According to the new survey, Mr. Obama currently garners the support of 51 percent of voters, while Mr. Romney is the favorite of 47 percent of the Old Dominion State electorate. Ninety-three percent (93%) of the respondents indicated that they would definitely vote for the candidate they cited as their favorite during the interview.

The Washington Post, Oct. 22-26, 2012.

The poll also shows that 95 percent of Obama supporters stated that they were either very enthusiastic (70 percent) or fairly enthusiastic (25 percent) about the Democratic candidate. Among Romney supporters, 56 percent were very enthusiastic, while 37 percent indicated that they were fairly enthusiastic.

The health of the U.S. economy remains a major concern for the electorate irrespective of their political affiliation. Fifty-six percent (56%) of the participants told the pollsters that they viewed the issue as extremely important. Thirty-six percent (36%) described the state of the economy as very important. Only six percent (6%) said it was somewhat important.

Voters were largely split when it came to decide which of the two candidates was more likely to manage the economy satisfactorily. Forty-five percent (45%) of the respondents thought that Mr. Obama was more likely to do a better job, while 46 percent indicated that Mr. Romney‘s economic policies were more likely to promote growth and job creation. The former Massachusetts governor has pledged to create 12 million jobs during his first term.

The Washington Post, Oct. 22-26, 2012.

Forty-three percent (43%) of those questioned told the Washington Post that their financial status had remained virtually the same since Mr. Obama took office in January 2009. Twenty-four percent (24%) said they were better off while 32 percent described themselves as worse off. One percent (1%) were unsure.

Thirty-five percent (35%) told the pollsters that their financial health would have remained the same had Mr. Romney been in charge for the past four years. Thirty percent (30%) said they would have been worse off while 28 percent believed that they would have been better off at the end of a Romney administration than they were at the beginning. Seven percent (7%) were unsure.

When asked to indicate how crucial military spending was in their view, over two thirds (68 percent) of respondents said it was extremely important (29 percent) or very important (39 percent). A quarter (25 percent) said that they considered the issue as somewhat important.

With regard to Medicare, 76 percent of those questioned stated that the future of the government-administered social insurance program for senior citizens would greatly influence their choice of president on Nov. 6. In addition, 52 percent of the participants said Mr. Obama was more likely to manage the scheme adequately in the future, whereas 40 percent said that they felt Mr. Romney would do a better job.

The Washington Post, Oct. 22-26, 2012.

The Washington Post interviewed 1,504 adults, including 1,228 likely voters, over a four-day period. Thirty-one percent (31%) of the respondents described themselves as Democrats, 23 percent as Republicans, and 36 percent as Independent voters.

According to a CBS News instant poll of uncommitted voters – that is voters who are either undecided or those who might change their minds between now and Nov. 6 – 53 percent of the 500 survey participants said that they felt Mr. Obama had come on top, while 23 percent of the respondents believed Mr. Romney had won the debate. Twenty-four percent (24%) of those questioned told the pollsters that the debate was a tie.

Source: CBS News.

Prior to the final exchange, the participants were asked which one of the two candidates was more likely to handle an international crisis adequately. Fifty-eight percent (58%) stated that Mr. Obama would be more competent, whereas 46 percent chose the former Massachusetts governor. Following the debate, the incumbent president’s score jumped to 71 percent, while Mr. Romney‘s increased slightly to 49 percent.

With regard to national security and terrorism, 64 percent stated that Mr. Obama was more likely to protect American citizens. Only 36 percent felt Mr. Romney would be able to offer a decent level of protection.

Source: CBS News.

However, those questioned were equally split (50 vs. 50 percent) on which candidate was more likely to defend America’s interests vis-à-vis China.

The second poll conducted by CNN following the debate also revealed that Mr. Obama was the victor, although his lead over Mr. Romney was more modest. Indeed, 48 percent of those questioned felt the incumbent president had dominated the debate, while 40 percent thought Mr. Romney had come on top.

Fifty-one percent (51%) of the participants thought Mr. Obama would make a better leader, while 46 percent felt the former private-equity executive had the ability to lead the nation effectively. However, the president’s more aggressive tone on Monday night negatively affected his likeability ratings according to CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

“A majority of debate watchers said that President Obama seemed to be the stronger leader. But on the question of likeability, the two candidates are essentially tied on a trait that has generally been an advantage for Obama. That’s probably due to the fact that two-thirds of debate watchers felt that Obama spent more time than Mitt Romney on the attack,” he explained.

The way the Benghazi attack was handled makes it difficult for the Obama administration
to retain any credibility. Photo: AP.

The Obama campaign was once again this weekend highly critical of Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney for using the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, for political purposes and for suggesting that the Obama administration had not handled the unrest in the Arab world adequately and had endangered the lives of diplomatic personnel in Libya.

“We don’t need shoot-from-the-hip diplomacy. And when Mitt Romney first responded to what was going on in Libya, his own party called him out for insensitivity,” Robert Gibbs, one of President Obama‘s campaign advisers, told CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday. On the same day, senior Obama strategist David Axelrod told Fox News Sunday that the former Massachusetts governor was wrong to comment and make uninformed assessments as the diplomatic compound came under attack. Four diplomatic staff, including U.S Ambassador Chris Stevens, lost their lives on that night.

Since then, the Obama administration has issued a series of narrative to explain last month’s violent attack. On Sept. 16, UN Ambassador Susan Rice told Fox News Sunday that the attack on the consulate on the 11th anniversary of 9/11 was nothing more than a protest against the controversial film mocking Prophet Muhammad that had “spun out of control.” On Sept. 28, the Director of Public Affairs for the Director of National Intelligence issued a statement suggesting that the evidence at the time indicated that the assault “was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists,” although it emphasized that the “information gathered was [still] preliminary and evolving.” On Oct. 9, on the eve of a congressional hearing, the State Department announced that the original information was inaccurate and that the assault on the diplomatic compound was not the result of a demonstration gone wrong.

“Everything is calm at 8:30 p.m. There’s nothing unusual. There has been nothing unusual during the day at all outside. […] A few minutes later – we’re talking about 9 o’clock at night – the Ambassador retires to his room. […] At 9:40 p.m., the agent in the TOC and the agents in Building C hear loud noises coming from the front gate. They also hear gunfire and an explosion. The agent in the TOC looks at his cameras […] and the camera on the main gate reveals a large number of people – a large number of men, armed men, flowing into the compound,” an official states during a conference call.

With this information now public, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham told CBS’s Face the Nation at the weekend that the Obama administration did not expect the Benghazi attack to be object of so much scrutiny.

“There wasn’t a soul around the compound. And the coordinated attack lasted for hours with Al-Qaeda-associated militia. My belief is that that was known by the administration within 24 hours. And, quite frankly, Susan Rice, on your show on September 16, the president on the 18th, and the 25th, kept talking about an attack inspired by a video. They never believed the media would investigate. I think they have been misleading us, but it finally caught up with them,” the South Carolina senator said.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Department of State, and the congressional hearing are currently conducting separate investigations into the event.

Mitt Romney told the Virginia Military Institute on Monday that he would reverse
Mr. Obama's deep cuts to the Pentagon's budget. Photo: CNN.

Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney highlighted his administration’s foreign policy on Monday when he gave a speech at the Virginia Military Institute (VMI). The former Massachusetts governor insisted that the world needed America’s leadership to make it a better place.

Mr. Romney first talked about last month’s attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, which resulted in the death of four American diplomats, among whom Ambassador Chris Stevens. The Republican nominee, who criticized President Obama for describing the Benghazi attack as “bumps in the road,” reiterated his long-held belief that the murder of several American personnel was not a random act and was the work of terrorists.

“The attack on our consulate in Benghazi on September 11th, 2012 was likely the work of forces affiliated with those that attacked our homeland on September 11th, 2001. This latest assault cannot be blamed on a reprehensible video insulting Islam, despite the administration’s attempts to convince us of that for so long. No, as the administration has finally conceded, these attacks were the deliberate work of terrorists,” he told his audience.

Mr. Romney also referred to post-war leaders, such as former Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense George Marshall, leaders who showed “courage and vision,” unlike the current president who is leading “from behind” and “leaving our destiny at the mercy of events.”

“[…] it is the responsibility of our President to use America’s great power to shape history,” the former governor remarked.

Mr. Romney then noted the Obama administration’s approach to Israel, highlighting the strain which currently exists between the U.S. president and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, before stressing that Mr. Obama’s decision in July 2009 to put “daylight” between the United States and the Jewish State had benefited Iran. He also emphasized that his approach with regard to the Islamic Republic would not be focused on diplomacy but on greater sanctions to prevent Tehran from developing its nuclear capabilities.

“Iran today has never been closer to a nuclear weapons capability. It has never posed a greater danger to our friends, our allies, and to us. And it has never acted less deterred by America, as was made clear last year when Iranian agents plotted to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador in our nation’s capital,” Mr. Romney reminded his audience. In addition, he stressed that America needed to “make clear to Iran through actions – not just words – that their nuclear pursuit [would] not be tolerated.

