I would say the math favors Romney over Obama, but it will probably be close either way.
Joel Send a noteboard - 01/03/2012 03:37:52 PM
My biggest complaint against Obama is that, in a time of economic and strategic crisis, he got the first real electoral mandate since Reagan, with proportionate Congressional allies, but blew that opportunity. He was too busy trying to be a gracious winner and handout corporate bailouts to implement socialism, even though that WAS what he campaigned on and McCain campaigned against. The public stated its preference and Obama failed to deliver what was promised; now he must live with the consequences as surely as they must.
Hard to dispute. He might have seemed less slimy appealing to union or manufacturing labor, or blue collar workers in general. By explicitly recruiting Democrats to vote in the GOP primary, especially after condemning the practice earlier in his career, he just looks as desperate and devious as you say, because he is.
There just are not many places Obama could go if he did not win OH or FL. Romney would sweep the South (except I disagree VA is a gimme,) and adding OH would put him just 17 EVs short. Obama could (and likely will) match that by picking up the Midwest (except for IN and OH,) PA and NM, but then what? The remaining states are VA, NV, CO and NH, all but one of which are likely wins for Romney, and the other (VA) would still leave Obama 4 EVs short.
Incidentally, I do not think VA was a fluke, even though I did think it out of reach for Obama in 2008. He won the state simply because living in MD or DC has become so unappealing and/or impractical for people working in the latter that they are moving to VA in droves. That dynamic has not changed much in the past four years. I do not think Obama can count on Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill and a large black population to give him NC again, but I could easily see him winning VA. The problem is that is not enough; even sweeping the Midwest (again, except IN and OH,) winning PA and NM he would still end up needing a win in NV, CO or NH, none of which seem likely. He may have a shot in NH, and that would be enough, but I would have to say Romney is still the favorite even there.
If Romney is the nominee, Robamacare is essentially irrelevant; Romney can promise to repeal it his first day in office until he is blue in the face, but no one will forget he both invented and wrote a book urging the federal government adopt it. In terms of the Mideast and national security, Obama green lighting the hits on bin Laden and al Awlaki will probably trump his handling of Iran or Syria except with people who have never voted for him and never will. Unless Iran sets off a nuke, that will be a non-issue, rightly or not. I imagine your earlier assessment that the election will turn on the economy remains accurate, and if the recovery is lagging in FL, Romney telling everyone about his four vehicles (including two Caddies) is not helping him much more in OH than it did in MI. Expect that infamous picture of a smiling Romney stuffed with corporate raider money to saturate OH over the next year as unions make their last stand.
Well, a few days ago I did mention that if Ron Paul is angling for the Vice Presidency he is as crazy as everyone thinks, that Romney has learned the lesson of McCain sacrificing his moderate credibility by adding Palin, and Paul would be Palin to the nth degree. Of the VPs you named, how many ultimately won the presidency? Before Bush the last one was Nixon (elected more because of Wallace than anything he did as Ikes VP) or LBJ. The definitive quotes on the Vice Presidency are from Nelson Rockefeller ("I never wanted to be VICE president of anything") and Cactus Jack Garner ("the vice presidency is not worth a bucket of warm shit.")
I think Santorum hurt himself (as usual) with his play to Democrats. Obviously, in a general election crossovers are encouraged, but this looked like a ploy to get people who were going to vote Obama in the general election to vote Santorum as a way of denying Romney the win. That is not only desperate, it's also probably the most underhanded play of the whole primary season.
Hard to dispute. He might have seemed less slimy appealing to union or manufacturing labor, or blue collar workers in general. By explicitly recruiting Democrats to vote in the GOP primary, especially after condemning the practice earlier in his career, he just looks as desperate and devious as you say, because he is.
Based on the map, Romney has a good chance to win the Presidency, particularly if a few swing states are mad enough at Obama.
I think both Florida and Ohio are likely to vote Republican, the former because the Jewish vote will either stay home or vote Romney given Obama's stance on Israel and the latter because the economy is worse there than in other areas and the "recovery" has yet to be felt. The whole of the South will likely go Republican (we all know that VA and NC voting for Obama was a complete one-time affair, or rather, anyone who has ever spent time there for an appreciable period knows that). Add in Missouri and it's bye bye Barry (time to open the champagne).
I think both Florida and Ohio are likely to vote Republican, the former because the Jewish vote will either stay home or vote Romney given Obama's stance on Israel and the latter because the economy is worse there than in other areas and the "recovery" has yet to be felt. The whole of the South will likely go Republican (we all know that VA and NC voting for Obama was a complete one-time affair, or rather, anyone who has ever spent time there for an appreciable period knows that). Add in Missouri and it's bye bye Barry (time to open the champagne).
