Local Blogs

Nose Under the Community Tent

By Paul Losch

E-mail Paul Losch

About this blog: I was a "corporate brat" growing up and lived in different parts of the country, ending in Houston, Texas for high school. After attending college at UC Davis, and getting an MBA at Harvard, I embarked on a marketing career, mai...  (More)

View all posts from Paul Losch

Grass Roots Obama

Uploaded: Apr 1, 2012
Full disclosure: I am an Obama supporter. Despite some character flaws that make him less effective than I would like to see in a President, I am glad he is in the White House, and I intend to vote for him again this November, whoever is his GOP opponent.

That said, I had an opportunity on March 31 to witness a remarkable session in the East Bay that struck me as having its roots in the days that the President was a community organizer in Chicago some years ago. I was invited to attend as an Obama supporter, but I quickly tried to shift to more of a reporter role of the event.

I will not disclose things that could be viewed as internal matters for those who support the Obama re-election effort, but I have some observations about the event and what implications it may have for us here locally in the coming months before the November election.


The 6 hour session was called 'Camp Obama,' and was intended for people who wish to get more actively involved with the President's re-election campaign, especially in roles beyond 'worker bees.' Nearly 50 people carved out their Saturday to attend. It was very well run, with several people leading it who were connected with the campaign and the White House. One had attended the event the previous evening in SF at which Michelle Obama was the keynoter. Another met the President at (what is now the ill-fated) Solyndra visit to Fremont in 2010.

The morning involved discussions around how at the local level the campaign was organizing and recruiting. There were clearly defined roles and tasks. It was clear from the presentations and discussions that the Obama campaign is taking full advantage of the 'Cloud,' and data gathering, analysis and feedback is going back and forth between local groups like this one in the East Bay and the HQ in Chicago.

The sessions after lunch focused more on 'messaging.' How to talk to people, what to say what not to say, some drill down on the whole ObamaCare issue. There was a lead at each table (tables set up by different parts of the East Bay) to get people to sign up for further training and participation going forward. This was a leadership recruiting event, and people were clearly engaged, nobody over the top, but genuinely interested in doing more than just showing up at the voting booth this November.

My thoughts:

1. The grass roots organizing by the Obama campaign is formidable. What I saw on Saturday is going on all over the country. Blue states like California are harnessing supporters to work on swing states, such as Nevada, with personal visits and phone calls to prospective voters, not just Obama supporters, but also independents and the like who vote differently each election cycle.

2. The people in the room I was in on Saturday were Americans of every stripe you can imagine. They were in different circumstances, from homeless to very comfortable. Nobody was strident, nobody was angry, nobody was PollyAnniish. They were there because they want the President re-elected, and were willing to do some work as volunteers to accomplish that objective. I contrast this with 'Tea Partiers' who come across to me as in a perpetual state of anger.

3. I could not help but wonder what the counterpoint is in the Republican Party. As a marketing guy, I was thinking that this deep grass roots effort by the Obama campaign is juxtaposed with robo-phone calls, huge media spending, spewing by the likes of Fox and Limbaugh, but little personal contact with real people, be it phone or face to face. Both candidates will make personal appearances as the election approaches. The question is what's behind their curtains?

4. This session spent a great deal of time discussing ObamaCare. Talking points were fine, it is clear that there is a great deal of mis-understanding about the law. The crowd was too polite. From my point of view, the matter cannot be discussed until after we hear from the Supreme Court later this June. This did not seem to be something that the people leading this session understood.

Regardless of who runs against the President this fall, and even who wins, the grass roots effort by the Obama campaign is a very impressive machine. More goes into winning an election than such an effort, things like substance come into play, some of the time. Strategically, what wins elections in this day and age? Time will tell.

Do get involved, whatever your inclinations. It is not that difficult to do so, it can be an enjoyable social experience. That's what I am doing this year.


Comments

Posted by Foster, a resident of ,
on Apr 1, 2012 at 4:53 pm

"I could not help but wonder what the counterpoint is in the Republican Party."

Duh.

<sorry!>

The counterpoint to the thousands of Obama donors ponying up fifty bucks are the big donors on the the other side - guys that write massive checks.

Foster Friess's million keep Santorum in the race, Sandy Alderson spends 15 million to keep Newt in the race. Even with that, Romney's superpac outspends them at a rate of 10 or 20 to 1.

For the general, groups like Karl Rove's Crossroads will raise $250 million to spread fear about Obama among the Fox sheeple. So far, most of it reportedly has come from 5 (yes, five) donors.

So Obama has to do the bootcamps. Twenty buck donations don't cut it in the age of Citizens United.

Not a big fan of Obama, but the GOP hasn't run any one serious enough to consider for my vote. They drove out all the sane candidates early. We're left with a candidate with the core principles of an Etch A Sketch.

