Could it get any worse for Romney: Polls show him down 10 points, GOP playing dead

[LuvFindsAndyHardy]

Oh Chance, I put myself in the 'Obama will def win' category so I didn't look like a cunt wagging my finger at my fellow demo-jubbers (thanks for blowing my cover) but, in reality, I don't hold much stock in specific polls (and you've never actually seen me post anything to the contrary) did you REALLY think I would post that without having some specifics in mind?

Exhibits A:

Obama will not be elected again this November 2012.

I predicted that the Republicans would keep the White House in 2004, and I predicted that Democrats would win the White House in 2008.

My prediction is that Obama will lose come November.

No, Obama doesn't have an advantage at all in the electoral college.

Florida, Iowa, Indiana, and North Carolina -- all states that were in blue in 2008 -- will be voting for Romney this year.

Virginia will be easy for Romney to win too.

You may be embarrassed too when Obama doesn't win re-election.

The next President (Romney) can and will repeal this whole thing on Day one in office.

With a Republican president & a Republican congress, Obamacare will be dismantled.

I think this is actually a win for the Republicans. This will energize them even more to win the presidency for Romney in November.

Exhibit B:

Romney will win by a wide margin.

My point, which you kinda proved, is that these back and forth "look at the polls you bastards" threads don't go well. Both sides tend to take what we want from them and ignore what we don't like.

 

[chance1]

To Luv ............

dems a lotta posts and I missed some of them initially so my bad

Ben's idea that Mittens will win big is sorta silly I think - Dick Morris has said that - not sure how recently though - not sure how a tight race now could turn into a wipeout either way personally

not feeling the venom from A - that B has

btw - US vs. Turkey women's volleyball is on - amazing stuff

 

[Benvolio]

Sorry CG your tit for tat doesn't work here.

 

[Benvolio]

Then, too, you are forgeting our not-so-secret weapon. You hate the tea party, but its single most outstanding feature is its ability to energize the base. Time and again. Most recently liberals demonized Chic fil A and the tea party had people lined up around the block.

 

[chance1]

Then, too, you are forgeting our not-so-secret weapon. You hate the tea party, but its single most outstanding feature is its ability to energize the base. Time and again. Most recently liberals demonized Chic fil A and the tea party had people lined up around the block.

The TP can work both ways Ben

the "other" way is to energize the liberal base - while there are many fine TP members, there's many of them who do and say things that are beyond the pale

so the libs get juiced/scared/motivated

and indies - undecideds - seeing these clips of TP individuals espousing hate or intolerance or obstruction .......... say "no way"

my sense is the TP is a net negative

a "secret weapon" would be Mitt Romney actually explaining the American Public just how he will fix this economic mess coherently and specifically

If he has so much money, he should buy a an extended block of time - 15 minutes/30 minutes

where he on camera makes his case not just "unemployment > 8 for 40+ months" or "BO will raise your taxes" etc.

he needs to show people he has substance and will on day 1, improve things for the american people

 

[LuvFindsAndyHardy]

dems a lotta posts and I missed some of them initially so my bad

You don't call me the Duchess of Cuddenpaste for nothin'!!

 

[rareboy]

LOL Energize the base yet alienate the swing and non-partisan voters that really matter? You really have no understanding about how politics works do you?

It slays me that the RNC doesn't get the idea either. Sure you can get the fundies on a bus to shake their fist at the godless gays and you can count on them to vote...........but when your party is so determined to marginalize everyone...including their own moderates, in order to stay true to the ideological purity of the T-Bag Mullahs.........eventually you can kiss any opportunity of winning over swing voters who are either frightened or disgusted with the doctrinaire, take no prisoners approach of the talibangelicals.

 

[Benvolio]

Nice theory but I don't see evidence of it in voting. Remember how the TP defeated the labor bosses in the Wisconsin recall.

 

[chance1]

Nice theory but I don't see evidence of it in voting. Remember how the TP defeated the labor bosses in the Wisconsin recall.

the Dems, lead by the Birthday Boy, tucked tail and bailed on the unions there - and that's a one state thing

and actually what won in WI was that independents sided with Walker

the unions were (accurately) portrayed as not doing what was in the best interest of the masses

 

[Benvolio]

the Dems, lead by the Birthday Boy, tucked tail and bailed on the unions there - and that's a one state thing

and actually what won in WI was that independents sided with Walker

the unions were (accurately) portrayed as not doing what was in the best interest of the masses

My point was, in part, that the TP did not alienate the Independants. Apparently many Democrats voted with them. It is only one election but the have generally successful. I see no evidence they have ever been a net negative.

 

[broadshoulder]

This Londoner is chuckling.....

 

[CowboyBob]

What do you think Romney will be doing this time next year? The failing campaign he's in the middle of right now won't get him elected to anything. He did admit he's unemployed:

Which of his mansions will he be living in?

Browse images: Mitt Romney

All the money wasted so this character could feed his ego.

 

[Benvolio]

Perhaps he will hit absolute rock bottom and go on public charity as a "community organizer".

 

[chrisrobin]

What do you think Romney will be doing this time next year? The failing campaign he's in the middle of right now won't get him elected to anything. He did admit he's unemployed:

Which of his mansions will he be living in?