There just are not many places Obama could go if he did not win OH or FL. Romney would sweep the South (except I disagree VA is a gimme,) and adding OH would put him just 17 EVs short. Obama could (and likely will) match that by picking up the Midwest (except for IN and OH,) PA and NM, but then what? The remaining states are VA, NV, CO and NH, all but one of which are likely wins for Romney, and the other (VA) would still leave Obama 4 EVs short.
Incidentally, I do not think VA was a fluke, even though I did think it out of reach for Obama in 2008. He won the state simply because living in MD or DC has become so unappealing and/or impractical for people working in the latter that they are moving to VA in droves. That dynamic has not changed much in the past four years. I do not think Obama can count on Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill and a large black population to give him NC again, but I could easily see him winning VA. The problem is that is not enough; even sweeping the Midwest (again, except IN and OH,) winning PA and NM he would still end up needing a win in NV, CO or NH, none of which seem likely. He may have a shot in NH, and that would be enough, but I would have to say Romney is still the favorite even there.
Things that could further hurt Obama include a stalled recovery, lingering high unemployment (which Bernanke warned about today), perceived US weakness over Iran's nuclear program and/or the Syrian crisis, an overturn of Obamacare in the Supreme Court, or just further missteps in the everyday things.
If Romney is the nominee, Robamacare is essentially irrelevant; Romney can promise to repeal it his first day in office until he is blue in the face, but no one will forget he both invented and wrote a book urging the federal government adopt it. In terms of the Mideast and national security, Obama green lighting the hits on bin Laden and al Awlaki will probably trump his handling of Iran or Syria except with people who have never voted for him and never will. Unless Iran sets off a nuke, that will be a non-issue, rightly or not. I imagine your earlier assessment that the election will turn on the economy remains accurate, and if the recovery is lagging in FL, Romney telling everyone about his four vehicles (including two Caddies) is not helping him much more in OH than it did in MI. Expect that infamous picture of a smiling Romney stuffed with corporate raider money to saturate OH over the next year as unions make their last stand.
As for Ron Paul, I'm surprised you haven't forwarded a conspiracy theory that he's there to divert potential third party supporters from someone else and help get Romney elected, and that he was playing that game from the beginning. Of course, he might be trying to gun for VP or at least some position of influence in a Romney White House. In that sense, you are wrong about saying there's no prize for second place. Historically, there always have been prizes for those sorts of things (George H.W. Bush in 1980, Al Gore in 1992, both Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton in 2008 are the most recent examples I can think of).
Well, a few days ago I did mention that if Ron Paul is angling for the Vice Presidency he is as crazy as everyone thinks, that Romney has learned the lesson of McCain sacrificing his moderate credibility by adding Palin, and Paul would be Palin to the nth degree. Of the VPs you named, how many ultimately won the presidency? Before Bush the last one was Nixon (elected more because of Wallace than anything he did as Ikes VP) or LBJ. The definitive quotes on the Vice Presidency are from Nelson Rockefeller ("I never wanted to be VICE president of anything") and Cactus Jack Garner ("the vice presidency is not worth a bucket of warm shit.")
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
This message last edited by Joel on 01/03/2012 at 03:38:23 PM
Now That Romney Is Officially the Republican Presidential Nominee: Pick the President!
29/02/2012 08:29:02 PM
- 1246 Views
I agree Romney will be the candidate.
29/02/2012 08:54:52 PM
- 642 Views
I would say the math favors Romney over Obama, but it will probably be close either way.
01/03/2012 03:37:52 PM
- 692 Views
I have never understood the point of the Electoral College.
29/02/2012 11:39:11 PM
- 693 Views
You don't think like a politician then
01/03/2012 12:38:36 AM
- 733 Views
I certainly hadn't considered much of that. I'm glad you posted it. *NM*
01/03/2012 07:15:03 AM
- 310 Views
I also have not seen most of that mentioned in the popular vs. electoral debate.
01/03/2012 02:34:31 PM
- 619 Views
a bit simplistic and unrealistic
02/03/2012 11:44:02 PM
- 661 Views
When illustrating a point realism is not required and simplicity is a plus
03/03/2012 03:04:26 AM
- 677 Views
I have a couple quibbles.
03/03/2012 05:23:46 AM
- 702 Views
Oh, certainly, I'm over-generalizing but I was already getting long-winded
03/03/2012 06:52:04 AM
- 667 Views
What a bunch of waffle!
03/03/2012 10:47:19 AM
- 802 Views
Also I don't like this refrain that implies only the POTUS vote matters
03/03/2012 03:29:58 AM
- 822 Views
IMHO, parliaments choosing prime ministers is LESS democratic than the electoral college.