Agree with the social experience. Made calls in 2008. Was not a boring day.


Posted by James, a resident of ,
on Apr 1, 2012 at 6:35 pm

Obama has blocked the Keystone pipeline from the source of Canadian oil. Playing to his greenie base. Pretty much end of story for him, nationally.


Posted by Sharon, a resident of ,
on Apr 1, 2012 at 8:17 pm



The issue with Obama is that no one did due diligence nor vetting for

1/ His award of a Nobel Prize with no history of qualification for it

2/ His election to POTUS with no executive, legal and 1 year of Senate experience

He is articulate and charming--but so was John Edwards the 2 time Democratic VPOTUS and POTUS candidate who is now on his way to 15 years in a Federal prison.

For the POTUS to intervene in local legal disputes-

-as Obama did in Cambridge Mass and recently Florida-

-is a misuse of the POTUS office.

More important Obama has not stood up to AIPACs sabotage of US fundamental interests in our foreign policy

Obama is a charming public speaker-

-by his judgment and experience on foreign policy are poor and the economy is stagnant with oil heading to $5+ over the summer vacation period.

Why can we not get great candidates -?

- both McCain and Obama where very weak prospects


Posted by Outside Observer, a resident of ,
on Apr 1, 2012 at 11:38 pm

>> "both McCain and Obama where very weak prospects "

So true, and the prospectives for 2012 are even worse.

I suggest we have a 3rd option. "None of the Above". If "None of the above" gets the majority of votes, then everyone else on the ballot is precluded from running again, and we start all over from the beginning with new candidates.


Posted by Paul Losch, a resident of ,
on Apr 2, 2012 at 6:51 am

Paul Losch is a registered user.

Re-Direct, SVP

This blog is not intended to discuss the merits of Obama or any other candidate. Rather, it was written to engender discussion about how different groups are using different strategies to get their candidate elected.

Please offer up your thoughts and describe your experiences around that, even if it is just how you react to getting a phone call at dinner time--one of my pet peeves.

There are and will be plenty of other postings about the candidates in the coming months, if what transpired on this web site in 2008 is any indication. If you want to opine about a candidate or his policies, you will have plenty of opportunity to do so.

I am hoping this blog generates some discussion about what we are doing or experiencing locally around being part of a campaign. Donors welcome!


Posted by Foster, a resident of ,
on Apr 2, 2012 at 9:58 am

Paul:

Good luck with that.

♥ James wants to grind an ax about a pipeline designed to bring tar sand (the 'dirtiest of oil') to Texas to be exported to other countries.

♥ Sharon wants to grind an ax about a 1 term governor having more experience than the President who got us out of Iraq, killed Bin Laden and after being handed the worst economy since the Depression, has given us 23 consecutive months of private sector job growth. Instead she wants the 1 term governor with an EtchASketch as chief campaign strategist.

♥ outside observer wants to grind an ax about changing the Constitution to add 'none of the above'

The only reason you didn't get more comments like this so far is you posted on a weekend, instead of mid-week!

I think it's a great topic. One could even localize the discussion (naturally fits, given the grassroots theme) about how the local party offices are motivating their troops. After all, Obama will solicit the troops help from a national level, but direct them to the local offices (that's where it's fun - the local dem hq, like you suggested.)

(yes, Sharon, that's where we all smoke dope, burn the flag and have orgies0

Nationally, I see only one side motivating their die-hard base to hit the streets and phones.

The other side? For all the lies, venom and hatred of the incumbent Fascist Muslim Socialist Radical Christian Kenyan™, rallying around an EtchASketch seems like quite a reach. Prediction - unless Myth picks Rubio, Obama wins Florida by five points. If Myth doesn't carry Florida, game over - the GOP can't win without FL.


Posted by Paul Losch, a resident of ,
on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:08 am

Paul Losch is a registered user.

Since I am not a Republican, I do not know much about what it going on in that party other than what I see and hear in the news.

I do have the impression that here in California, the GOP folks come here to raise money, but little else. No effort to organize people to help out in other parts of the country where they could help with tipping point states.

This may change once they have a firm candidate, and they have a great deal of catching up to do should that be part of their national campaign effort. It may be too late already to make a legitimate go of it.


Posted by GOP race junkie Tosh, a resident of ,
on Apr 2, 2012 at 12:50 pm

Foster's correct.

There's going to be tens of thousands of calls going into Florida in October and the first week of November.

Democrat base states are 242 votes. The Republicans have to peel off Pennsylvania (Santorum as nominee or VP pick) or Wisconsin (chances of going red are pretty much done since Scott Walker screwed the pooch up there - totally energized the lib base with his overreach) to change the 242 number.

With 242, then the Dems only need Florida's 29 to go over the top. So the VP pick can only help in one state, have to defend PA or FL with the Rubio pick mentioned. Tough choice. Or get both with a Santorum/Rubio ticket.

With Florida for the GOP and PA for the dems, there are numerous other combinations that spell doom for the GOP: Obama in Ohio & Virginia end it, or Colorado & NC.

Or the GOP gets disheartened, doesn't show up and Obama runs over him like he did with McCain, 365-163. Highly unlikely, but if so, the disheartened base will be the reason the dems keep the senate and re-take the house. Blame the base, or the candidate?

It's going to be all about jobs reports and campaign mistakes for the next 6 months. Assuming flat reports, no serious mistakes, no global economic meltdowns, then it's the ground game in the swing states.

Deja vu all over again.

Paul's nailed it.






Posted by James, a resident of ,
on Apr 2, 2012 at 12:55 pm

Paul,

All the GOP really needs to do is to run against the Obama record, and use the media to get out the message. That strategy is much more effective than spending a Saturday at a propaganda camp.


Posted by Paul Losch, a resident of ,
on Apr 2, 2012 at 7:02 pm

Paul Losch is a registered user.

James,

The Obama record aside, you may be right or wrong about using the media to get the message out to win. That is the whole point of this blog--Obama's campaign has a huge "retail" effort as part of their strategy. I suspect that its "wholesale" strategy of media and the like will ramp up later in the year.

The GOP is still in the trenches fighting it out over how long it will take before Romney clinches the front runner spot. I detect no grass roots effort at a party, let alone a candidate, level on the Republican side. Even if Romney became the nominee tomorrow, I think it is too late for the GOP to mount an effective grass roots effort, even it they wanted to (which I don't think they do.)

So the GOP is left with a "wholesale" strategy." They have plenty of money to throw at it, not sure what the message is yet. I hope they have something more than that Obama has failed. Give me a reason to vote for someone. But again, this blog is about campaign stratgies and tactics, not the candidates or their substance.


Posted by Sharon, a resident of ,
on Apr 2, 2012 at 7:25 pm



The Conservative " retail strategy" is very active and is taking place on the Web--- it is a Network Strategy-

-very different from the old stale retail/wholesale/hope/hype/spin story.

Conservatives in Palo Alto/ MP/ PV- are very active in this new Conservative Network Campaign Strategy-it has a huge Asian American constituency who prefer to keep a low profile in public.

- PA Conservatives tend to avoid bumper stickers, lawn signs etc because of previous incidents of having their cars or homes damaged.

The interesting question for today is--

Who leaked the confidential SCOTUS deliberations on health care to the White House?

One of the justices must have–given Obamas statements today

Who was it?

Here is a clue–

-she was @ Harvard


Posted by GOP race junkie Tosh, a resident of ,
on Apr 2, 2012 at 7:37 pm

"The Conservative " retail strategy" is very active and is taking place on the Web--- it is a Network Strategy-"

- like posting unfounded rumors like a SCOTUS leak?

Sharon - Other than email from the candidates and the party requesting money, what on earth are you talking about?!?!?!?

"Conservatives in Palo Alto/ MP/ PV- are very active in this new Conservative Network Campaign Strategy"


Posted by Paul Losch, a resident of ,
on Apr 2, 2012 at 7:53 pm

Paul Losch is a registered user.

I think Sharon has a point about social networking playing a role in local, grass roots efforts this campaign season.

It may be a generational thing, but I am not a huge Facebook or Twitter user. Still, many people of all ages are, and it definitely plays a role in this years campaign.

Another arrow in the quiver. Open to and for use by both sides.


Posted by James, a resident of ,
on Apr 2, 2012 at 10:44 pm

Paul,

The retail branch of the GOP is two-fold:

1. The traditional personal connections. Fairly quiet, but substantial.

2. The Tea Party rebellion types.

I would suggest that the GOP retail stuff, when combined, is larger than the Dem stuff. Apparently you see it differently. Attending propaganda camps can get one to drink the kool-aid. Guilty as charged, Paul?


Posted by Paul Losch, a resident of ,
on Apr 2, 2012 at 11:00 pm

Paul Losch is a registered user.

James,

I do not dispute what you describe as going on with GOP types. However, what you describe does not come across to me as "organized" as what I witnessed on last Saturday.

I am smart enough to not drink anybody's kool-aid. Please focus on the issue and not on me.


Posted by Sharon, a resident of ,
on Apr 5, 2012 at 3:48 pm



A growing issue is that around 30% of the electorate say

"non of the above"

When given a roster of established candidates for office--this applies to both sides.

The situation is much worse when it comes to the approval ratings for national, state and local legislative bodies--Congress approval ratings are in the single digits.

State Governors get higher ratings probably because they do something practical and can be evaluated on their performance

- they have to meet budgets and payrolls-for example

Most other politicians are not worth their salary and just get in the way.

Politics needs to catch up with the internet which enables more productive direct participative democracy.


Posted by Foster, a resident of ,
on Apr 5, 2012 at 5:08 pm

"State Governors get higher ratings"

Huh? Looked at any polls lately?

Kasich in Ohio is sub 35%, so is the drug test Gov in Florida.

MacDonnell's numbers in VA used to have VP written all over them until his transvaginal probe transgressions.

Little Scotty Walker has to raise $25 million from out of state to defend his recall, plus he has lawyered up against some potential indictments from his previous county administrator position.

Obama is at 50%, Romney is in the high 40's.

Not a lot of governors can say that.

Anyone poll Palin since she quit? She dropped from 70% down to low 30's before she walked, didn't she?




Posted by Sharon, a resident of ,
on Apr 5, 2012 at 6:39 pm

There is a difference between

1 approval rating and

2 who would you vote for between 2 candidates

For example

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday

shows that 25% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president.

Forty-three percent (43%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a

Presidential Approval Index rating of -18

vs--

In a hypothetical Election 2012 matchup,

Mitt Romney attracts 47% of the vote, while President Obama earns 45%.

If Rick Santorum is the GOP nominee, Obama leads 46% to 44%.

Web Link


These are the latest valid tracking polls



Posted by Foster, a resident of ,
on Apr 6, 2012 at 10:30 am

Sharon, you copied your numbers from Rasmussen incorrectly, from your link: "In a hypothetical Election 2012 matchup, Romney and President Obama are tied at 46%. If Rick Santorum is the GOP nominee, the president leads 47% to 41%. " Web Link

Latest valid tracking polls? What's your definition of "valid" re polls? Ras is the epitome of right leaning polls, while DK funded PPP (opposed to PPP's independent polls.) lean left. Ras is notorious for skewing right up to the final weeks before an election when they come back into the mainstream of results.

You gave up on your "State Governors get higher ratings" argument? Was expecting for you to support your statement with facts rather than a shift into presidential polls.

Back to topic - I agree with Sharon, obliquely, that the swing states and their governor issues will be play a roll in the retail, ground game this November.

MacDonnell's transvaginal transgressions will swing female voters into the blue column in VA, while Little Scotty Walker's overreach and recall will take WI out of swing state status due to the mobilization of the left specifically because of him. Kasich's appalling numbers in Ohio and his SB 5 blunder spurred a huge ground game that will continue through November. We'll see about Florida.




Posted by John Derbyshire, a resident of ,
on Apr 7, 2012 at 5:42 pm

Conservative author John Derbyshire explains why conservatives are fighting so hard against Obama: Web Link


Posted by Sharon, a resident of ,
on Apr 7, 2012 at 8:39 pm


@ Posted by John Derbyshire, a resident of another community

Why do you lie?

As everyone knows Derbyshire was fired by the National Review for writing that crazy article in Taki magazine-

-all Conservative media have joined in rejecting his crazy ideas--from WSJ to Forbes etc.

Derbyshire is married to a Chinese woman and has bi racial children-

-his attitude towards blacks is weird-

--but not that unusual among some Chinese Americans-

-they are a significant voting group locally but not nationally.


Posted by Foster, a resident of ,
on Apr 9, 2012 at 11:14 am

Sharon decries racism then oddly inserts the racial makeup of the author's family along with her opinion/stereotypee of Asian on Black racism.

I'm still waiting for her explanation to the question asked of her about the bold new world she seems so proud of - "in this new Conservative Network Campaign Strategy"

Blogs, emails, fb and posting here are the Conservative Network Campaign Strategy?

You gave up on that, the governors comment, your incorrect polling data, etc..

Do you ever read the posts that correct your false claims?



Posted by Paul Losch, a resident of ,
on Apr 9, 2012 at 2:26 pm

Paul Losch is a registered user.

Come on you guys! Are you able to stay on topic????

The point of my blog here is to discuss eperiences around working for a campaign. We all have our views about the President and his potential oppopnets, and the policies that attend them.

Those of you that choose to not get personally involved in a campaign and choose to opine on this blog are in the wrong space. Find another place that is conducive to opinions as opposed to experiences.


Posted by Sharon, a resident of ,
on Apr 9, 2012 at 3:43 pm

Thanks for stepping in Paul Losch to keep the discussion on track.

In our experience local Conservatives heavily use Web 3.0 and sophisticated social media technology in this election cycle.

we do not hold public rallies or public meetings.

The reason is security-

-we have seen many instances where left wing activist sabotage and the harass local Conservative participants in such gatherings.

Financial contributions are of course a public matter.

We are not going to reveal the Conservative 3.0 web and social network strategy for the reasons we have stated

-America has confidential voting for good reasons of freedom.

