Lots to talk about this weekend in politics, the economy, and sports.
Have at it.
Time's Mark Halperin published a piece yesterday with a rather shocking opening sentence.
"With five months until Election Day, Barack Obama faces a grim new reality: Republicans now believe Mitt Romney can win, and Democrats believe Obama can lose."
While he may look like a stereotypical presidential candidate, presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney's campaign organization doesn't look the part at all, at least according to this Politico article which takes a look at how he's set up his staff structure.
According to the piece, Romney runs a more vertical-oriented structure which can streamline processes but might potentially make him too caught up in the details to run things effectively. On the other hand, he clearly is more than just a figurehead the way that Barack Obama was during his 2008 campaign:
As the unofficial head of the Democratic Party, presumably the wishes of President Obama ought to carry some weight among his fellow liberals in Congress. Sadly for him, it appears that congressional Democrats don't seem to have much regard for Obama's agenda. They don't seem to have any interest in getting it enacted as IBD notes:
John Heilemann's lengthy reported chronicle of the campaign strategies of the presidential campaigns has been out for a few days and is must-reading if you haven't checked it out yet. One key portion of the article concerns President Obama's money problem. After campaign aides boasted that they would raise near $1 billion in support of their candidate, reality has proven their predictions to be nothing but wishful thinking.
For the first time ever, it is now possible that a sitting president might actually raise less money than his challenger. Having less money doesn't matter necessarily given the fact that many candidates with smaller financial resources have been able to win. Still, it is unprecedented and the panic at Team Obama is palpable:
Liberals like to believe that tax and regulation policies have no effect on the economy despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. The latest proof of this comes via the Tax Foundation which calculated that millions of Americans are leaving high-tax areas like New York or California in favor of lower-tax jurisdictions like Texas or Florida. As a result, the tax-happy states are missing out on billions of dollars in revenues they might have been able to have otherwise had their residents stayed put:
Today is a big day in Texas as the race to replace retiring GOP senator Kay Bailey Hutchison is finally facing its first vote. While there is a Democratic primary today, more people are paying attention to the Republican race since the winner of that contest is heavily favored to win in November.
Because the primary has so many candidates, it's likely that the top two candidates are going to have to face each other again in a runoff election. In polls, the top two candidates are David Dewhurst, the more establishment-oriented liuetenant governor, and Ted Cruz, an attorney who is going after the Tea Party vote:
We already know that the punitive tax hikes on a small number of wealthy individuals favored by liberals will do almost nothing to pay off the national debt. What we didn't know is just how divided Democrats are as to who will get the shocking tax increases.
The Hill reports today that congressional Democrats can't agree on who should be targeted to pay more in taxes, those families making $250,000 or more or those making more than that. The prolonged debate (most of which hasn't been too public) reveals just how much of a political game the whole thing is:
As time goes on, the hastily constructed second-degree murder case against George Zimmerman in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin is continuing to collapse as more evidence formerly known only by the prosecution is released to the public.
The first is that Martin seems to have been less interested in running away from Zimmerman and more in bashing him, according to a witness interviewed by police within minutes of the shooting. But that's not all:
Liberals insist that they, too, can be trusted with national security matters and yet we keep seeing reports like this where sensitive materials are being leaked--not to help America's enemies but to gain popularity for the White House, in this case, accidentally revealing to the media about a double agent inside Al Qaeda: