Fascinating. Truly fascinating. And totally unbelievable. To what am I referring? Polls released yesterday indicate that Obama is ten points ahead of Romney in Ohio and nine points ahead in Florida. Why don’t I believe them? I’ll get to that in a moment, but first, are we really supposed to believe that a president who consistently shows weakness in polls about policy is that far ahead in these critical swing states? I mean, there’s an awful lot of baggage to consider:

But the media is fighting diligently for his reelection. Last week, when an audio tape surfaced of Obama in 1998 declaring his belief in redistribution, there was no pile-on by media elites. To them, this was not in the same league as Romney’s 47% remark. Romney was excoriated over that one, while Obama got his usual pass:

It is possible, of course, that the electorate is deaf, dumb, and blind to what has occurred over the last four years. In that case, these polls might be accurate. There are videos going viral right now showing Obama voters displaying their ignorance over the basic facts of American government, current policies, and even the identification of the candidates. So, yes, there is the possibility those polls are revealing this abysmal lack of knowledge and astounding ideological rigidity.

But there are solid reasons to question the accuracy of the latest round of polls. A look at the breakdown of those being polled reveals a stupefying oversampling of Democrats and undersampling of Republicans and independents. Most of the pollsters—not all, thankfully—and the ones who are receiving all the publicity, are using the 2008 election turnout as their basis for whom to poll. Well, 2008 was the high water mark for Democrat turnout. Is it even reasonable to assume the turnout will be the same for 2012? Not only is the energy level of Obama voters ebbing, but independents who went for him in 2008 are having a lot of second thoughts. Nearly every poll indicates they are disillusioned with the results of 2008.

What are the pollsters missing? How about the 2010 congressional elections? Remember those? That’s when the House turned Republican and Republicans increased their numbers in the Senate. It’s when Tea Party-backed candidates such as Marco Rubio stunned the political establishment. Florida voters put Rubio in office even as he ran not only against a Democrat, but also against turncoat Charlie Crist. Rubio, in that three-way race, still broke the 50% mark. Is that same electorate going to go strongly for Obama? Hardly likely. It seems to me that 2010 is a better marker for following the voting trend.

Think a minute. Has Obama done anything since the congressional elections to increase his popularity? The economic news remains dismal. His Obamacare mandates are forcing religious organizations to go against their beliefs, putting freedom of religion in jeopardy. He is currently being caught in a boldfaced lie about the real cause of the Libyan uprising.

It is manifestly dishonest to conduct skewed polling. It is a violation of sound journalistic practice to become a cheerleading squad for the president. I’ll be very interested to see what the true voice of the people is when the one poll that counts is tallied on November 6.

The Republican convention ended on Thursday evening, and right away the next morning, both Romney and Ryan showed up just down the street from me. For whatever reason, the Romney plane was at the Lakeland Regional Airport; they chose that as their departure place rather than the Tampa International Airport. That means they had to drive from Tampa to Lakeland, about a 45-minute jaunt by bus. Since they were going to be this close, I figured I should travel that mile or so over to the airport to see them off. The rally was much larger than I anticipated.

Romney’s plane already was there as a patriotic backdrop. I didn’t get there as early as some, so my view wasn’t the greatest. I did see and hear our congressman Dennis Ross, though, who is a principled man who stands by his convictions.

As is the case with most of these presidential rallies, nothing starts on time, so even though the official starting time was 9:30, the principals didn’t arrive until at least 10:15. You can see the kind of view I had in this picture:

In case you can’t tell, let me confirm that is Ryan speaking in the distance. Binoculars would have been nice. They did try to help out, though, with a screen off to the left:

Someone else who was there had a much better vantage point, so I owe the following two pictures to him:

Photo Courtesy of Michael Barrett

Photo Courtesy of Michael Barrett

Why a stop in Lakeland? We are the center of the Florida political universe. Northern Florida is resoundingly Republican. The southeast, anchored by Miami, Palm Beach, and Ft. Lauderdale, is predominantly Democrat, with the exception of the Cuban enclave. Central Florida, where I am, is the mixed area, and will determine the direction Florida goes in this election. Lakeland is right between Tampa and Orlando, so we see the candidates quite often. I’m sure this won’t be the last opportunity before November.