03/03/2012 05:57:41 AM
- 624 Views
Re: IMHO, parliaments choosing prime ministers is LESS democratic than the electoral college.
03/03/2012 07:02:30 AM
- 660 Views
*is learning*
04/03/2012 09:49:42 PM
- 652 Views
Re: *is learning*
04/03/2012 09:56:16 PM
- 665 Views
Re: *is learning*
05/03/2012 12:08:08 AM
- 703 Views
You could imitate the French.
07/03/2012 10:40:16 PM
- 635 Views
That seems... unlikely....
08/03/2012 03:03:54 PM
- 636 Views
It does, doesn't it?
08/03/2012 06:11:08 PM
- 834 Views
After I thought about it more, I realized France and the US are not so different in that respect.
08/03/2012 08:51:03 PM
- 614 Views
More similar than the other major Western democracies at least, agreed.
08/03/2012 09:32:55 PM
- 592 Views
I did not realize lack of a parliamentary majority dictated his cabinet.
09/03/2012 12:27:31 AM
- 669 Views
I don't know much about Norwegian politics, but you seem to be wrong.
03/03/2012 06:18:08 PM
- 672 Views
Do you happen to have that link, please?
03/03/2012 06:46:31 PM
- 555 Views
Sure.
03/03/2012 06:58:07 PM
- 728 Views
Guess we did not read far enough.
03/03/2012 10:38:07 PM
- 671 Views
Yeah, you have to know a few things about European politics...
03/03/2012 11:49:44 PM
- 873 Views
Hey, man, I am an AMERICAN: I do not HAVE to know ANYTHING!
04/03/2012 11:46:57 PM
- 893 Views
Re: Yeah, you have to know a few things about European politics...
05/03/2012 06:56:24 AM
- 674 Views
The thing is, regions often have national relevance far greater than their populations would suggest
05/03/2012 10:21:26 AM
- 626 Views
Re: Yeah, you have to know a few things about European politics...
08/03/2012 07:11:12 PM
- 625 Views
Many valid reasons, including those Isaac cited.
02/03/2012 02:26:37 AM
- 771 Views
Most states are ignored anyway
02/03/2012 11:56:12 PM
- 849 Views
Only because and to the extent they have already committed themselves.
03/03/2012 03:41:39 AM
- 697 Views
Why would we do something logical? Dude, you're utterly ridiculous. *NM*
05/03/2012 04:53:38 PM
- 365 Views
I'm kind of sad- does this mean Santorum won't be providing wonderful sound bites anymore?
01/03/2012 02:22:31 PM
- 613 Views
Romney or Obama, either way, America loses. *NM*
02/03/2012 01:10:26 AM
- 440 Views
Hard to dispute that either; six of one, half a dozen of the other.
02/03/2012 01:38:07 AM
- 596 Views
I'd agree hope and change was extremely unrealistic
02/03/2012 11:58:57 PM
- 588 Views
Well, you know my story there; I voted for Obama and got Hillary (at best.)
03/03/2012 01:43:20 AM
- 608 Views
Update: Despite rules requiring they be split, the MI GOP is giving Romney BOTH statewide delegates.
02/03/2012 11:10:56 PM
- 699 Views
Romney is damaged
02/03/2012 11:27:33 PM
- 606 Views
Obama is rather damaged also; it will probably come down to FL and OH, yet again.
03/03/2012 02:23:53 AM
- 710 Views
I'm hoping for Rubio as VP... then FL probably won't matter
03/03/2012 04:28:08 AM
- 595 Views
You should put that on your license plates.
03/03/2012 06:41:34 AM
- 720 Views
And what are you basing all of this on?
03/03/2012 09:54:06 PM
- 707 Views
The closeness of several states when Obama was far more popular, and UTs heavily Mormon neighbors.
03/03/2012 11:44:06 PM
- 659 Views
Wrong
04/03/2012 08:08:56 AM
- 782 Views
Higher turnout magnifies the Mormon effect.
04/03/2012 08:08:09 PM
- 817 Views
Your reasoning is flawed and if you can't see it there is no hope for you
05/03/2012 11:39:04 PM
- 723 Views
Yeah, I think we had that conversation already, several times, in fact.
07/03/2012 05:36:45 AM
- 561 Views
Do you have any knowledge of statistics at all?
07/03/2012 09:04:15 PM
- 720 Views
I hate this message board
07/03/2012 09:06:30 PM
- 516 Views
It would probably help if you deleted the stuff from two, three posts back?
07/03/2012 09:25:40 PM
- 632 Views