The former governor was also critical of the Obama administration’s decision to pull all troops out of Iraq abruptly, instead of withdrawing them gradually and, in the process, securing all the gains that had been achieved. Instead, Mr. Romney noted, the president’s move has resulted in “rising violence, a resurgent al-Qaeda, the weakening of democracy in Baghdad, and the rising influence of Iran.”

Mr. Romney also highlighted the president’s failure to adequately fight al-Qaeda which “remains a strong force in Yemen and Somalia, in Libya and other parts of North Africa, in Iraq, and now in Syria.”

The former governor also pledged to reverse Mr. Obama’s deep cuts to the Pentagon and to restore the size of the Navy “by building 15 ships per year, including three submarines.”

“The 21st century can and must be an American century. It began with terror, war, and economic calamity. It is our duty to steer it onto the path of freedom, peace, and prosperity,” Mr. Romney concluded.

Waterboarding, as a field interrogation technique, has been used by American troops
since the Spanish-American War.

Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney would reinstate the use of torture including waterboarding, currently illegal in the United States, should he win the Nov. 6 election. President Barack Obama issued an executive order to ban the use of torture, although the practice is often conducted abroad through the use of extraordinary rendition, or ‘torture by proxy,’ where suspected terrorists are sent overseas to be interrogated and tortured by other governments.

“We’ll use enhanced interrogation techniques which go beyond those that are in the military handbook right now,” Mr. Romney is believed to have stated during a townhall meeting in Charleston last December according to the New York Times. The Republican nominee was later asked whether he considered waterboarding a torture technique. “I don’t,” Mr. Romney told the reporter.

According to an internal Romney campaign memorandum, the former Massachusetts governor’s advisers “have privately urged him to ‘rescind and replace President Obama‘s executive order’ and permit secret ‘enhanced interrogation techniques against high-value detainees that are safe, legal and effective in generating intelligence to save American lives.’”

In a document obtained by the paper, the Romney campaign points out, among other things, that the Obama administration has made it easier for terrorists to resist such interrogation techniques.

“[…] the Army Field Manual is publicly available on the Internet. The CIA has stated that it believes many al Qaeda operatives receive training in the resistance of interrogation methods and that al Qaeda actively seeks information regarding U.S. interrogation methods in order to enhance that training. By committing the United States to using only techniques that are a mouse click away, the Obama Administration has made it that much more difficult for interrogators to do their jobs effectively,” the document points out.

Gas masks have been handed out and warning systems trialed as Israel steps up talk of war
with Iran. Photo: Jim Hollander / EPA.

Texas Congressman Ron Paul strongly criticized Saturday’s Senate motion against Iran’s nuclear program and described it as a pretext to launch a military offensive against the Islamic republic.

Dr. Paul‘s son, Sen. Rand Paul, was the only lawmaker who voted against the motion, which passed in a 90 to 1 vote, that alleges that Iran’s nuclear program is not entirely peaceful, contrary to Tehran’s claims. The resolution also states that the U.S. must do all it can to stop Iran developing nuclear weapons.

Dr. Paul has consistently criticized Congress for imposing illegal sanctions against the Islamic republic and has repeatedly compared such actions as an act of war.

The Senate resolution comes as Israel is pushing the Obama administration to set ‘red lines’ which, if crossed, would result in military intervention by the U.S. Mr. Obama and Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney have both rejected the establishment of such ‘lines,’ although they insist that the U.S. will never let Iran develop nuclear weapons.

Meanwhile, Israel has also reiterated its threat that it may launch a unilateral attack against Iran’s nuclear facilities ahead of the Nov. 6 presidential election, which is the last thing President Barack Obama would want. Should Israel carry out a pre-emptive strike against the country’s nuclear installations, the chances are that Iran would attack both Israel and U.S. military bases in the area, forcing Washington to retaliate.

The Commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, Mohammad Ali Jafari, told two Iranian news agency on Saturday that Israel would be annihilated if it decided to attack his country.

“The Zionist regime should know that if it starts something, that will be the point of their annihilation and the endpoint of their story, “he told Fars.

Jafari also told the Iranian Students’ News Agency (ISNA) that he was convinced that Israel would eventually launch a military strike, while insisting that Iran would be ready to deal with such an attack.

“Their threats only prove that their enmity with Islam and the revolution is serious, and eventually this enmity will lead to physical conflict. We are making all efforts to increase our defensive capabilities so that if there is an attack … we could defend ourselves and other countries that need our help with high defensive capabilities,” he stated.

Jafari also said that he expected that, when the attack comes, it would likely be in the form of an air offensive, while stressing that such a hostile intervention could occur at any time.