In contrast-- the left relies on public rallies and emotion.

The elections -
- from our point of view-

-should be determined by rational fiscal policy-

-jobs-trade-prosperity-

- and American fundamental interests in our foreign policy-

-That means-no more wars that do not further fundamental American interests.

The essence of this Conservative view on foreign policy was well understood by the Greek Democrat Nicias-- in 415 BC

When he said–

"We must remember also that we have only just recovered in some measure from a great plague (financial crisis) and a great war, and are beginning to make up our losses in men and money.

It is our duty to expend our new resources upon ourselves at home, and not upon begging exiles who have an interest in successful lies;

Who find it expedient only to contribute words, and let others fight their battles; and who, if saved, prove ungrateful;

and if they fail, as they very likely may, only involve their friends in a common ruin…"—

--Nicias, speaking in the Athenian Ekklesia against the Sicilian expedition in 415 BC.


The Conservative view on race/ethnicity- in America continues to be "E Pluribus Unum".

The left has a very different view on these economic-social-and foreign policy matters--fine

That is what Democracy is about.




Posted by James, a resident of ,
on Apr 9, 2012 at 4:09 pm

Paul,

"Full disclosure: I am an Obama supporter. Despite some character flaws that make him less effective than I would like to see in a President, I am glad he is in the White House, and I intend to vote for him again this November, whoever is his GOP opponent." (your words).

"That said, I had an opportunity on March 31 to witness a remarkable session in the East Bay" (again, your words).

Such sycophancy can hardly be entertained as an objectie reporting of the methods involved in a campaign. After all, according to your 'reporting' only 50 people attented this propagands meeting.

You have, indeed, drunk the kool-aid.


Posted by Foster, a resident of ,
on Apr 9, 2012 at 4:55 pm

Paul is the one who drank the koolaid?????

"Such sycophancy can hardly be entertained as an objectie reporting of the methods involved in a campaign."

As opposed to Sharon's Super Secret Plan to get us out of Vietnam, errrr, Sharon's Super Secret Plan to find WMD, ummmm, no, Sharon's Super Secret Plan to use a quote from 415BC in a discussion about 2012 retail campaign tactics, err, umm, no, it was Sharon's Super Secret Plan to hide the Super Secret Ultimate Conservative Secret Web Based Election Strategy.

"We are not going to reveal the Conservative 3.0 web and social network strategy for the reasons we have stated"

Seriously, Sharon? The only secret thing you have in an online election strategy is.....

Whatever hidden reason you

- use so many

- dashes along with
- carriage returns
- resulting in partial sentence
- paragraphs

Obama's already saturated the Net.

"We are not going to reveal...."

- Wow.

Honestly, you had me going at first. I thought maybe the conservative movement was doing more than Facebook, Little Green Footbals and RedState.

- Obviously not.


Posted by steve, a resident of ,
on Apr 9, 2012 at 4:59 pm

[Post removed due to disrespectful comment or offensive language]


Posted by steve, a resident of ,
on Apr 9, 2012 at 5:58 pm

Naturally the editors see n othing wrong with any of sharons comments. What a surprise! I guess reading someones comments and then giving an opinion on said comments and the poster is too much for the delicate sensibilities of our prim and proper editors. Making a comment about Web 3.0 is also apparently verboten when it applies to the darling of the editorial staff.


Posted by Sharon, a resident of ,
on Apr 9, 2012 at 6:11 pm

@ Posted by Foster, a resident of the Fairmeadow neighborhood,

In a democracy we have to have free exchange of ideas to inform wise decision making

Losch may agree or not on the role of Web 3.0 and social network technology in this election cycle-

-it is certainly dominant among very,very many Silicon Valley executives who are Conservatives.

For the matters of personal security-productivity and effectiveness they keep a very low public profile on their political views for security reasons.




Posted by Sharon, a resident of ,
on Apr 9, 2012 at 6:11 pm

@ Posted by Foster, a resident of the Fairmeadow neighborhood,

In a democracy we have to have free exchange of ideas to inform wise decision making

Losch may agree or not on the role of Web 3.0 and social network technology in this election cycle-

-it is certainly dominant among very,very many Silicon Valley executives who are Conservatives.

For the matters of personal security-productivity and effectiveness they keep a very low public profile on their political views for security reasons.




Posted by Foster, a resident of ,
on Apr 9, 2012 at 6:20 pm

/snort

"-it is certainly" fine for them to keep their views private

"-it is certainly" silly to invent something in your mind and then label it Double Super Duper Extra Secret Probation Web 3.0 Campaign Info Conduit Among Super Secret Executives; sounds more like Sharon's Highly Imaginative Transfer, for short

"- from our point of view-"


Posted by Foster, a resident of ,
on Apr 9, 2012 at 6:24 pm

Seriously, participate in Paul's discussion about tactics and schemes if you like, I'd be interested in hearing what's out there besides Obama's highly tuned, proven, web based money machine.

-but Sharon
-ya got nothing

Except, of course, the Sharon Highly Imaginative Transference


Posted by Sharon, a resident of ,
on Apr 9, 2012 at 7:36 pm


Foster demonstrates the blog equivalent of DUI around .30- have a happy night--do not drive.

Paul brought up the other serious issue of peoples experience in this campaign--let us ignore the nuts-because elections are important to sane Americans


Posted by Foster, a resident of ,
on Apr 9, 2012 at 8:30 pm

"Foster demonstrates the blog equivalent of DUI around .30- have a happy night--do not drive."

As I said - ya got nothing.

You invent a fictional Web 3.0 Super Secret Campaign Tool fantasy for conservative tech execs, get called on it, and all ya had left was to say I'm drunk.

Rather would have preferred that I was given the beatdown the Nuggets administered tonight. That said, I already made my point about your contributions, Sharon - "Honestly, you had me going at first. I thought maybe the conservative movement was doing more than Facebook, Little Green Footballs and RedState."

-hic-

;-)




Posted by Sharon, a resident of ,
on Apr 10, 2012 at 8:40 pm


Today The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 24% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president.

Forty-one percent (41%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -17

Sixty-one percent (61%) believe finding new sources of energy is more important than reducing the amount of energy Americans now consume. Thirty-two percent (32%) feel reducing the amount of energy consumed is more important.

Web Link


Santorum will endorse Mitt and bring the Catholics and also blue collar workers to Mitts campaign.

Gas prices are predicted to rise dramatically in the next months as Iran takes even more oil off the global market and the DOW had its worst day this year.

The election will be about the economy-

-if someone--guess who-- attacks Iran then the global price of oil will go above $ 200 per barrel and our economy will suffer terribly.

We may also be dragged into another war which has nothing to do with fundamental American interests.

Obama is wise to to say NO to those who threaten to attack Iran-

-enough is enough


Posted by GOP race junkie Tosh, a resident of ,
on Apr 11, 2012 at 9:17 am

Sharon:

I asked you ten days ago, in keeping with the thread.... what you meant by this: "Conservatives in Palo Alto/ MP/ PV- are very active in this new Conservative Network Campaign Strategy"

Putting aside Foster's mocking of your non-responsive responses (web 3.0, certainly dominant among ... Silicon Valley executives, etc..) I am still curious if you were serious in any way, or is Foster correct about your Double Secret Probation conservative web strategy being mostly your own creation?

Your rant from yesterday didn't touch the thread topic either. Foster previously gave you some solid advice about leaning exclusively on Rasmussen numbers until the cusp of the election; after all, Ras would have had you believe McCain/Palin was in the race until the the very end in 2008.

Perhaps a conservative can give you a fresh perspective - a former GOP congressman from Florida (typical scandal story, left office due to a dead female aide, if I recall correctly.) You'll moan about his current employer, of course... Web Link

Joe Scarborough: Nobody thinks Romney is going to win. Can we just say this for everybody at home? I have yet to meet a person in the Republican establishment that thinks Mitt Romney is going to win the general election this year. They won't say it on TV because they've got to go on TV, and they don't want people writing them nasty emails. I obviously don't care. I have yet to meet anybody in the Republican establishment that worked for George W. Bush, that works in the Republican Congress, that worked for Ronald Reagan that thinks Mitt Romney is going to win the general election.

Keep that one in mind in November when the numbers come home to roost, mostly because of the self inflicted wounds by the Romney Etch-A-Sketch Machine.

I'm no Obama fan, but he's got a machine that will roll over a lightweight moderate like Mitt. Paul just highlighted one very small cog. The only thing that will prevent a repeat of the 100 point EV thrashing of McCain 3 years ago is Crossroads and the inherent funding advantage in hidden PAC money.

Excluding any European meltdown in October, of course.

Anyway, I digress; am most curious of your sole contribution to the actual topic - what is the web strategy you refer to other than what I've already seen on websites, FB and emails?


Posted by ignore her, a resident of ,
on Apr 11, 2012 at 11:00 am

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


Posted by Sharon, a resident of ,
on Apr 11, 2012 at 7:52 pm


Political parties never reveal the details of their strategy to the other side.

So we are not going to answer you query--

The Rasmussen Reports is a valid evidence based poll-


-Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 27% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president.

Forty percent (40%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -13

Web Link

The facts are facts

VP Biden is extremely quite these days-

-why is that?


Posted by Foster, a resident of ,
on Apr 12, 2012 at 9:36 am

"Political parties never reveal the details of their strategy to the other side."

GOTV and rallying the troops is NOT a secret 'strategy'. It's their job. You can see what both sides are doing - it's obvious, just as Paul outlined in the topic lead. It's public, it's also on the Net.

Yet Sharon invents a fictional Web 3.0 Super Secret Campaign Tool fantasy for conservative tech execs, gets called on it, and all ya had left was to say I'm drunk. Now you can't tell Tosh just because it's secret. Kinda ugly when your fiction gets pegged.

Trying to shift this into a polling thread? Start another thread for polls, Sharon. And explain in that thread how the people that know Mitt best aren't going to vote for him.

From your beloved right-leaning Ras: Massachusetts: Obama 51%, Romney 40%

They know him, they elected him, they don't like him.

In his home state.

Remember what Tosh told you Scarborough said. "Nobody thinks Romney is going to win. I have yet to meet a person in the Republican establishment that thinks Mitt Romney is going to win the general election this year."


Posted by GOP race junkie Tosh, a resident of ,
on Apr 12, 2012 at 3:42 pm

Sharon - you don't answer questions, do you? Seems sad that you can't intellectually defend your claims.


Posted by steve, a resident of ,
on Apr 12, 2012 at 4:12 pm

But the editors do not care. Sharon can say whatever she wants, insulting people in the process. Sharon is a cherished asset for the Weekly. Criticism of her and her comments will not be tolerated. Who is Sharon, really? A former council member?


Posted by Careful what you wish for, a resident of ,
on Apr 23, 2012 at 7:56 am

What scares me the most about Obama is not Obama, but the people who follow him.
This is a NYT link Web Link

It is about the tremendous grab for power throughout all areas of our government by the Executive branch. From bypassing Congress to ignoring Fed judges, this WH is on a march for power unlike any in my half century. But what is REALLY scary are the folks who post on the NYT blog who think this is just fine since it is THEIR guy doing it. Can you imagine a Republican or Conservative bypassing Congress and ignoring the Federal judges?

Y'all better be careful, or you WILL get an extremely powerful Executive Branch, and your karma will come back. Me, I support the balance of powers, but honestly, if you really want an overreaching Executive branch, so be it, I will flow with it when my guy/gal is in power.


Posted by GOP race junkie Tosh, a resident of ,
on Apr 23, 2012 at 10:06 am

'Careful' - "Y'all better be careful, or you WILL get an extremely powerful Executive Branch"

You're joking, right? This power grab has been going on for decades and you're only now worried about it?

Read "Drift", #1 on NYT bestseller list - the author highlights the executive power grab performed by the last two dem and the last three gop presidents.

Obama is just continuing the tradition.

I can't imagine any of the GOP candidates will do any different.

from SF Chron review this Sunday:

"Congress comes in for sharp criticism for relinquishing its constitutionally assigned duty to declare and fund war, but it is Presidents Ronald Reagan, George Bush 1, Bill Clinton, George Bush 2 and Obama whom Maddow calls out most energetically. Each innovated new ways to circumvent Congress and override the brakes of public opinion.

The long, creative list includes using private war contractors in place of a reserve force to make it easier to go to war without the public feeling the pinch; expanding secrecy under the aegis of intelligence operations to black out more and more of the budget; perfecting sales pitches and information control for those military interventions that do become public; and deferring to the generals for decisions about not just how but even whether to go to war.

"Drift" highlights the power of the feel-good, feel-strong imagery that Reagan's World War II propaganda work prepared him to exploit as a president. This imagery has since proliferated: the Air Force jets overflying football stadiums, "smart" missiles threading the needle of Iraqi target chimneys, missile-bristling destroyers speeding toward crisis zones, young volunteers in a wallpaper of TV ads informing their proud parents about their plans to join up."

Read more: Web Link

"Can you imagine a Republican or Conservative bypassing Congress and ignoring the Federal judges?"

Where have you been for the last thirty years?!!?


Posted by GOP race junkie Tosh, a resident of ,
on Apr 23, 2012 at 10:36 am

'Careful' -

Of course, there is a significant difference on the Bush overreach of executive power (torture, detaining Americans without due process, etc..) and the actions highlighted in your link...

"....the White House has rolled out dozens of new policies — on creating jobs for veterans, preventing drug shortages, raising fuel economy standards, curbing domestic violence and more.

Each time, Mr. Obama has emphasized the fact that he is bypassing lawmakers. When he announced a cut in refinancing fees for federally insured mortgages last month, for example, he said: "If Congress refuses to act, I've said that I'll continue to do everything in my power to act without them." "


Posted by James, a resident of ,
on Aug 6, 2012 at 3:19 pm

Today, the CREEP (Committe to re-elect) for Obama announced that is has spent a ton of money on grass roots (retail) efforts to re-elect. Simple question for you, Paul: Were you given any perks to show up for your March 31st event? Were the organizers paid?


