Dem pollsters: It’s Hillary time

posted at 8:40 am on November 21, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

For Democratic Party pollsters Patrick Caddell and Douglas Schoen, the Obama administration has become a political Amityville Horror.  Barack Obama’s approval numbers have plunged, and his options for campaign strategy in 2012 range from going negative to, er, going medieval.  Caddell and Schoen offer the same advice to Obama as the house gave in Amityville Horrorget out:

Certainly, Mr. Obama could still win re-election in 2012. Even with his all-time low job approval ratings (and even worse ratings on handling the economy) the president could eke out a victory in November. But the kind of campaign required for the president’s political survival would make it almost impossible for him to govern—not only during the campaign, but throughout a second term.

Put simply, it seems that the White House has concluded that if the president cannot run on his record, he will need to wage the most negative campaign in history to stand any chance. With his job approval ratings below 45% overall and below 40% on the economy, the president cannot affirmatively make the case that voters are better off now than they were four years ago. He—like everyone else—knows that they are worse off. …

One year ago in these pages, we warned that if President Obama continued down his overly partisan road, the nation would be “guaranteed two years of political gridlock at a time when we can ill afford it.” The result has been exactly as we predicted: stalemate in Washington, fights over the debt ceiling, an inability to tackle the debt and deficit, and paralysis exacerbating market turmoil and economic decline.

If President Obama were to withdraw, he would put great pressure on the Republicans to come to the table and negotiate—especially if the president singularly focused in the way we have suggested on the economy, job creation, and debt and deficit reduction. By taking himself out of the campaign, he would change the dynamic from who is more to blame—George W. Bush or Barack Obama?—to a more constructive dialogue about our nation’s future.

Who would come to the party’s rescue?  You get three guesses, and the first two don’t count:

He should abandon his candidacy for re-election in favor of a clear alternative, one capable not only of saving the Democratic Party, but more important, of governing effectively and in a way that preserves the most important of the president’s accomplishments. He should step aside for the one candidate who would become, by acclamation, the nominee of the Democratic Party: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

We’ve covered this scenario a few times here at Hot Air, too.  Such a move could very well produce a movement of suburban and rural Democrats back into the fold, the voters that Obama has driven off.  However, there would also be a danger of alienating the urban progressives who still see Obama as their best hope for gaining a policy advantage, and who do not recall the Bill Clinton administration with as much fondness as other Democrats and the media do, thanks to his triangulation on welfare reform and spending policies.

As Chris Cillizza reports this morning, that urban-progressive base is still significant for Obama:

One of the most persistent story lines for the president has been that the liberal left has grown increasingly dissatisfied with his actions (or inaction) on some of its priorities — including single-payer health insurance, the extension of the George W. Bush tax cuts and whether to close the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

But an examination of the polling data among key subgroups that constitute Obama’s base makes clear that he has as much support from them as any modern president seeking a second term.

“There is one immutable fact about President Obama’s reelection chances: Nobody has a more solid 44 percent base than he does,” Democratic pollster Peter Hart wrote in a not-entirely-uncritical memo assessing the state of political affairs a year out from the election.

As evidence, Hart noted that in the latest NBC-Wall Street Journal poll, Obama takes 44 percent in a three-way race with former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee and Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) running as an independent; has a 44 percent job approval rating; and has a 45 percent positive personal rating. In the same survey, 45 percent said they “probably” will vote for Obama in 2012.

At the heart of the president’s enduring strength among his base are African Americans who have never wavered in any meaningful way after 95 percent of black voters opted for the Illinois senator in 2008.

I’d be careful about putting too much stock in the media polls, whose partisan skew in sampling makes them fairly suspect (and which always gets corrected in the final poll or two before an election, mysteriously), but it still shows that Obama has a significant base of support.  Coming as it does from African-American voters, there would be a big question as to just how transferable that support would be to Hillary Clinton.  If these voters see the Democratic Party pushing out the first African-American President in favor of the wife of the last Democratic President, how enthused will they be to come out and vote in November 2012 for Hillary?  I’d guess … not terribly so.

All of this depends on one more factor, which is Obama’s willingness to withdraw.  I doubt seriously that even a march down Pennsylvania Avenue by Democratic  Party elders to tell Obama that he’s through would get this President to pull an LBJ or Truman and pass on another term.  In other words, the horror continues.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Seriously? We’re still calling Pat Caddell a Democrat with a straight face? Have you EVER heard him say something supportive of a Democrat position?

YYZ on November 21, 2011 at 8:44 AM

All of this depends on one more factor, which is Obama’s willingness to withdraw.

Ed, I think that one sentence means you wasted a lot of time typing and linking. :-)

Washington Nearsider on November 21, 2011 at 8:44 AM

Ed, you gotta say it Eddie Murphy style

cmsinaz on November 21, 2011 at 8:47 AM

YYZ on November 21, 2011 at 8:44 AM

He’s allowed to call himself anything he wants. Do you complain about Republican pundits who go off the reservation?

Cindy Munford on November 21, 2011 at 8:47 AM

I’ve seen 5 “Obama 2012″ bumpter stickers here in Charleston. All them were on cars driven by “urban” people.

SouthernGent on November 21, 2011 at 8:47 AM

Caddell has become quite disenchanted by the “progressive” turn that the Left has taken. Why he doesn’t see Hillary! as part of that crew is beyond me.

This is the same Hillary!, who along with her girlfriends Susan Rice and Samantha Powers sent us into a costly Libyan adventure to make North Africa safe for Islamist hegemony. No thanks.

Like her arch-enemy, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary! would like to impose Leftist indoctrination from the cradle in her idealized village.

onlineanalyst on November 21, 2011 at 8:49 AM

She was the Democrats savior in ’08 as well. Morris had her elected as president 12 months out from the election. Rush was promoting o as a means to reduce PIAPS chances. Be prepaired for “four more years”. I hope the republic can withstand it.

chicken thief on November 21, 2011 at 8:51 AM

The horror continues.

And, will continue. When faced with his own blunders, delusions and ineptitude, Obama is known to double-down.

Fallon on November 21, 2011 at 8:52 AM

However, there would also be a danger of alienating the urban progressives who still see Obama as their best hope for gaining a policy advantage, and who do not recall the Bill Clinton administration with as much fondness as other Democrats and the media do, thanks to his triangulation on welfare reform and spending policies.

Memo to urban progressives and conservative Republicans:

Don’t confuse Bill Clinton with Hillary Clinton. Bill was a ‘moderate’ to some extent (compared to what’s left of the old Democrat Party). Hillary was, and still is, a hard left Democrat who would not be much, if any, of an improvement over Obama.

What I can’t understand is why Pat Caddell (who is very bright, and totally gets that Obama is a Marxist) doesn’t get this, and still clings to the ragged threads of what’s left of the old Democrat Party.

Buy Danish on November 21, 2011 at 8:52 AM

Out of the frying pan …

OldEnglish on November 21, 2011 at 8:53 AM

wait. you think that with corruption/unions/fraud (but i repeat myself) that Obama can’t win?

I think he can win. he controls the media.

kelley in virginia on November 21, 2011 at 8:54 AM

Yes he does fallon

cmsinaz on November 21, 2011 at 8:55 AM

OT: I just witnessed John Kerry, who served in Vietnam, admit on F&F that the Democrats cut over $500B from medicare when enacting Obamacare.

fossten on November 21, 2011 at 8:55 AM

The only difference between “O” and PIAPS is a Y chromozone. They are both commited Marxists.

chicken thief on November 21, 2011 at 8:57 AM

Caddell expects Zero to toss himself under the bus for the good of the party? No wonder he can’t get a campaign gig.

Kissmygrits on November 21, 2011 at 8:59 AM

I’ve seen 5 “Obama 2012″ bumpter stickers here in Charleston. All them were on cars driven by “urban” people.