I watched a lot of the Republican convention and was impressed with how women and minorities have become a key contingent within the party. While many speeches smack of boilerplate in both parties, there were some addresses that transcended the ordinary. Anytime Marco Rubio speaks, it’s from the heart. Paul Ryan’s acceptance speech was nothing short of stupendous. Romney’s was just what it needed to be, as he introduced himself to the country as someone who took risks and had to work his way up on his own. He didn’t come across as an emotionless robot at all; I’m convinced that many undecided voters who were watching him had to come away from this speech impressed with the fact that he is very human, a true success story, and someone who just might be able to put Humpty Dumpty back together again.

The comments today at the rally were nothing new, but recycled from those convention speeches. That’s fine. There hardly was time to come up with anything new. What I did sense in the crowd was anticipation and excitement. They think Barack Obama is in his final weeks as president.

As he should be.

Tropical storm Isaac never really threatened the Tampa area. On Monday, I was wondering how bad it was going to be when I went out in the car. I found out it was almost a normal day. A little rain, even less wind, no problem. The Republican convention played it safe by calling off all activities that day; that’s understandable. If they hadn’t, the media would have bludgeoned them forever as insensitive. Some will do it anyway simply because Isaac is now upon New Orleans. In their view, all of life must come to a standstill over this storm.

Well, life goes on . . . and so does the convention. If you’re watching any station covering the proceedings besides Fox News, you have to prepare yourself ahead of time for what you will hear:

Protesters can be seen in the streets doing their usual thing. Even Joe Biden is coming to Florida during the convention. He had planned to be in Tampa, attempting to divert coverage and offer some of his typical inane commentary, but his handlers apparently thought better of it at the last minute. Their cover was that his presence would have interfered with any emergency situations that might arise. Well, that could be the real reason, but then again, given Mr. Biden’s predilection for foot-in-mouth disease, one can be excused for believing otherwise.

Meanwhile, the president is busy focusing on the essential issues facing the nation:

I wonder how long he’s going to try to get away with that?

This has to be the most politically partisan Justice Department in American history. I want to be cautious in making such a bold statement; as a historian, I need to be careful not to exaggerate—there’s a whole lot of history to review. Yet consider the latest moves. In my state of Florida, the governor, Rick Scott, tasked the Florida Secretary of State to clean up the voter rolls to ensure that only American citizens were actually voting in elections. That sounds like common sense, doesn’t it? Only American citizens have that privilege, and if people are voting who should not be, that would be against the law. Also, based on the 2000 election—surely that hasn’t faded from anyone’s memory yet—it’s evident that even 500 invalid voters could determine the next president of the United States.

So what does the Justice Department, under Eric Holder, do? It is suing the state of Florida for moving forward with the effort to guarantee that only real voters are voting. Frankly, this is a stunner. The DOJ tries to justify its action by saying the effort was not approved by the Voting Rights Act. This is ludicrous, and only those who are hopeless Obama partisans can really believe the rationale. The DOJ declares, without proof, that this is discriminatory, aimed at minorities, especially Hispanics, since Florida has a large number of illegal immigrants. It implies that the effort is an attempt to purge the voter rolls of genuine Hispanic citizens who can vote. There is no evidence that this is behind the cleanup process; it’s merely a duty of government to make sure those who are ineligible to vote don’t break the law and unduly influence elections.

What does the DOJ want here? It’s not hard to believe the political appointees at the top, starting with Holder, want to look the other way if illegals vote. They know where those votes will go. To its credit, the government of Florida is now suing the Department of Homeland Security for refusing access to its database of illegals. Governor Scott has declared the cleanup will proceed. He is right to stand up to this obvious political ploy.

This comes on the heels of Holder’s attempt to stop states from requiring a photo ID for voting. Again, the old canard is dragged out to justify it: this is an attempt, they say, to depress minority voting. It’s fascinating where Holder sees discrimination and where he doesn’t. He’s the one who killed the prosecution of Black Panthers who stood outside a polling place in Philadelphia threatening voters. How are we to believe this isn’t political?

It was kind of funny last week when it became known that anyone wanting to meet the First Lady at a book signing had to provide a photo ID to be allowed access. So people need a photo ID for that, but not for voting? In fact, a photo ID is required for lots of things in our society:

It’s time to call their bluff. Florida has chosen to do so. More power to Governor Scott and his administration for standing up to federal bullies who misuse the authority of their offices for partisan purposes.

I voted in the Florida primary yesterday. My candidate, Rick Santorum, came in third. He knew he wasn’t going to win the state, and has been out working in other states that have caucuses coming up. He’s wise in using his funds appropriately. I voted my conscience, and am glad I did. Even with the victory last night, Romney has only about eighty delegates; the winner is going to have to get more than one thousand. It’s not over until it’s over.

This primary season has divided conservatives. Some have opted to support Romney simply because they think he is the only one who can beat Obama. It’s possible they may be right. Others have chosen to back Gingrich because they believe he’s the one to make the necessary changes, that he’s not afraid of anyone and will do what has to be done. Again, I can understand their rationale.

But I am far from convinced by their arguments.

So does that mean I delete them as friends on Facebook? Do I never speak to them again because I think their reasoning is faulty? Should I resort to name-calling or some other childish gesture? Hardly.

Yet that doesn’t mean I won’t continue to voice my concerns. Romney may win the nomination. He may beat Obama in the general election. So far, so good. But what follows after that? Will he be true to his promises? Will he really dismantle Obamacare? How many of his erstwhile supporters will suffer buyer’s remorse when they see him back away from his former stands?

That’s exactly what I fear he will do. Republicans may win in the short term and lose ultimately. A Romney presidency may fundamentally alter the direction of the party and its cornerstone beliefs. At best, he may be a good manager of a continued downward slide as a nation. Is that what we really want?

If he is to be the next president, no one would be happier than I to be proven wrong with regard to my concerns. But we’re not at that point yet. There are forty-six states remaining; most of them will award delegates proportionally; all four of the remaining candidates have pledged to take their campaigns all the way to the national convention. It remains to be seen if Romney actually can accumulate enough delegates by then. If he can’t, we’re in for a very interesting convention.

It’s now two days since the South Carolina primary. The commentators have commentated, and I’ve listened to and read a number of them as I attempt to come to my own conclusions regarding the outcome. Here are my various thoughts, in no particular prearranged order.

I heard only one of the speeches that evening—Newt Gingrich’s. He was appropriately humble and visionary. He showed magnanimity toward the other contenders. If all I knew about him was that one speech, I would be an avid supporter. But the questions remain. Even if I give him all the benefit of the doubt, and accept his moral turnaround as genuine, there’s still other baggage [there's that word again that refuses to leave peacefully].

Fox senior analyst Brit Hume darkly warned that a Gingrich nomination would be unacceptable to many of his former congressional colleagues. He predicted a silent revolt—some openly avoiding appearing with him during the campaign—fearful they might lose their reelection bids if they get too close. I don’t know how accurate that prediction is, but it does arrest one’s budding enthusiasm.

And as Santorum noted during the final SC debate, do we really want to nominate someone whose next utterance may cause a firestorm? Can Newt be trusted to rein in his rhetoric when necessary? Right now, it’s working for him as he takes the media to task for its hypocrisy. Will that approach work in the general election if he is the nominee, or will it sink the Republican ship? I, for one, love to see a politician calling out the media for what it is: a shill for Obama’s reelection. But would Newt find the proper balance between critique and casting a hopeful vision for the future of the country? He did so on Saturday. That’s a start.

I have to admit I hope SC is the beginning of the end for the Romney candidacy. While I think he’s a decent person, I don’t believe he has what it takes to tackle the Democrat smear machine. He can’t even hold his own against friendlier opponents. His drastic drop in SC in such a short period of time doesn’t bode well for his staying power. When you add those concerns to the ones I’ve had all along, there’s no way I could exert any energy on behalf of nominee Romney.

I didn’t see Santorum’s speech, but the commentators I read generally said it was one of his best, if not the best, of the campaign season. They said it had genuine substance. He seems to have gained greater respect over time. Most see him as a principled conservative and not a political opportunist who sways in the policy winds. The issue now, of course, is whether he can replicate his Iowa win anywhere else. Or is Gingrich now on such a roll that he will sweep all before him? I continue to believe that would be a shame. Santorum, to me, is the most honorable of the potential nominees, and deserves better from the Republican electorate.

The contenders are now in Florida. I’m already planning to go to one event where Santorum will be present, and perhaps others may appear there as well. It’s only about a mile from my house, so it will be quite convenient. While I know Santorum’s chances are not great at this point, I believe one must vote according to conscience. Unless there is a revolution in my thinking over the next week, I will happily cast my vote for him on January 31.

When all is said and done [as the cliché goes], I must trust God to take the republic under His wings and do what He can with the material He has to work with. One thing I firmly believe: a second term for Barack Obama will result in a further decline in the moral and social capital of the nation. Regime change is essential.

Eight votes. That’s all that separated Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum once the Iowa caucuses ended. Technically, Romney was the winner, but one has to excuse Santorum for feeling as if he took the prize. Two weeks ago, no one saw this in the making; one week ago, though polls showed a Santorum surge, few could have guessed it would turn out this way.

Even the speeches given by both at the end of a long night marked the contrast: Santorum’s was, as many have commented, inspiring and from the heart, while Romney’s was a rehash of campaign rhetoric. Another factor that impressed me was the way Santorum identified with blue-collar workers because that was his family’s background. The story of his grandfather was Reaganesque, and while nearly every candidate has taken it upon himself or herself to embrace the Reagan mantle, Santorum has come closest to the actual spirit of the 40th president. One of the keys to Reagan’s success was his ability to relate to the so-called “common man.” If Santorum can do the same, he may continue to surprise.

What does this mean for him going forward? The climb to the nomination will be steep regardless of the Iowa infusion of adrenaline. New Hampshire, the first primary state, is Romney territory. Can Santorum build on his momentum and carve out a niche there large enough to keep the buzz alive? It’s then on to South Carolina, whose primary voters are more like Iowa’s than New Hampshire’s. Can he pull out a clear-cut victory in the Palmetto State?

One positive factor for him is the withdrawal of Michele Bachmann from the race. The most conservative candidates—Santorum, Bachmann, and Perry—have split the conservative vote. Now that she is no longer on the ballot, that could help Santorum. Although her numbers were not high in either New Hampshire or South Carolina, even a few more percentage points could make the difference. If Santorum had Bachmann’s 5% in Iowa, he would have run away with the top spot.

It looked like Perry was going to drop out as well, only to surprise even his own team by deciding to move on to South Carolina. That’s too bad. I like Perry, but he has no real chance at getting the nomination. His only contribution now will be to draw votes from Santorum, thereby giving Romney a greater opportunity to stay at the top.

The case with Gingrich is somewhat more complex. He is angry, and that anger is directed at Romney. He already has a full-page ad running in New Hampshire newspapers contrasting his conservatism with Romney’s moderate stance. He’s fighting back. That could re-energize his campaign, which might lower Romney’s numbers, yet it also could detract from Santorum’s, thereby creating a wash and maintaining the status quo.

Ron Paul, meanwhile, by coming in third, will put the best face on the result, but has to be disappointed. So many of the polls had him number one; perhaps his foreign policy views finally caught up with him. As I’ve said before, I wouldn’t feel safe with Paul as commander-in-chief. He doesn’t really grasp the dangers we face from radical Islam. Let’s be honest: he’s more of a libertarian than a Republican. Iowa was his best shot; it will be downhill from this point for him. It’s time to pack it in and reject calls for a third-party candidacy that can only end in the reelection of Obama.

No matter what happens in New Hampshire, the race will not be decided there. Neither do I think South Carolina will serve that purpose. As a Floridian, I’m glad I will be able to participate in a primary with significance later this month. The media may want to call this for Romney at every point along the way, but that will be premature. Keep watching for surprises. I have this feeling there are more in the offing.