“No one dares to wage an extensive ground assault on Iran. A war will occur, but it’s not clear where or when it will be. Israel seeks war with us, but it’s not clear when the war will occur,” he added.

A poll released by Tel Aviv University in cooperation with Israel Democracy Institute a few weeks ago showed that around 60 percent of Israelis opposed a unilateral attack against Iran without U.S. support.

Source: Rasmussen, Sept. 15, 2012.

The latest Rasmussen national survey published on Saturday shows that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is now slightly ahead of President Barack Obama seven weeks ahead of the Nov. 6 contest.

The poll shows that Mr. Romney is currently the favorite of 48 percent of voters, while Mr. Obama garners the support of 46 percent of the electorate. Four percent (4%) of those questioned admitted that they were still unsure who to vote for.

The survey also found that 49 percent of respondents “at least somewhat” approved of Mr. Obama‘s performance, with only 29 percent expressing a strong degree of approval. Fifty percent (50%) told the pollsters that they “at least somewhat” disapproved of his record. The majority of these (42 percent) strongly disapproved of his overall performance.

Following this week’s anti-American protests in North Africa, the Middle East and parts of Asia, Rasmussen also asked the respondents who they thought was behind the murders of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and another three U.S. diplomats in Benghazi, Libya, last Tuesday. More than half (51 percent) of the respondents said they believed the Libyan government was involved in their death. In addition, 45 percent of the participants said the Obama administration should pull all its diplomatic staff out of countries which have experienced unrest in the past few days.

On Saturday, some U.S. staff were asked to leave Tunisia and to avoid certain areas of Sudan following recent attacks on diplomatic buildings.

“The Department of State ordered the departure of all non-emergency US government personnel from Tunisia, following the attack on the US Embassy in Tunis. The airport in Tunis is open and US citizens are encouraged to depart by commercial air. The State Department also urged US citizens to avoid travel to Darfur, the Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan regions of Sudan,” a statement issued by the department read.

The Rasmussen survey was conducted over a three day period between Sept. 12 and Sept 14 among 1,500 likely voters.

The U.S. economy created far fewer jobs in August than anticipated.
Photo: Andrew Burton / Getty.

The latest job numbers published by the Department of Labor on Friday confirm that the U.S. economy still has a long way to go to recover to its pre-crisis levels. The news comes less than 24 hours after President Barack Obama‘s acceptance speech to the Democratic National Convention.

According to the Department of Labor, a mere 96,000 new jobs were created in August, far below analysts’ expectations. Indeed, analysts had predicted that the economy would add 123,000 posts last month.

Although the unemployment rate fell slightly from 8.3 percent to 8.1 percent over a four-week period, the decrease will do nothing not reassure Mr. Obama or the electorate. Indeed, the data indicates that the fall is the direct result of a smaller labor force. In other words, a large number of Americans – 368,000 to be precise – have become disillusioned and have stopped looking for employment.

Altogether, some 19 million Americans would like a job, although only 12 million are actively looking for work. The remaining 7 million are keen to get a job but have stopped looking for one.

The disappointing figures will deal another blow to Mr. Obama, who asked the electorate last night to be patient with his administration.

“I won’t pretend the path I’m offering is quick and easy. I never have. You didn’t elect me to tell you what you wanted to hear. You elected me to tell you the truth. And the truth is, it will take more than a few years for us to solve challenges that have built up over decades,” Mr. Obama told the convention on Thursday night.

The official unemployment rate has now been above eight percent (8%) for the past 42 weeks.

Condoleezza Rice and John McCain both criticized President Obama's foreign policy this week. Photo: Getty.

Some Republicans took advantage of the GOP National Convention to criticize Barack Obama‘s foreign policy on Wednesday and accused the president of sending the wrong message to the world.

Arizona Sen. John McCain, who was defeated by Mr. Obama in 2008, said that the Obama administration should have helped Iranian dissidents when they started demonstrating against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad back in 2009. He was also critical of Mr. Obama‘s decision to announce a withdrawal date from Afghanistan, which he said “discouraged our friends and emboldened our enemies.”

Former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice was equally critical of the Obama administration, pointing out that the Democrats had failed to deal with Syria adequately while letting China and Russia dictate what the U.S. response to the Syrian uprising should be.

Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney himself accused Mr. Obama of giving “trust where it’s not earned, insult where it’s not deserved and apology where it’s not due.

Source: Gallup, August 2012.

Still, in a recent Gallup poll, 54 percent of respondents said they felt that Mr. Obama would be more competent than Mr. Romney in matters of foreign policy.