last year during the campaign than during the twentieth anniversary of one of the century’s most momentous events? Much like President Bush, Obama has no concept of the life and hardships of the American people. Bush got away with this for awhile due to his Texas style, but Obama comes off as an aloof elitist who is in love with himself. What’s worse: reading a book in class after you’ve been told about planes crashing into the World Trade Center, or giving a shout-out to someone as the Medal of Honor winner (he wasn’t) right before switching gears to talk about the tragedy at Ft. Hood?
Are these unfair judgments about the President’s character? Of course they are, but these judgments happen. I can’t count the times I’ve heard people talk about Bush’s reaction to the news of 9/11. I still haven’t figured that one out. Politics isn’t fair, perceptions are real, and Obama needs some good news.

Tagged with:
 

trusting politicians

On November 9, 2009, in Politics, by Henshaw

Why do Democrats trust government? Rasmussen released a a poll today that asked: “Why do politicians break promises?” The consensus answer for Republicans is a lot different than Democrats. For whatever reason, most Democrats believe campaign promises are broken because of “unforeseen events.” That’s certainly an optimistic way at looking at things. Newly elected Democrat Bill Owens from New York broke four campaign promises, including promises regarding the health care bill, an hour after being sworn in. There was nothing unforeseen about health care, but that’s how politicians behave. It’s not surprising, but it is odd that so many Democrats believe that politicians have only the best intentions. In the case of Bill Owens the Republican belief that a politician will say whatever it takes to get elected sounds a lot more like the truth.

winging it?

On February 23, 2009, in Politics, by Henshaw

Every new administration has bumps along the way but there’s a growing consensus on the right that Team Obama is winging it. The evil genius Karl Rove wrote an article on the subject last week. Karl listed several examples ranging from all the botched appointments and the stimulus itself.

Team Obama was winging it when it declared the stimulus would “save or create” 2.5 million, then three million, then 3.7 million, and then four million new jobs. These were arbitrary and erratic numbers, and they knew there’s no way to count “saved” jobs. Americans, being commonsensical, will focus on Mr. Obama’s promise to “create” jobs. It’s highly unlikely that more than 180,000 jobs will be created each month by the end of next year. The precise, state-by-state job numbers the administration used to sell the stimulus are likely to come back to haunt them as well.

This isn’t the end of the world, but with a crisis on Wall Street the perception of competence is vital. If Bush would have had a string of appointment disasters like Obama has experience the perception would have been “well, Bush is stupid.” So what’s the excuse for Obama? Why are so many in the press giving the president a free ride when the only legislative accomplishment so far is a stimulus bill no one likes? Johah Goldberg touches on this phenomena.

Two weeks ago — half of Obama’s presidency so far — there was a lot of talk of Obama as a “chess master.” Bob Herbert: “Mr. Obama is like a championship chess player, always several moves ahead of friend and foe alike.” Few can hold a candle to Mr. Herbert’s facility with clichés. But I think this is a real dynamic. No, I don’t mean that Obama is a chess master, but that some of his fans cannot tolerate the conflict between their opinion of the man and his obvious mistakes and short comings. This is the flipside to political paranoia; the belief that “your guy” can do no wrong.

While the press may try to isolate the president from criticism the American people will only be fooled for so long. Obama’s approval rating over at Rasmussen(the poll that nailed the election) has dropped to 58%. That’s only a few points higher than Bush when he was reelected in 2004. Every day that passes the economy becomes a referendum on Obama. The president cannot declare war on Wall Street and hope to revive the economy. If investors decide to hold on to their money and wait for a friendlier administration things could get even worse. I don’t think that will happen, but what if Obama truly is in over his head?

Tagged with: