Republican Strategist Alex Castellanos Says, It's "Not True" That Women Make Less Money Than Men.

Alex Castellanos caused a stir Sunday on "Meet the Press" over equal pay for women:

Host David Gregory asked the panel to discuss how GOP candidate Mitt Romney can court female voters, whom Gregory referred to as "the real deciders of the race." Maddow said that if Romney would like to talk about women and the economy, he should root his arguments in policy. "Our best debates happen when we're talking about policy," she said. Maddow started to argue that women make less money than men, but Castellanos interrupted her. "Women don't make less than men?" she pressed. "Actually, if you start looking at the numbers, Rachel, there are lots of reasons for that," Castellanos said." Right now women are making 77 cents on every dollar that men are making," Maddow said, attempting to frame her argument again. "But that's not true, If so, every greedy business man in America would only hire women, save 25 percent and be hugely profitable," Castellanos said." 

TPJ: This is yet another example of the Republican Party not understanding women's needs and whittling away at their rights. The examples of this concerted effort by Republicans are numerous (click here for link to examples). I about had to lift my wife's jaw off the floor when we heard Republican strategist Alex Castellanos say that it's not true that women make less than men for equal work. His absolute disregard that women still deal with pay inequities, (despite being increasingly the main earner in a household) reminds me of the recent House of Representatives committee hearing on contraception held by Republicans. It looked like a "Madmen" skit out of the 1950s because it lacked any female, Congressional leaders!! If the Republican Party was sincerely concerned about women and their needs/rights, why would they completely shut out women Congressional leaders from a hearing on birth control?

Combine all this with a trend in Republican led state legislatures toward cutting back reproductive rights, and you gotta wonder, "How can any women support the Republican Party?!!" By the way, the cable news network where Castellanos works, CNN, says he is wrong about the facts on "equal pay, for equal work."

---End of Transmission---

Massachusetts Ranked 47th out of the 50 States in Job Growth Under Governor Romney.

By Brett Arends, WSJ.com and MarketWatch [LINK Credit]:

The Republican contender [Mitt Romney] was the governor of Massachusetts from January 2003 to January 2007. And during that time, according to the U.S. Labor Department, the state ranked 47th in the entire country in jobs growth. Fourth from last. The Massachusetts jobs growth over that period, a pitiful 0.9%, badly lagged other high-skill, high-wage, knowledge economy states like New York (2.7%), California (4.7%) and North Carolina (7.6%).The national average: More than 5%. This was after four years. So far Obama has been in office for just one year. How was Romney's performance by his first anniversary? Fiftieth out of fifty. That's right. In Romney's first year in charge, Massachusetts ranked dead last in America in jobs growth.

TPJ: This was despite Romney running for Governor of Massachusetts as a "job creator!!" The same line he's trying to use to win the presidency in 2012. If he is such a "jobs guru" as he claims, then why couldn't he do better in the relatively small state of Massachusetts? How does he expect to turn around the entire country if he couldn't even turn around Massachusetts?

---End of Transmission---

Republicans in Wisconsin: Single Parenthood Abusive.

The Republican war on women battles on in Wisconsin. The same misogynistic Republican politician who was the catalyst for ending Wisconsin's "equal pay for women" (Rep. Glenn Grothman) is now going after single mothers. Yeah, you read that correctly. He proposed a bill to formally state that single parenthood is a contributing factor to child abuse!! It is a disgusting indictment of single mothers because they outnumber single fathers by 5 to 1. The sad irony is that many mothers end up single mothers to protect their kids from abusive fathers/husbands. So, in my mind, single mothers help reduce and prevent abuse by removing their children from volatile relationships.

Single mothers are heroes in my mind, so for this sick bastard Republican politician to attack them makes me want to vomit. The Republican Party has made it clear from attacking Planned Parenthood, contraceptives and now single mothers that women aren't their priority. Even Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential candidate opposes certain women's rights, like access to Planned Parenthood. That asshole, Rep. Grothman "defended" his bill ending equal pay for women by saying, "You could argue that money is more important for men." That is something you'd expect someone would say in the 1800s--not 2012!! In Congress, Republicans are even opposing and blocking the re-authorization of the "Violence Against Women Act!!" Vice-President Joe Biden had this to say to the Republican Party's outrageous opposition:

“It’s bad enough that we’re even debating this issue. But imagine what message this would send to the women and girls of this nation and around the world if we didn’t reauthorize this bill. Imagine the signal it would send to our mothers and our daughters that they are not to be free of abuse,” asserted Biden.

Thankfully, President Obama and the Democrats are stalwart advocates and fighters for women's rights and needs. We must stand up for women and lend our support to the Democrats or we might soon find ourselves back in the days where women have little to no rights.

---End of Transmission---

Romney Proposes Major Cuts to Health Care and Help for the Disabled. Increases for the Military.

WASHINGTON — Reducing government deficits Mitt Romney's way would mean less money for health care for the poor and disabled and big cuts to nuts-and-bolts functions such as food inspection, border security and education. Romney also promises budget increases for the Pentagon, above those sought by some GOP defense hawks, meaning that the rest of the government would have to shrink even more. Nonmilitary programs would incur still larger cuts than those called for in the tightfisted GOP budget that the House passed last month.

TPJ: Yeah, who cares about helping poor, sick and disabled people? It's not like the Jesus that Romney follows stood for helping these most vulnerable segments of our population...oh wait, yes he did. And food inspection? That's not important...never mind all the salmonella outbreaks we've had from salad to peanut butter. So, long as we give more money to our never-ending war machine, that's all that matters...at least according to Mr. "I've got mine, screw you" Romney.

---End of Transmission--

Republican War on Women Battles on in Wisconsin and Ohio.

Ladies, don't move to Wisconsin, because the Republican Governor Scott Walker and his fellow Republicans in the state government don't want you to have equal pay for equal work. They recently over-turned that state's equal pay act. Don't you just feel the love, ladies? Nor do they want to provide you cancer screenings at a reduced cost at the local Planned Parenthood center.

The Republicans in Wisconsin have prevented Planned Parenthood from providing abortion services, and in Ohio the state government put the family planning center at the bottom of the priorities list for the state's new budget and blocks them from receiving funding for cancer screenings, HIV and domestic violence services. Not only are Republicans in Ohio preventing women from having reproductive freedom but are even willing to jeopardize the physical safety of abused women. Stay classy, Ohio (sarcasm). And, do you know what high-profile politician wants to end all federal funding to Planned Parenthood? That's right, the Republican presidential candidate for the United States, Mitt Romney.

You can vote for him if you don't care about your rights as a woman, or you can vote for President Obama who passed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act for women, and who has pledged his full support for Planned Parenthood. Don't let Republicans play political games with your breast cancer screenings, contraception or right to help after a domestic abuse assault.

Oh, and did you know that Mitt Romney is a cookie snob? Yeah, his rich-ass palette apparently only likes fresh-baked cookies. He told some poor woman at an event in Pennsylvania that he didn't seem to like the cookies she provided because (in his opinion) they looked like they were made at 7-11!! I learned from my momma, years ago to never refuse the cookies someone offers you. Or, any food for that matter because it's rude and bad manners. But: “In fact, the cookies came from Bethel Bakery, a popular Pittsburgh pastry shop.” The bakery’s owner, John Walsh, told a local TV station: “We wanted him to be welcomed with the best in the ’burgh, and he had no idea. This guy has no idea how beloved this institution is that provided these cookies.”

---End of Transmission--

Signs of Economic Recovery in States Hit Hardest by Great Recession.

("Blue 3D Graph" by Renjith Krishnan for Free Digital Photos)

It's getting harder and harder for conservatives like Mitt Romney to argue that the economy isn't recovering on a steady trajectory. The national unemployment number has is trending down rather than up as it was when President Obama inherited the economy from President George W. Bush. Under Bush's leadership, the national unemployment number reached the high-watermark of nearly 10.6% before beginning the steady decline under President Obama to where it is now at roughly 8%. However, the actual percentage of unemployment is less important than the tread because the trend tells you what direction the country is headed, whereas the percentage is just a snap-shot of one isolated point in time. The trend under President Obama is looking good with 22 straight months of job increases. That's 3.1 million jobs.

We are headed in the right direction, but all of that could stall if Mitt Romney is elected as president. Why? Because his economic policies aren't very different than those of President George W. Bush. Romney wants to give even more tax cuts to his super rich buddies on Wall Street. We tried tax cuts for the rich for nearly a decade. But, if tax cuts for the rich grow the economy and increase jobs, then the economy should have gotten stronger under Bush. Instead, the stock market crashed, the housing market fell out from under the middle-class and unemployment spiked. So, if we go back to the "Bush model" as Romney wants to do then I'm afraid the recovery will crumble.

The best example of where America is headed can be seen in the Midwest. These are the states that have been hardest hit by the Bush recession. Michigan saw the peak of it's unemployment rate in the last days of President George W. Bush when it hit 14.2% in August 2009. Since President Obama took office, it has steadily declined to where it is now at 8.8%. Eight percent is still obviously too high but if you click on the link highlighted in the last sentence, you can see the graph trending steadily downward. When you consider where Michigan was when Obama took office, 8.8% is nearly half of what it was. It is important to note that President Obama's decision to save the auto industry that Michigan and much of the Midwest rely upon has helped lower their unemployment rates.

Ohio is another auto industry state that saw it's peak unemployment rate of 10.6% at the end of the Bush presidency--a month before President Obama took office. But, just like in Michigan, Ohio's unemployment rate under Obama has steadily decreased to 7.6% today. Again, click on this sentence to see the trend in graph form. Even Florida's unemployment is trending downward. It hit a high of 11.4% in January 2010 and now continues to fall toward 8% (click here to see graph trend). When you look at these statistics in these hardest hit states it shows that the ship is finally turned in the right direction and we're picking up speed.

It takes time to turn around a gigantic economy such as the one here in America. It's like trying to turn around a giant aircraft carrier--you can't just spin it around immediately like a speed boat!! But, we're back on course and the last thing we should do is go back to the Bush policies that got us in this mess. Yet, that's what Romney wants to do, and this is the same guy who told the auto industry to go bankrupt. If he's so experienced in the economy then why did he fail to support the auto industry? To me, that's all you need to know about who has the better instincts to help blue collar workers, and the middle class. If you want the rich to do even better than they did under Bush, go ahead and elect Mitt Romney. If you want the middle class to grow the go with Obama.

---End of Transmission---

Ted Nugent: "Mitt Romney knows what I’m saying is true." Is it True, Mitt Romney?

Despite Ted Nugent saying he'd be "dead or in jail" if President Obama is re-elected, the Romney campaign is refusing to disavow themselves from the reckless rock "star." They released a statement calling Nugent's violence tinged comments, "divisive." It's much worse than "divisive." Calling President Obama a "liar" is divisive. Comments hinting at violence toward a president of the United States, (and his supporters) go way past divisive and border on illegal. Why else is the U.S. Secret Service looking into Nugent's comments?

His violent messages give mentally unstable people with guns, and a hate for President Obama, license to act on their hateful fantasies. This isn't just liberal non-sense, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center who tracks violent hate-groups, there has been a huge increase since President Obama took office in 2008--an increase of 755%!!! Imagine if a Muslim supporter of President Obama said that he'd be "dead or in jail" if Mitt Romney was elected? The right-wing would be white-hot with anger over it--and rightly so. Except, I do find it disgusting, that just being "Muslim" to some conservatives is synonymous with "bad." I certainly do not. But apparently, in America, violent hate speech is fine, so long as you're a white, Christian, conservative.

But, let's get back to the Romney campaign. They did say Nugent's words were "offensive" but if they are so offensive then why haven't they disavowed themselves altogether of Ted Nugent? What does the Romney campaign gain from such disgusting comments? I'll tell you what they have to gain. They know that they have a problem with the conservative base in the Republican Party, and hope to gain the votes of people just like Ted Nugent.

So, they've made the calculation that they'd rather stand with voters like Ted Nugent, than distance themselves from a man (Nugent) who said in the 2008 election that Hillary Clinton was a "worthless bitch" who should "ride his machine gun." That same election he told then candidate Barack Obama to "suck on his machine gun." Nugent also stated that Massachusetts wasn't apart of America. So, this guy is a repeat offender and that makes it even more offensive that Mitt Romney would personally seek out Ted Nugent's endorsement. It's also upsetting that given Nugent's past comments, Romney son, Tagg Romney bragged about the Ted Nugent endorsement on Twitter. Now, I don't think a politician should have to answer for ever crack-pot supporter. However, I do think a candidate should have to answer for comments made by supporters whose endorsement they actively sought. Especially if those endorsements threaten violence toward elected officials.

One final point, Mitt Romney should categorically repudiate Ted Nugent as a supporter of his campaign because Ted Nugent doesn't seem to think Romney means it when he says Nugent's comments were "offensive." To quote crazy, Uncle Ted, "Mitt Romney knows what I’m saying is true." So, It seems for Ted Nugent, Romney was just saying that Nugent's comments were "offensive" to fend of the media but that his true feelings are that Nugent's words were "OK." Given Romney's propensity toward flip-flops, I think that calls for Mitt Romney to finally clear this matter up by categorically dismissing Ted Nugent as someone he wants support from.

---End of Transmission---

Romney Supporter, Ted Nugent, Threatens Violence Against Obama and Democrats.

A few days ago, crazy conservative rock singer, Ted Nugent, (seen left) told a group of NRA (National Rifle Association) members to "chop the heads" off of Democrats (and by extension, Obama) in the upcoming election. His comments, dripping with violent rhetoric continued, "If Barack Obama becomes the President in November again, I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year."

His words conjure up horrifying imagery. Why would he end up in jail if President Obama were re-elected? Given Nugent's history of violent threats and accusations, it's not a leap of logic to suggest he's hinting at doing violence to the president!! In that regard, I'm pleased to hear that the Secret Service is investigating because last time I checked, it was illegal to make these kinds of threats about a President of the United States of America.

Even if Ted Nugent was exaggerating, he should be reprimanded for such hateful talk. Violent rhetoric is never a good idea, and a terrible idea in political discussions -- especially when guns are involved, and following the recent shooting of Congresswoman Gabby Giffords. Nugent is one of these extremely conservative, gun-toting survivalists, which is legal and his right as an American. Unfortunately there are some in that category who form "militias" with the aim to violently over-throw any American government they deem as unfit to lead and protect the Constitution of the United States of America. These are the people I think about when I say Nugent's comments are reckless.

These militia types are deadly serious, and some are one incident away from being Timothy McVeigh. So, Nugent might not act on his words himself, but his words provide encouragement to others who are indeed ready to act in a violent fashion. Keep in mind, Nugent's violent rhetoric comes at a time when threats against our president are at an all-time high. It is also an era that has seen an alarming increase in, "hate groups" such as the Ku Klux Klan, Neo-Nazis and countless other smaller groups. These aren't simply words disagreeing with President Obama's policies. These are words that incite unstable people to act in horrific ways. I hope that Ted Nugent will get a serious warning, at least, from the U.S. Secret Service. No president, Democratic or Republican should be talked about in this way. There is no place, what-so-ever for violence in politics. This is beyond reckless--it's seditious!!

Ted Nugent should clarify his intentions in regards to our president, and should also apologize to President Obama and Democrats. On top of that, Mitt Romney should disavow Nugent's words and disavow Nugent himself as a supporter of Romney. It's disappointing to me that Romney sought out Nugent's endorsement in the first place considering Nugent has a long history of talking in such violent ways about Democratic officials. In 2008, Ted Nugent told President Obama to, "suck on my machine gun."

If Republicans are going to ask President Obama to disavow Hillary Rosen's comments about Ann Romney's work ethic as a mom, then surely Mitt Romney should do the same with Nugent's remarks about violence!! It was right for Obama to disavow Rosen's comments. But, imagine if an Obama supporter suggested decapitation of Romney and his supporters!! I oppose any and all violent groups--right, left or in the center. No one should trivialize Nugent's remarks. The campaign should have no place for sexist, racist or violent speech. Let us discuss the issues and make our founding fathers proud.

---End of Transmission---

Mitt Romney, Lilly LedBetter Act and Equal Pay for Women.

One of the first accomplishments of President Obama was passing the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. It is an act that makes it easier for women to challenge cases of unequal pay in the workplace. You'd think that the Mitt Romney campaign would be ready to talk about this important legislation given the recent anti-women legislation coming out of Republican led states. As well as the contraception opposition by Republican presidential candidates and Mitt Romney pledging to defund, "Planned Parenthood."

So, when "The Huffington Post" journalist, Sam Stein, asked whether Romney supports it or not is disconcerting that a Romney aide responded with six seconds of silence before simply saying, "we'll get back to you on that." Eventually the Romney people stumbled out that they do support equal pay but only after a reporter forced their hand on a matter that shouldn't be debatable--equal pay for equal work. It's not exactly pro-actively standing for women, nor is it encouraging to those who rightly support equal pay for women in the workplace.

As if that isn't bad enough, Romney's pal in Wisconsin, beleaguered Republican Governor Scott Walker repealed the 2009 Equal Pay Enforcement Act in Wisconsin. Romney referred to Walker as a "hero." Yet the Republicans want women, and men, to believe that there isn't a war on women's rights? If you believe that they you'll believe anything.

---End of Transmission---

Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney and the Buffet Rule.

Recently, Representative Paul Ryan, Republican from Wisconsin, has come out defending the ultra-wealthy who have done very well despite the Great Recession. He dismissed President Obama's "Buffet Rule" tax plan as "budget pixie dust." Interesting indeed since all the Buffet rule is asking is for the ultra-rich to pay a little extra in taxes to help fund some of the crucial programs that are keeping seniors afloat (medicare). It says that successful Americans such as Warren Buffet shouldn't be paying less in taxes than his middle-class secretary. Buffet himself as come out and said people like him need to be asked to help more by paying more in taxes to help keep the American middle class from crumbling further.

Buffet, a titan of investments, knows that without a stable and protected working class, the wealthy wouldn't have anyone to work in their factories. There wouldn't be much of a military to protect their rich asses either since very few in the military are from the upper classes. As it is, our brave soldiers get very little in the form of veteran benefits, thanks in part to greedy Republican elites who seem to care little about anyone other than themselves. Well, if people like Mitt Romney keep squeezing the middle class out of adequate pay, health care and housing, they see the "peons" raise up with more than their vote!!

Paul Ryan claims that even if we pass the "Buffet Rule" it would pay off the deficit completely. He's missing the point because this tax proposal is about fairness and joint sacrifice. The middle class bailed out the rich corporate bosses and Wall Street tycoons and it's time they put some skin in the game. It's about chipping into a society that we all share whether they want to believe it or not in their isolate ivory towers. By the way, Mitt Romney only pays an effective tax rate of 15% yet he is worth upwards of $300 million dollars. Oh, and he absolutely supports the Paul Ryan plan that is an absolute give-away to the wealthy while the middle class get little in tax cuts.

Speaking of Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan (Romney's favorite sycophant) thinks Romney is likable because he's a throw back to the 1950s. Well, I hate to break it to you Paul, but the 1950s weren't that great for a lot of people in America today, namely: women, ethnic minorities, gays, and anyone not Christian. And like the 1950s, Republicans today are trying to control women's bodies and their birth control decisions!! It's like "Back to the Future" with the Republican Party and Mitt Romney, their leader, is straight out of "Mad Men!!" If that's not enough to scare you into opposing their policies and leaders then I don't know what world you are living in.

---End of Transmission---

Voters Agree with Obama that Economy Favors the Rich.

A new poll done by The Washington Post in partnership with ABC News revealed that a solid majority of American voters (52%) believe that the economy is tilted toward the rich, and thus, stunting the economic recovery. That reflects the facts before the American people. The wealthy haven't done much of anything to help improve the economic recovery. In fact, they have sucked up all the money in the system by either tax cuts that heavily favor them, hording money instead of lending to small businesses and continuing to receive record bonuses. Throw in the renewed strength of the stock market, which favors the wealthy and you have a recipe for continued stagnation of the middle-class.

The representatives of the ultra-wealthy in America, the Republican Party, have been blocking President Obama from improving the lives of middle class Americans by refusing to end the Bush tax cuts that favor the rich. The irony is that if tax cuts to the wealthy created jobs as the Republicans claim then we would have avoided the huge increase in unemployment as President George W. Bush was leaving the presidency. But, instead of cutting back on such a tax giveaway, Mitt Romney supports a program proposed by Republicans in Congress to maintain a budget that favors, yet again, the wealthy!! Including a massive tax windfall for the wealthy. The irony is that Americans would have to take on further debt to pay for those tax cuts, which is total hypocrisy for a party that bitches about spending too much money when Democrats seek to increase health care outcomes for average Americans.

That plan proposed by Republican Representative Paul Ryan cuts the corporate tax rate down to 25% allowing already well-off corporations to cut their expenses. Does the plan allow for an equal reduction for the average American? Nope. Under Ryan's budget, embraced by Mitt Romney, the bottom 20% of Americans barely get a measurable tax cut and those in the middle 60% will actually have a slight increase in taxes!! Whereas those in the top 1% (the rich) would see a 14% decrease in the amount of taxes they'd have to pay. Those in the 0.1 percent (the ultra-wealthy like Mitt Romney) get a whopping 20% decrease. This means less money for families to afford health care, groceries, education and other necessities.

As if that wasn't insult enough to the middle class, the Paul Ryan budget would essentially gut Medicare and Medicaid, which many middle class workers count on to boost their meager retirement savings. That link above comes from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. Enough is enough. Help Democrats prevent the rich from siphoning further money out of the pockets of the middle class by voting for the Democratic Party. Under Obama's leadership, we will restore the rightful place of the middle class as the heart of the American economy. To continue squeezing the middle class, as the Republicans have been doing for the past 4 years, is killing the golden goose. I say that because without the average American workers, many of these out-of-touch rich Republicans like Romney wouldn't have the money they love to hoard.

---End of Transmission---

Bill Graham's Daughter, Ann Graham, Says it's O.K. To Discriminate Against Atheists.

The daughter of televangelist Rev. Billy Graham, Ann Graham says that it’s important to discriminate against candidates who are atheists because politicians “should have a fear for almighty God.”

TPJ: I heard her say this live, and my jaw dropped wide open. This bigoted comment came just seconds after she said people who are considering whether to vote for a Mormon or not should look at the candidates "policies" rather than their religious beliefs. I guess that only applies to believers in "God." The constitution clearly states that no religious test should be given as a criteria for public office. Yet that is exactly what Ms. Graham and others like her do every election toward non-Christians.

She was way out of line and not engendering the spirit of brotherhood that Jesus taught about. How are we supposed to work together if Christians dismiss atheists out of hand? As an atheist, I have voted for no one but Christians, and it never kept me from voting based on their policies. Christians dismiss atheists and non-Christians as untrustworthy and evil but then Christians wonder why non-believers feel so discriminated against??? Wake up America -- this is supposed to be a religious free country!! Freedom of religion and freedom from religion. Can you imagine the outrage if President Obama was an atheist and said he wouldn't vote for a Christian?!! And the outrage would be justified. What she said was extremely irresponsible and bitterly divisive.

Speaking of President Obama, it seems that plenty of religious conservatives (thought not all, thankfully) want to have it both ways. They want to be able to falsely label President Obama as a "Muslim" (as if there is anything wrong with being Muslim in the first place). However, when a Democrat or Liberal dares question their insertion of religion into politics, they cry like a baby that their first amendment rights of freedom of religion are being attacked!! They have rigged the system where they are right when they are right, and right when they are wrong. No wonder they don't want the status quo to change, they have a very effective scam going on.

The silence from Christians after Ms. Graham's ugly statements speak volumes toward their hypocrisy on freedom of religious expression. If they truly stood for religious freedom in America then they would be demanding that Ms. Graham apologize for such polarizing, disrespectful remarks. The irony is that most atheists would love to not have to talk religion, but Christians refuse to acknowledge the secular nature of American government. So, to not defend oneself is such an environment is akin to dropping your weapons in the midst of a battle.

I don't have a problem with people voting against atheist candidates based on their policies, but not based on their atheistic beliefs. Being an ex-Mormon, I have plenty of disagreements with that religion, but I would never not vote for Mitt Romney because of his religion. I don't even need to consider such a factor because his policies are plenty enough information for me not vote for him. I really am concerned about the level of religious discrimination toward non-believers and believers of non Judeo-Christians beliefs. I'm even more concerned about how much religion has been inserted into politics over the past 20-30 years. Let's keep our elections based on policies, please.

---End of Transmission---

The More Voters Learn About Romney the Less They Like Him.