Browse images: Mitt Romney

All the money wasted so this character could feed his ego.

Perhaps not as funny as Dubya looking under his desk for WMD.* I'll bet the parents of the dead soldiers really got a few yucks
out of that one!

*when he should have been looking up his ass.

 

[CowboyBob]

Perhaps not as funny as Dubya looking under his desk for WMD.* I'll bet the parents of the dead soldiers really got a few yucks
out of that one!

*when he should have been looking up his ass.

Speaking of Dubya..... why isn't he and Cheney invited to appear at the republican convention in Tampa? It appears the republican party are embarrassed of their last republican President and Vice President. War, depression, corruption, torture.

A Romney Presidency would be Bush on steroids.

 

[JB3]

I am personally more interested in if voters/democrats will fall for the playing dead trick the GOP is trying to use to get out of taking responsibility for their incompetence.

- - - Updated - - -



what if it is flawed? you have to accept the counter argument before you draw conclusions, that's its not flawed and that Romney is a loser.

where do republicans draw the line between facts they like and facts they dont? seems to be all over the place.

Romney will lose. Posting a flawed poll that heavily over samples democrats doesn't predict that, and you should not be basing any 'current state of the electorate' conclusions on it.

 

[Kulindahr]

The real issue is that historically no President other than FDR has been reelected with an unemployment rate of 8+%. Every other current economic factor has a similar history as far a presidential elections go. Given the current situation either two things are going on here to explain why the two candidates are fairly neck and neck in a tight election, either Obama is a really, really good President or Romney is a really bad campaigner.

While Obama has been a fairly okay president, he is no FDR and I wouldn't call him a great leader. I don't think he is currently defying the odds on his personality alone and a health care plan that most of the American people still haven't accepted. Though, I do think it is his personality and campaigning skill that is keeping him from sinking.

On the other paw, it is fairly clear that the damage to the Republican brand from the Bush years, Romney's IMHO complete failure to mount an effective campaign as an alternative to Obama, a bloody overlong primary, and an internal bloodletting of RINO hunting devastating party moderates are pretty much the main causes for the Republicans to fail to gain ground in an election that should have been theirs to win.

You forget the House Republicans, whose stench touches all things GOP.

 

[Kulindahr]

And debates are not generally regarded as Mitt's strong point, either. He doesn't like doing them since it exposes him to his track record of frequent ever-changing positions. Not to mention his record of paying/not paying taxes for ten years is bound to be brought up frequently. And obviously he is not going to release his returns ... adding more to the speculation that he's hiding something. The American people will see this and it will resonate that you can't trust him.

The more the spotlight is on him, the worse he usually does. The debates will actually and more-than- likely be his final nail in the coffin.

If Johnson gets into the debates, Romney is going to look like an idiot. Where he actually has reasonable Republican positions, Johnson has better ones, and can actually argue for them. Where he has vague notions about a free market, Johnson has specifics and can argue them coherently. And where Romney dodges and weaves and refuses to be open, Johnson is up front and has nothing to hide. Republicans will start thinking they got the wrong man -- and it's too late to do anything. But more than a few will be pissed enough at getting such a loser that Johnson will suck protest votes from the GOP.

There was a Republican contender who seemed a really good man, but he didn't have any money. I'd have felt comfortable voting for him. What was his name? Gary Johnson, or something? He only attended one debate.

He was only ALLOWED in one debate -- the PTBs kept changing the rules to keep him out.

all polling data has him below 50% approval so not sure where u get "solid" from

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - President Obama Job Approval

> roughly 60% of the public think we're on the wrong track

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - Direction of Country

but he's so darn "likable" - 2/3 like him vs. Romney's 47%

Voters find Obama more likable than Romney, polls show - Los Angeles Times

so the reality (the real reality not your alternative in your head only reality) is that by all accounts he should be free to make millions in speaking fees come January 2013 based on his job performance and lack of ability to convince americans we're on the road to recovery

but .......... he's likable

so much for obama hating which is the narrative of The Walking Dead - racism, etc.

americans are not attaching him to his team's negative campaign - he's teflon BO

The problem with all those ratings is that they exist in limbo, detached from anything concrete. They're comparing someone to what the guy answering the question thinks the world should be like. So in practical terms, they're as useful as a cat with no legs. In order to have value, performance has to be measured against something -- and odds are, if Obama were set against the Republicans in Congress, I bet his approval rating would be around 70%.

That's the one that matters: people may not really approve, but they glance to the side and see the alternative, and decide they prefer a leaky boat to a pile of boards.

 

[Kulindahr]

OBVIOUS COMMENT: What we have here is the wrong end of the horse.

GOP horses come without that other end.

 

[Kulindahr]

Oh Chance, I put myself in the 'Obama will def win' category so I didn't look like a cunt wagging my finger at my fellow demo-jubbers (thanks for blowing my cover) but, in reality, I don't hold much stock in specific polls (and you've never actually seen me post anything to the contrary) did you REALLY think I would post that without having some specifics in mind?

Exhibits A:


Exhibit B:


My point, which you kinda proved, is that these back and forth "look at the polls you bastards" threads don't go well. Both sides tend to take what we want from them and ignore what we don't like.

I read these threads and lose sleep -- I don't see a good future no matter who wins.

Couldn't we just do without a president for four years?