Romney likely to win Presidential Nomination for Republicans

Yes, it does seem like there was a disappointing night for Mitt Romney and a promising one for Rick Santorum. However, the national spotlight has put negative attention on Santorum regarding his campaign's inability to file for being on several ballets in a handful of counties and/or states. As of this point, a safe assumption can be made that Romney will be the nomination winner, keeping his high campaign money spending, strong economic message, and pending no major screw ups (like a Howard Dean moment).

Although a comfortable prediction of his win can be made, his speech made in Massachusetts tonight could be a prelude to tactical mistakes that could cost him the candidacy or a second term in the White House if he wins the Presidential Election. He talked about balancing the budget by cutting unnecessary programs and pretty much undoing everything President Obama has done. The question that needs to be asked is if he over-promised tonight by telling his supporters of all the different taxes he wants to repeal, like the death tax and cutting taxes for businesses.

There is statistical evidence to place a bet on Mitt Romney winning due to the public opinion polls being reported in recent months. Many of the polls showed that the economy and deficit were one of the top concerns of Americans on the list. Then, there is a mixture of ranks between repealing Obama-Care, pro-life issues, and security. One can make a general correlation with what areas (regions, counties, states) presidential candidates won with those public opinion polls. For example, Mitt Romney were winning well populated areas that have economically established Republican voters. This gives Romney the economy candidate which gives him a statistical edge. Gingrich showed himself being a regionally south candidate while Romney being the leader of rural and Christian conservatives. 

Friday Mike Out Podcast (2/24/2012)

Welcome to Friday Mike Out, I am your host Mike Lampe from the situationalist.

These are your top three headliners from the week

1. Rick Santorum was the momentum candidate going into Wednesday's Presidential Debate. However he seemed to have slipped! It was, instead, Mitt Romney acting like the comeback kid, acting strong although a little stiff.

2. Things are getting interesting in Wisconsin Politics. Governor Scott Walker has seen better days considering the recall election pending to happen and his former aids indicted for illegally campaigning.

There is a bright side to Walker's troubles. There seems to be a hint of hesitation among liberals regarding the potential Democratic Recall Candidates. Along with poll numbers, this can be shown by the hype Russ Feingold got after telling Stephen Colbert on Comedy Central he is not looking to run.

3. Going back to Wednesday's blog, a new Marquette University Law School Poll indicates Obama still beating all potential Republican Candidates... This means the contraception issue did not affect him as much as some political commentators thought it would.

That is it for your Friday Mike Out from the Situationalist... Have a good weekend!

Election 2012: Obama's Win with Contraception Fiasco?

Welcome to The Situationalist beginning of Coverage of Election 2012!


Two weeks ago, it was made known that the Obama Administration had implemented a rule that forced religious institutions to cover the use of contraceptives to women that were asking for it. The media focused on the expressed anger of Catholic Bishops who oversaw Catholic medical centers and universities housing health services for their students. One could say this was another run of the mill when it comes to Democrats standing for Women's Issues while Republicans show their loyalty to the religious right.

However, one should wonder why the Obama Administration implemented this rule considering social issues have not been brought before in this election cycle. Why give the Republicans a reason to rally up a constituency that had been dormant for the last year and a half? Although some are calling foul and others are calling this an embarrassing move by the Obama campaign machine, it is interesting what has happened since this event occurred. Below are the events that occurred starting with the implementation of the policy:

1. Media recognizes implementation of the contraception policy
2. Political outcry by Catholic Leaders and other social conservatives
3. Rick Santorum (R) gains bump in the polls for his strong stance on social issues
4. Mitt Romney loses ground to Santorum and loses a handful of primaries
5. President Obama announces compromise given political outcry

Intentional or not, the Obama Administration has been able to shake up the Republican Primary in the short run which has made it harder for conservatives to fully back Romney as their Republican Nominee. Some political commentators are speculating that Santorum has become the momentum candidate which could lead to nomination. Although the Republicans will eventually unite to nominate a presidential candidate, The Obama Administration has been able to indirectly make political campaign contributions to Republicans more sporadic.

Blog/Article by The Situationalist - Mike Lampe

The Growing "American" Hatred of Higher Education

 DISCLAIMER: I am writing this article fully knowing I am working in the Higher Education Field. I fully recognize my bias of supporting higher education. I also fully recognize that we must look at the criticisms of higher education to validate the importance of our economic labor producers.

As early as the 19th Century, higher education played a pivotal role in maintaining and creating economic markets by providing skilled labor. Even today, many desired positions with desired income levels require or prefer some sort of advanced degree above a high school diploma. Not only is this an economic necessity, it has also become part of the American middle class social status. That is, you may be looked down upon in many middle class circles if you do not have a degree. 

With the obvious benefits being stated, the United States must look at why there is a growing hatred for higher education institutions to calm down social tension as well as finding more effective and efficient ways of creating the skilled labor force. This, now more noticeable, hatred can be described by economic, political, and social reasoning. 

Economic

The economic reasoning for this hatred is quite simple noticing the economic hardship we are seeing today. Since higher education institutions have played a pivotal role in the labor markets, people are wondering why job vacancies are left unfilled due to lack of skilled laborers in those particular fields.

Political

The primary reason for any anger politically are taxes. Since tax dollars are used to support higher education and unemployment at a record high, Americans are upset that institutions are not living up to their pivotal role to appease the economic labor markets. A typical tax-hating citizen would wonder why they have to pay into a system that doesn't work.