FromMark Z. Barabak of The Los Angeles Times:

But his victories — and the way Romney achieved them — have taken a toll that could do lasting harm as he turns to the general election campaign against President Obama.In state after state, Romney has grown less popular the longer the campaign wears on and the better voters get to know him. The same thing happened in 2008, the first time Romney sought theGOP

TPJ: While popularity is only one factor in choosing a president, it's a lot easier to vote for someone if you find them likable. It's rather pathetic that poor Mitt Romney has been running for president practically since he was born but it hasn't changed peoples' opinions of him. He's throwing buckets of money at voters to try and sway them but no amount of money can get people to like you. It's rather sad actually to see him desperately try to get people to like him. He wants the presidency so badly that he's willing to change his core beliefs, and that comes off as insincere and desperate. It makes people wonder if they could trust him as president.

Whats worse for Romney is that his low popularity numbers come in key states like Ohio. No Republican candidate has won the presidency without winning Ohio. The Mark Barabak article drills down further on this point:

In Ohio, perhaps the single most important fall battleground, a recentQuinnipiac Universitypoll found that Romney was viewed more unfavorably after the March primary than favorably, a reversal of his standing as recently as mid-January.

TPJ: The same is true in Michigan where President Obama is riding high on his successful rebuilding of the domestic auto industry, which is the bedrock of several economies in the all-important Midwest. That Romney missed the importance of saving the car companies should tell you everything you need to know about his "experience" with the economy. His Dad was the head of a car company in Michigan, yet Mitt still managed to get it wrong. It's true that he's a business guy but his business experience is in buying up failing companies to cut jobs and sell the companies down the road for a profit. Seen in that light, it's no wonder he wanted the Detroit car companies to go bankrupt!! Bankrupt companies and lay-offs were his "bead and butter" at Bain Capital.

Romney knows how to make money but that's not the same as knowing how to create jobs. Mitt Romney needs someone to break it to him that the American people are just not into him!! And the harder he tries, the less likable he appears. No one likes someone who doesn't know when to take an exit, and that's Romney. He lost in 2008 but couldn't accept the will of the voters, so now he's back trying to force himself on voters. As I said, it's pathetic.

---End of Transmission---

Mitt Romney is not Popular with Women Voters.

At a time when Americans are focused on building upon the economic recovery to expand jobs and new industries, the Republican party pulled out the misogynistic playbook from the 1950s and launched a full-scale attack on women and women's rights. Even as President Obama and the Democrats were celebrating the Lily Leadbetter Act, which lowers the disparities between women and men in the work place. It all started with the shredding of a pink bow.

Earlier this year, The Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation stopped sending money to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screenings. One individual, the head of the foundation let her political beliefs on reproductive freedom prevent lower-income women from getting breast cancer screenings provided through Planned Parenthood. This drew rightful outrage from women and men alike that a conservative political ideology would seek to keep low-income women from getting adequate breast cancer screenings!! Komen eventually backed down but the message was clear to women, and the men who love them that the "War on Women" has shamefully returned.

Independent women gave control of Congress to the Republicans in the mid-term elections of 2010 in hopes of improving the economy, so what did they do instead? They went after reproductive rights and contraception availability. Republican led state governments passed laws forcing women to receive a trans-vaginal probe before getting an abortion. So, they support mandates if it means violating a woman's body and personal freedoms, but not it if means expanding health care to larger groups of women and children? Not only do they oppose women's freedoms in regard to their health, but also apparently the concept that everyone should deserve decent health care in America!! Amazingly out-of-touch.

Then you have Mitt Romney supporting the "Person hood Amendment" which would ban abortion, even in cases of rape or incest!! "DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz claimed that Mitt Romney has adopted an overall extreme take on reproductive issues, citing a statement Romney made indicating he would have supported a “personhood amendment,” which would define life as beginning at conception, while Governor of Massachusetts. “A personhood amendment would ban all abortion, even if a woman is a victim of rape or incest or would die otherwise,” Wasserman Schultz said during a conference call with reporters.

Combine all these draconian measures by Republicans with the misogyny from Santorum and Romney's plan to scrap Planned Parenthood altogether and it's no wonder President Obama is ahead with women by 18 according to a new USA TODAY Poll.

---End of Transmission---