Posted by committee names, a resident of ,
on Aug 6, 2012 at 4:05 pm

Creep? That's so cute!

What do they call Romney's committee?

It can't be "re-elect", since he has only won one election and lost every other race he's been in. The one race he won (Gov of Massachusetts, where he ran as Left of Kennedy) Mitt couldn't get reelected and ran away rather than face certain defeat. So brave!

How about - Committee for Losing Aspiring Politicians

CREEP vs CLAP?


Posted by Sharon, a resident of ,
on Aug 6, 2012 at 4:28 pm


it would be refreshing to have a sane adult discussion of the different policies of the two candidates- Obama and Romney.

This election will decided on 3 issues

1/ Jobs

2/ the National Debt

3/ the Economy-our GDP growth rate is now only 1.5%

Foreign Policy and the so called " culture wars" will be irrelevant in this election.

The key voting block will be the Independents.


Posted by Serious discussion, a resident of ,
on Aug 6, 2012 at 5:41 pm

Sharon, open up a thread on those topics, or all in one.

We can then talk about all the Bush/Cheney policies that Romney endorses, as well as all the Bush/Cheney team members on Romney's team, as well as when Romney was asked about how he differs from Bush/Cheney last week, and he couldn't answer the question.

We can also discus why the most secretive nominee in history, a man who refuses to share common nominee information with the American public, we can discuss the absurd notion that he should represent the Republican Party in Tampa.

Make sure to include the debt issue, and then we can highlight that Romney will explode the deficit with his tax cuts for billionaires and millionaires, as well as corporate tax cuts.

You are right about foreign policy. Obama having killed bin Ladin takes that off the table.


Posted by James, a resident of ,
on Aug 6, 2012 at 5:54 pm

My question was addressed to Paul L.

Paul, were you provided any perks for attending the March 31st ("remarkable") event? Were the organizers paid?


Posted by charts required, a resident of ,
on Aug 6, 2012 at 6:05 pm

Sharon won't use facts in her so called sane discussion, rarely documenting with valid links. FOr example, any GDP discussion should take account of the mess that Bush made of growth in 2008/2009.

Chart of GDP growth by Obama following Bush policies that led to negative GDP in 2008/2009

Web Link


Posted by Sharon, a resident of ,
on Aug 6, 2012 at 6:39 pm


We are now in the 2nd half of 2012

As any board member of a significant publicly traded company will tell you-

-the new CEO can get away with blaming the previous CEO for at most 3 months-1 quarter-after that it is on the new CEOs head.

The swing vote-the Independents- will determine the outcome of the election on 3 issues

1/ Jobs

2/ the National Debt

3/ the Economy-our GDP growth rate is now only 1.5%


Obama is charming-Romney is not so charming

The issue for the Independents among us is competence to turn around the US Economy-not charm

As Clinton said in the 90s "It is about the the Economy-stupid"

Seal Team Six took out OBL and they deserve all the credit, together with the CIA- who tracked him down

Personal attacks on Obama or Romney are silly and a waste of time.


Posted by bin Ladin dead, GM is alive, a resident of ,
on Aug 6, 2012 at 9:50 pm

"Personal attacks on Obama or Romney are silly and a waste of time."

Sharon says that right after she alludes that Obama wasn't part of getting bin Ladin!!!!!

Obama promised he would get bin Ladin. Romney told us in 2008 he wouldn't go after him in Pakistan. There is a clear difference between the two. One has a pair, the other - not so much.

Bush told us he would get bin Ladin and 6 months afterward said he didn't care about bin Ladin.

Sharon: do you believe the President is an American?


Posted by Really, Sharon, a resident of ,
on Aug 7, 2012 at 8:06 am

"Personal attacks on Obama or Romney are silly and a waste of time."
This comment by Sharon would be hysterical if not for the fact that Sharon has been attacking Obama for 4+ years.
Obama was the Commander-in-Chief and he took out Bin Laden. End of story
Also do not forget that Obama has to put up with an obstructionist Republican party, that favors their own selfish goals over the good of Americans as a whole. The question is, will they go so far as to aid Al Qeida and other foreign terrorists in their goal to deny Obama a second term.
Sharon's biased rhetoric should be taken with a grain of salt--she is the Rush Limbaugh of the Town Square forum


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Local picks on 2015 Michelin Bib Gourmand list
By Elena Kadvany | 6 comments | 3,375 views

Ode to Brussels Sprout
By Laura Stec | 20 comments | 2,581 views

Go Giants! Next Stop: World Series!
By Chandrama Anderson | 1 comment | 1,925 views

Politics: Empty appeals to "innovation"
By Douglas Moran | 9 comments | 1,274 views

It's Dog-O-Ween this Saturday!
By Cathy Kirkman | 2 comments | 283 views