Digging more historically in the political hatred, Americans, in general, have had an individualistic ethic. From the British Government to the New Deal of President Roosevelt, there has always been American anxiety of public expansion. When noticing the history of higher education, one can see a consistent growth of access to higher education, number of institutions, and federal/state programs that help increase access to all who want it. For example, the GI Bill (allowing funding for soldiers to go to college) was a significant policy that some regard the gate opening allowing many who, before then, could not go. One could tie the American anxiety of large public entities to the modern growth of higher education.

Social

Last but not least, there has been a modern social trend in which high school students are socialized by numerous social institutions to get a college degree, regardless of what students want to do. Adding that to the graduated college student struggling to find work in a sluggish economy, one can see the social uproar towards any higher education institution. 

With this being a general overview of criticisms, one can point out many specifics that could demonize higher education institutions. At the the end of the day, we have to realize the importance of higher education, as well as how we can accommodate the criticisms that have been highlighted in the bad economic times in the 21st Century. Higher education has become a beacon of opportunity for many students. Unfortunately, the more students have access to such opportunity, the more students have to separate themselves from the growing pack.

The Situationalist

Written by Mike Lampe

Obama and the "Buffett" Rule

As stated in a previous article, President Obama's Administration has provided details on the Jobs Plan he promised to release after Labor Day. This plan is set to cost around 300 Billion Dollars and seems to be round 2 of where Speaker Boehner and the President ended last time while discussing the debt ceiling. 

Besides the tax cuts that are set to give incentives for businesses to hire within the United States, media outlets are hooked on has been coined the "Buffett" Rule. Obama discussed the situation in which Warren Buffett, A successful investor on Wall Street, pays less taxes that his receptionist does.

Therefore, the Obama Administration proposed that when "Buffett"-like tax situations millionaires get into,  their taxes would default to the middle class tax rate. Thus eliminating the complicated minimum alternative tax as well as changing the concept of a "flat tax," only the flat tax would be for the wealthy income earners. 

In the article, Lampe: Its the Economy Stupid, Mike Lampe had recommended to get rid of the Bush Tax Cuts to the rich and implement a tax break that is more job specific. Although not getting rid of the Bush Tax Cut for the wealthy entirely, this approach sends a message of compromise and the perception that fresh ideas are going through the Oval Office at the White House. 

Although it is quite clear that Obama will not get everything he asks for, it will be interesting to see how the Republicans will respond to this bill. There is already the anti-tax movement of the Republican Party that suggest the government should not tax "job creators."

BREAKING NEWS: Huntsman joins Perry-Romney battle in Tonights Republican Debate

In the Reagan Presidential Library, the 2012 Republican Presidential Debate was held on MSNBC to determine who might be the next Republican Candidate to run against Barack Obama. There are three groupings of candidates that showed up at the debate; 1. the Governors, 2. The Opportunists 3. The Left Behind.

1. The Governors
A secondary title to this article was the battle of the Governors. Everyone knew and expected a back and forth between Gov. Perry from Texas and Gov. Romney from Massachusetts. There was a great interaction between the two on the most important issue, job creation. The exchange argued the rankings of each state while they were in office. However, another Gov. Huntsman from Utah gave Perry and Romney a run for their money. After the small exchange, Huntsman pulled a fast one and shared that his state was #1 in job creation during his administration.

2. The Opportunists
Of course, I would have to say that the three governors took the main stage. Now for those who I would consider to be on the side "free stage," I put Michele Bachmann and Herman Kane. Michele Bachmann was putting an aweful amount of time talking about Obamacare, especially during the job creation discussion. Did she not remember how the Democrats lost the congressional elections is 2010? (Focusing more on health care than on job creation/economy)

3. The Left Behind
Although I called Ron Paul the winner of the first Republican Debate, I'm surprised to see him somewhat off his game tonight. Since the whole field was somewhat hostile, Ron Paul's normal strategy was overshadowed. Santorum was not strong and Gingrich is known not to have a good foundational campaign for Republicans to throw support at him.

SUMMARY:
- Perry will remain the front runner, but Romney also took impressive swings
- Huntsman may get a bump in the polls for being on par with the other front runners
- Bachmann and Paul will diminish more in polls
- Herman Cane 9-9-9 Tax Plan was catchy and may stick.

Lampe: Its the Labor Markets Stupid... (Obama announces Jobs Plan after Labor Day)

Prior to the new Jobs Plan President Obama is set to announce after Labor Day, the un- and underemployed people in the United States are asking, 'what have you done for us lately?' With unemployment at over 9%, both Democratic and Republican officials are trying to pitch the failure of the other party.

Let's face it, the Republicans are being hypocritical by slashing social programs and fundraising machines from Democrats (unions) without touching revenues; and Democrats are asking to keep key governmental programs without putting much of a fight to keep revenues (taxes) on the table.

But all this bickering does not solve the issue at hand. Yes, the federal budget will help ease political uncertainty in the markets, but it will not do much to increase employment as dramatically as the public wants. Although the Republicans' minds are in the right place, they are not thorough in their tax cut approach for the high income earners.

Would it not be a fair compromise to replace the high income tax break for a tax break specifically for companies employing people in the United States?

MAKING IT SIMPLE: Remember in school where we learned the basic process of our economy. You had the banks, industries, and the laborers. The bank would loan money to the industries to invest in their businesses. After the business is set up, they would pay employees to run the business. When the employees get paid, they go back to the banks and industries to start the process over again and expand the economy.

The question for our time is this, 'Are we becoming too efficient?' If we are not giving people the opportunity to earn money then spend it in the US Economy, does that mean the economy slows down because goods and services are not being purchased by the consumer powerhouse of Americans?

My three points of what I would ask President Obama to do:
1. Expire the tax cuts to the higher income brakets
2. Reform former tax cuts into a job-creating tax cut
3. Initiate these steps in your new jobs plan


Blog/Article by the Situationalist - Mike Lampe