SouthernGent on November 21, 2011 at 8:47 AM

Skin color politics I assume?

csdeven on November 21, 2011 at 9:01 AM

OT: Earlier I saw Kyl interviewed by an atractive CNN talking head. She kept digging at him about how obstinate GOP members were. (BTW: the liberal media seems to be piggybacking on the 60 Minutes segment on Nordquist to place all blame on the GOP.) Kyl patiently tried to explain to her the idea of tax reform in which all rates are lowered by high-income earners would have their deductions trimmed back.

Not good enough for her. In a telling remark, she said, “I know I’m not going to convince you….” To which Kyl rightfully responded, “It’s not your job to convince me of anything. Your job is to inform your viewers.”

It was classic. I have to believe it’ll wind up in a Newsbusters post.

BuckeyeSam on November 21, 2011 at 9:07 AM

Yes, Glenn Beck could be right on the prediction as well. Just repeating for emphasis.

NickDeringer on November 21, 2011 at 9:08 AM

He should step aside


Haaaaaa!!!!….
…….Haaaaaa!!!

…sure doesn’t seem to know Barack “The One” Obama very well.

Baxter Greene on November 21, 2011 at 9:11 AM

He’s allowed to call himself anything he wants. Do you complain about Republican pundits who go off the reservation?

I think it’s refreshing when pundits go off the reservation, left and right. It makes them more interesting.

But how far off the reservation and for how long do you have to go before you should stop calling yourself a Democrat or Republican?

YYZ on November 21, 2011 at 9:11 AM

So, the only alternative the demrats have to one Marxist, is a different Marxist. Nice.

Meanwhile, the GOP puts forward a couple of hard right conservatives, an idiot Texas governor, an inexperienced businessman, and a Washington insider….none who can win because they do not appeal to the indies. Meanwhile, we have a moderate conservative who does appeal to the indies and will beat Obama. But that isn’t good enough for a small minority and they would rather watch the country burn down under 4 more years of Obama than violate their “principles” (hahaha!). All because they mistakenly believe that it would “teach the country a lesson that ONLY they currently understand”. The arrogance is stifling. And idiotic.

csdeven on November 21, 2011 at 9:14 AM

OT: I just witnessed John Kerry, who served in Vietnam, admit on F&F that the Democrats cut over $500B from medicare when enacting Obamacare.
fossten on November 21, 2011 at 8:55 AM

Yes, and Republicans keep failing to remind Kerry and the Dems that there are also humongous tax increases already written into ObamaCare. This is a huge communication fail…

Buy Danish on November 21, 2011 at 9:17 AM

BuckeyeSam on November 21, 2011 at 9:07 AM

LOVE IT!! We meed more push back.

Cindy Munford on November 21, 2011 at 9:18 AM

Doubt it.

Perhaps Joe Biden has a secret (Biden for Prez in 2012) plan in the works; He sketched out a bumper sticker or two and a slogan “Four letters spell out the next President: J-O-E).

Hillary would want to be nominated by the Convention.

Obama has a HUGE ego and will run for President. Just so after his defeat he and Michelle can finally say publically that (non-black) Americans are racists.
But I do think Obama now sees that he does not like the job of being President and realizes he does not have what it takes and he really does not understand or like what America is all about. But he likes the perks of the job.

albill on November 21, 2011 at 9:21 AM

Yes Hillary could pretend that she is a uniter after Obama has effectively ended that dream but how does she answer the Obamacare question? That’s where the whole democrat party argument falls apart for 2012. They have no interest in anything involving repealing what they shoved down people’s throats. This would shatter the dream of independents who say that would support Hilliary before the REALITY of a campiagn that she is also a liberal/socialist for government health care and BIG government.

Hilliary cannot run convincely on the imaginary platform people have projected onto her. It’s Obama part II with people knowing how part I of projecting hope onto a candidate ends.

Conan on November 21, 2011 at 9:21 AM

Hillary? Seriously?! Does America really want another Clinton in the White House? While they have not been living together cnce HE left office, I am sure he would not hesitate to move back into the White House if she became President! “Hide your interns, ‘Slick Willey’ is coming back to the White House!” Good grief! This woman was so ‘stupid’, if we are to believe it, that she was duped for decades by her husband who raped, exusally harrassed, and had afairs with women for decades – from Willey to Lewinsky! If she is truly that gullible and can be so easily duped, do we really want her as President. and the last thing I want is another Socialist, ex-hippy in the White House. While she would be an upgrade from Obama (then again the Democrats’ MASCOT would be an upgrade), no thank you!

easyt65 on November 21, 2011 at 9:22 AM

Billy Jeff as First Lady…FTW…er..

ted c on November 21, 2011 at 9:25 AM

Why do leftists think that a white person can implement the same failed Marxist policies as a black person, and have better success?

MNHawk on November 21, 2011 at 9:27 AM

I have seen a mere handful of 0bama 2012 stickers.

In Austin, Texas—San FranFreako on the Colorado itself.

Sekhmet on November 21, 2011 at 9:28 AM

However, there would also be a danger of alienating the urban progressives who still see Obama as their best hope for gaining a policy advantage

The hard left will never abandon the Democrats. Ever.

John Deaux on November 21, 2011 at 9:28 AM

I’ve seen 5 “Obama 2012″ bumpter stickers here in Charleston. All them were on cars driven by “urban” people.

SouthernGent on November 21, 2011 at 8:47 AM

I’ve seen one Obama 2012 sticker so far, right next to a union sticker. I wanted to tell the guy he was a walking cliche’ but thought better of it. He might have thought the word meant something sexual.

Extrafishy on November 21, 2011 at 9:34 AM

Evan Bayh.

Key West Reader on November 21, 2011 at 9:39 AM

More bad news for Obama (and good news for Romney). Sorry, have to rub that part in:)

Buy Danish on November 21, 2011 at 9:39 AM

Evan Bayh.
Key West Reader on November 21, 2011 at 9:39 AM

He voted for ObamaCare and then quit. Rah Rah.

Buy Danish on November 21, 2011 at 9:40 AM

First off exactly how would Hillary Clinton be less partisan, and liberal than Obama? It’s a change of no really significance. If the democrats tried bait and switch they would lose a lot of the folks they managed to cobble together through “identity” politics. Like for instance Obama’s “urban” base aka black folks. The media can’t even manage to utter that Obama enjoys support from black people in the democrat party? How would they react to Obama, being pushed out of the way for Hillary Clinton?Hillary Clinton would be surrounded by the same people Obama is surrounded by now – Clinton retreads.

Dr Evil on November 21, 2011 at 9:44 AM

He voted for ObamaCare and then quit. Rah Rah.

Buy Danish on November 21, 2011 at 9:40 AM

Yeah, I know… remember the “war chest” he took with him?

Key West Reader on November 21, 2011 at 9:44 AM

At the heart of the president’s enduring strength among his base are African Americans who have never wavered in any meaningful way after 95 percent of black voters opted for the Illinois senator in 2008.

That is just completely pitiful, if it’s accurate (and I’m assuming it is accurate).

If and when someone who may be of the (can’t write the accurate word here so I’ll write, “Black” instead) race can see the forest for the trees and make a realistic evaluation of a con artist incompetent such as Barack Obama and vote for someone else, well, that’s the day that everyone must retire or abandon the negative assumptions about many of them not being of equal measure with others.

If and when they continue to support Obama by race it simply indicates a lack of ability to think and reason clearly. Don’t they all profess to just hate those “racists” of other races? Why in the world cannot they self-evaluate their own racism?

Lourdes on November 21, 2011 at 9:48 AM

The article looks like a trial balloon to test democrat’s loyalty to Obama, to see if the party will rally around Obama.

Dr Evil on November 21, 2011 at 9:50 AM

First off exactly how would Hillary Clinton be less partisan, and liberal than Obama? It’s a change of no really significance…

Dr Evil on November 21, 2011 at 9:44 AM

I can’t recall just why there was a rejection of Hillary Clinton and such an embrace of Barack Obama (and was that due to his race that he was elevated over her and hers). I agree that there’s little difference between the two as Progressives/Communists and Democrats.

But there’s little difference between Hillary’s and John McCain’s, based upon what McCain himself had to say about a comparison between him and her, his and hers.

But I still can’t recall why there was that switch to Obama over Hillary last election by the Left. It was such a terrible election, ushered in such awful times, such a harbinger of awful it was…

Lourdes on November 21, 2011 at 9:51 AM

Sekhmet on November 21, 2011 at 9:28 AM

I’m a bit skeptical of those things since 2008. I’ve written about it before but here in Jacksonville, there were zero Obama signs on the roadsides, some in yards but for the most part the landscape was riddled with McCain and Ron Paul signs. Until election day. Holy cow, it was like it had rained signs. It had to be some kind of strategy and it was both effective and creepy.

Cindy Munford on November 21, 2011 at 9:52 AM

The article looks like a trial balloon to test democrat’s loyalty to Obama, to see if the party will rally around Obama.

Dr Evil on November 21, 2011 at 9:50 AM

I’m not falling for the “hey, my leg is wounded and I’m very weak” strategy by the Democrats. It’s a ploy.

Lourdes on November 21, 2011 at 9:53 AM

Sekhmet on November 21, 2011 at 9:28 AM

I’m a bit skeptical of those things since 2008. I’ve written about it before but here in Jacksonville, there were zero Obama signs on the roadsides, some in yards but for the most part the landscape was riddled with McCain and Ron Paul signs. Until election day. Holy cow, it was like it had rained signs. It had to be some kind of strategy and it was both effective and creepy.

Cindy Munford on November 21, 2011 at 9:52 AM

I see you noticed, too.

Never trust that ACT of a lull by the Left. It just means they’re devoting more attention to planning while trying to look innocent of guile. Which they never are, innocent of guile.

Lourdes on November 21, 2011 at 9:55 AM

Dream on, Cadell.

rrpjr on November 21, 2011 at 9:58 AM

But more about Hillary Clinton:

Somehow I just can’t envision her generating enough energy to actually appear like she’s a fresh start for the nation.

How many times has she said she isn’t interested in running Ahhhgain? She may backtrack Ahhhgain on her statements but I can’t see her magically becoming an Energizer Bunny any time soon.

For that matter, neither can I see Obama doing so.

Obama’s one and only leg on his one and only stool of support is that “urban contingency” mixed in with the unions. It’s a racial-animus about Capitalism and a demand for increased Marxism/Communism based upn racial preferences (their own primarily). Let’s be frank, that’s what Obama is about and always has been.

Lourdes on November 21, 2011 at 10:00 AM

he will need to wage the most negative campaign in history to stand any chance.

Their real fear is that such a campaign will destroy the Democratic Party. And it will.

As for the negative campaign; that’s a given. What else does Barry have to run on? That HE killed BinLaden?

GarandFan on November 21, 2011 at 10:07 AM

The arrogance is stifling. And idiotic.

csdeven on November 21, 2011 at 9:14 AM

Somebody left the irony on

AZfederalist on November 21, 2011 at 10:21 AM

But I still can’t recall why there was that switch to Obama over Hillary last election by the Left. It was such a terrible election, ushered in such awful times, such a harbinger of awful it was…

Lourdes on November 21, 2011 at 9:51 AM

I think it started with celebrities, music producers, directors etc out in Hollywood- this constituency supported the Clintons. They were complaining about Bill Clinton, the Clintions in general, their baggage, and Clinton fatigue in 2008. I think the leftist out in La La Land felt Hillary Clinton wouldn’t be far enough to the left? I know the amount of slobbering all over Obama got to an embarrassing point, by celebutards. There are you tube videos of Demi Moore, and the lead singer of the Red Hot Chili Peppers, just gushing sycophantic nonsense over a green ambitious opportunistic pol….but gee he was bi racial so that’s all that mattered/

Dr Evil on November 21, 2011 at 10:26 AM

“make it almost impossible for him to govern”

Is there anything about him that makes it possible for him to govern?

That’s the real question.

NoDonkey on November 21, 2011 at 10:26 AM

And, will continue. When faced with his own blunders, delusions and ineptitude, Obama is known to double-down.

Fallon on November 21, 2011 at 8:52 AM

He also has a long history of fleeing.

parteagirl on November 21, 2011 at 10:43 AM

I can’t recall just why there was a rejection of Hillary Clinton and such an embrace of Barack Obama (and was that due to his race that he was elevated over her and hers). I agree that there’s little difference between the two as Progressives/Communists and Democrats.

Lourdes on November 21, 2011 at 9:51 AM

Her vote for the Iraq War was unforgivable to the base, plus her refusal to admit she was wrong (according to the base). Then Obama and his media made such a huge deal about how he made a speech against it, and it solidified Hillary as a hawk.

This is why I think Romney is our Hillary; he refuses to admit what the base wants to hear – that Romneycare was wrong and he made a mistake. If he loses the nomination, his refusing to make such an admittance will be one of the key reasons.

yogi41 on November 21, 2011 at 10:47 AM

“make it almost impossible for him to govern”

Is there anything about him that makes it possible for him to govern?

That’s the real question.

NoDonkey on November 21, 2011 at 10:26 AM

We saw what happened in 2009-2010 when it was possible for Obama to govern. The American people need to make it IMPOSSIBLE for him to govern.

Steve Z on November 21, 2011 at 10:51 AM

Anthony Kiedis (RHCP) – The Presidential Pledge

The cult worship of a green politician is a huge turn off, but the democrats don’t see it, they were marketing their American Idol president.

I have read that the kids just aren’t as excited as they were the first time. Hopey/Changey not exactly what they thought it was going to be.

There was a woman who said, that Obama was going to pay her mortgage, and fill her gas tank etc….the kids protesting now want to have all their student loans forgiven. This is how the left viewed Obama, he was going to be their Santa Claus. Obama would wave his hand and calm the seas. Obama would raise his hand and climate change would retreat. That last one would be easy, because there is no AGW they could declare that they changed the trend anytime they wanted by using factual data :)

It’s not just an extremely naive point of view of how the world, and American politics works, it’s a little stupid. Which brings us full circle to the public school system, and the dumbing down of America by our government. They didn’t just hit pay dirt, they are going to make those kids pay for those lousy degrees in art lit.

Dr Evil on November 21, 2011 at 10:51 AM

Wasn’t this part of the deal for her to step aside a few years back? Let him be the bad cop and she comes in as the good cop with “clean hands”(by comparison) to pretend moderation.

The socialist’s plan: two steps down, pause for one, two more steps down -Hillary is but the pause and make no mistake -so would Romney be but a pause -never reversing the destruction to freedom.

Don L on November 21, 2011 at 10:52 AM

Obama will win in 2012:

1. We can’t manage to rustle up a palatable candidate
2. The left is bat $#!+ stoopit
3. He’s has a 598% favorability rating with the graveyard demographic

Laura in Maryland on November 21, 2011 at 11:06 AM

But that isn’t good enough for a small minority and they would rather watch the country burn down under 4 more years of Obama than violate their “principles” (hahaha!). All because they mistakenly believe that it would “teach the country a lesson that ONLY they currently understand”. The arrogance is stifling. And idiotic.

csdeven on November 21, 2011 at 9:14 AM

..Louie, beginning, beautiful friendship, etc.

The War Planner on November 21, 2011 at 11:09 AM

Hillary didn’t lose via the Primaries, she had an actual majority of delegates from them. What she lost was the Super-Delegates… the true Party Elite. They got the tingles for Obama.

The problem for the D’s is that if they nominate Hillary, her track record of keeping a long memory on her enemies puts them all in serious trouble. If they have to come groveling to her and admit that going for Obama was a mistake, then she might be mollified. Maybe. They might even talk themselves into it. Although I the Elite are insane, they aren’t so crazy as to give Hillary run of the place… which is what she would demand.

I consider this delicious irony on the part of the D-Elites.

Surviving it, however, is another problem completely.

ajacksonian on November 21, 2011 at 11:11 AM

Billy Jeff as First Lady…FTW…er..

ted c on November 21, 2011 at 9:25 AM

Male lesbian.

listens2glenn on November 21, 2011 at 11:15 AM

Will any other potential Democrat candidate want the nomination this time around?
Obamacare is a huge issue.
How many voters could be convinced that Hillary is going to overturn it?

listens2glenn on November 21, 2011 at 11:22 AM

This is why I think Romney is our Hillary; he refuses to admit what the base wants to hear – that Romneycare was wrong and he made a mistake. If he loses the nomination, his refusing to make such an admittance will be one of the key reasons.

yogi41 on November 21, 2011 at 10:47 AM

Well, good luck with that delusion of yours.

Romney, with his faults, is miles better for the Presidency than ever Barack Obama OR Hillary Clinton ever could be.

Good effort, though, at changing the subject and knifing the GOP.

Lourdes on November 21, 2011 at 11:36 AM

Romney is our Hillary; he refuses to admit what the base wants to hear – that Romneycare was wrong and he made a mistake. If he loses the nomination, his refusing to make such an admittance will be one of the key reasons.

yogi41 on November 21, 2011 at 10:47 AM

What he did for Massachusetts (or signed off on) worked for Massachusetts voters adequately enough for them to continue what was done there.

But Romney’s said he’d ‘undo’ Obamacare as to nationalized healthcare.

I don’t know how many times he has to say that to have some people listen to what he’s saying.

Massachusetts — “Romneycare” — is a state system. Even Romney’s said that it doesn’t work and won’t work nationally and he doesn’t intend for it to if elected.

Lourdes on November 21, 2011 at 11:43 AM

Michelle would kill him.

Schadenfreude on November 21, 2011 at 11:59 AM

I’m just going to leave this here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8RYoKjbOZA

di butler on November 21, 2011 at 11:59 AM

I’ve been saying this since Obama beat her in the primaries, most recently the day after the midterms (click my name if you feel like it).

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on November 21, 2011 at 12:07 PM

I’ve seen 5 “Obama 2012″ bumpter stickers here in Charleston. All them were on cars driven by “urban” people.

SouthernGent on November 21, 2011 at 8:47 AM

I saw one yesterday here in Cedar Rapids. Looked like someone had attacked it.

No, it wasn’t me…

karl9000 on November 21, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Romney is our Hillary; he refuses to admit what the base wants to hear – that Romneycare was wrong and he made a mistake. If he loses the nomination, his refusing to make such an admittance will be one of the key reasons.

yogi41 on November 21, 2011 at 10:47 AM

What is happening is he’s more afraid to be caught flip-flopping (his well deserved rep) that being on the opposite side of his base. I don’t know who created that strategy, but it is a guaranteed loser -the GOP establishment can rest in hades if they push this lose on America.

Don L on November 21, 2011 at 1:34 PM

Read this (related), “Hollywood Producer Speaks Out Against Massive Obama and DNC Corruption”
– Sunday, November 20, 2011

[Excerpt]

Bettina: Back in 2008, I had never even voted in my life. I wasn’t registered to vote, and I probably didn’t even know how many Congressman the US has. I knew that, being in the film business, I was SUPPOSED to be a far left Democrat or face being blackballed and abused by my colleagues. So, I just didn’t bother with it. Why bother if you really have no choice anyway?

Then a writer/director client of mine, a Democrat, called me and asked me if I wanted to produce a documentary about voter fraud in the Democratic Primary with her. She had received a phone call from a very well known Congressional Investigator in Washington, who told her that the Hillary campaign had launched serious allegations against the Obama campaign for caucus fraud. We saw a letter from Hillary’s lawyer in DC, Lynn Utrecht, and sure enough there was something there.

When the director, Gigi Gaston, first told me about this…I couldn’t have been less interested. Really? Caucus fraud? Who cares. I wasn’t political and I didn’t have a dog in the Hillary/Obama race anyway. However, it was one of those split second decisions that changes the entire course of one’s life. For some reason, I agreed to do it and my life has never been the same. What we saw…the ugly, vicious, nasty voter fraud committed by the Obama camp, the DNC and ACORN, has scarred me for life. The entire time we were going across the country interviewing people who had experienced and witnessed the fraud, I could only feel that America was a third world, banana republic like Cuba. In fact, Brad Sherman, a California Congressman, told one of my partners on the film that “there was so much fraud in the Democratic Primary that we look like a banana republic.” He of course refused to say it on camera, but they all knew what happened. All of them. And the fact that no one stood up against this fraud, and in many instances criminal acts, appalled me. What they did to Mrs. Clinton was beyond disgraceful, and in the end we proved that by all accounts she really did win the nomination. Imagine what a different country this would be right now had she won. She might be a far left Democrat like Obama, but the big differences are that she is competent and doesn’t hate this country as he does.

Sher: After you had begun filming the documentary “We Will Not Be Silenced,” you discovered that Barack Hussein Obama’s fraud permeated virtually everything he did politically…from using his group ACORN to commit extreme election fraud to his usage of the New Black Panthers wielding weapons to intimidate voters. The fraud begins with Obama’s stealing votes and support from Hillary Clinton for the 2008 Democrat nomination. Would you give us the details of how this patently ugly and deviant picture unfolded?

Bettina: We started investigating the caucus fraud that was reported in 14 caucus states. There were 2000 complaints in Texas ALONE. Along with those claims, there were as I said a lot of criminal complaints as well at the police stations. What we found in every state was that the stories were always the same. People reporting vandalism, threats, death threats, fraud, falsified documents, lock outs, intimidation, you name it…all directed at the Hillary voters. And the worst part was that the ACORN/Obama campaign/DNC thugs weren’t really hiding it from anyone.

I think that Democrats always justify their fraud with moral relativity. They think that what they are doing is for “everyone’s own good” so the end justifies the means. We saw such blatant disregard for human beings, personal property, the laws of our country, and civil society in general that I was truly horrified. So many people we interviewed were scared to come forward, whether due to threats of losing their lives, their jobs, or being thrown out of the Democratic Party. I just kept thinking…who the hell do these people think they are? They are blatantly and openly committing the most heinous acts of voter fraud, threats, intimidation, and they don’t care. If I brought this fraud up to my Democrat friends, the only thing they said to me was “well BUSH did it too.” But, oddly, this wasn’t Republican on Democrat voter fraud. This was the Democrats eating their own.

Sher: On a lighter note, recently Dictator Obama’s team established his latest snitch website “Attackwatch.com.” Apparently, if anyone tells the truth about Obama they are to be reported to members of the still-growing Obama Police State. I understand that it was taken offline for awhile but, like all of the undead, it’s back! Many conservatives and others reported themselves but, I found your story particularly hilarious. Please tell the readers what you did to report yourself.

Bettina: I have basically had it with the Obama Regime and their snooping on people, trying to silence dissent, attempting to quash the First Amendment. They, again, would love to silence everyone so we can live in some hopey dopey world where no one’s opinions are welcome unless they kiss Obama’s rear end. When Obama put that “Something’s Fishy” nonsense on the White House website, I felt like I was living in Venezuala or Cuba. Everyone was supposed to “report their friends and neighbors who say negative things about Obamacare.” WHAT? “Report” them? OMG this really had become Hitler Germany. So, rather than wait for one of my friends or neighbors to report how much I hated Obama and his disgusting, vile, ridiculous “destroy America” piece of garbage legislation, DEATHCARE, I decided to just report MYSELF.

I called the White House message line, got a live operator, told her I hate Obama and Obamacare, and that I had my bag packed for the FEMA Camp if she wanted to send someone to come get me. Surprisingly, she laughed and giggled and hung up. I really was waiting for the Secret Service visit but it never came. Which kind of angers me because I have Facebook friends who have made very benign comments about Obama and have received the visits from the guys in the black SUVs. I guess you haven’t arrived until you have been the recipient of Obama’s attempt to shut everyone up.

[End Excerpt]

Lourdes on November 21, 2011 at 1:40 PM