Compared to Obama, Carter was success personified.

TheRightMan on April 17, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Again, no. I was there. The parallels of the the two presidents is striking. Carter was willing to take a much greater risk with operation Eagle Claw than 0bama did with Osama. Carter dealt with international problems that arose due to his policies, 0bama creates them problems with his policies. The major difference is that the media no longer has a monopoly.

Precisely, cozmo. Thanks for seeing it that way – the way I clearly put it. Romney is no Reagan – I did say that.

Yes you did, and only the Romney fluffin’ nutballs are making that comparison.

Makes the assimilation that much more difficult.

It is an insult to the memory of Reagan to dare to compare an Obama-Romney matchup to Carter-Reagan.

TheRightMan on April 17, 2012 at 9:55 AM

No it isn’t. Its a testament to Carter and 0bama.

cozmo on April 17, 2012 at 10:01 AM

Precisely, cozmo. Thanks for seeing it that way – the way I clearly put it. Romney is no Reagan – I did say that. It will be the lesser of two evils. But Romney has done well in his life. People dump all over the fact of Romneycare (understandably). A democrat governor would have given Massachusetts socialized medicine outright. He will be better than Obama. I bet there are a lot of so-called “Obama-cans” who regret their switch to the Dem side, and many independents who will not vote for Obama again. I am cautiously optimistic. Obama did not win by a blowout margin over McCain, and Romney is more conservative than McCain. I wanted Romney to beat McCain the last election. We can only run who we have. Newt imploded, and would have imploded in the general. Santorum believes more of the things I believe. So does Alan Keyes. Both Santorum and Keyes have the same problem. They are both unashamedly strident, and hence come off as scolds, especially with the LSM pointing out how square they are. They make it too damn easy for the “War on women” meme. That just ain’t going to stick to Romney.

So just how do they really measure “likeability?”

No it isn’t. Its a testament to Carter and 0bama.

cozmo on April 17, 2012 at 10:01 AM

Compared to Obama, Carter was success personified.

It is a testament to Romney’s weakness that he isn’t soundly thrashing Obama in the polls at this juncture.

It is an insult to the memory of Reagan to dare to compare an Obama-Romney matchup to Carter-Reagan.

TheRightMan on April 17, 2012 at 9:55 AM

No it isn’t. Its a testament to Carter and 0bama.

In April of 1980, Carter led Reagan 41 – 34. Granted, Romney is no Reagan, but – fortunately – Obama is worse than Carter, and even more of a scold than Carter. It is important to compare Carter’s dour tone and wagging finger when we see Obama doing the same kind of things and claiming the Reagan mantle. How ludicrous. The Audaciousness of a Dope.

kscheuller on April 17, 2012 at 9:42 AM

It is an insult to the memory of Reagan to dare to compare an Obama-Romney matchup to Carter-Reagan.

Reagan knew what he stood for and the base could trust him that he would fight for conservatism.

What exactly does Romney stand for and who will benefit most from his presidency? It certainly will NOT be conservatives.

It never does. Won’t work. You have to give people something to vote for. It’s going to be a hard, hard lesson.

ddrintn on April 16, 2012 at 9:24 PM

I totally agree with you and I must say I find it funny that many did not see this coming.

In reality, Romney will be lucky to lose by 43-52 in the general election.

And here is the reason why:

Half of those questioned say that Obama is more likely to stand up for what he believes, with only 29% saying that about Romney.

Actually, Romney is doing horribly in swing states like Ohio, Florida and Virginia, all states Romney must win.

Cult members only like polls showing cult leader in positive light.

angryed on April 17, 2012 at 9:09 AM

Cult member?

The MSM manufactures two polls for their chosen candidate and you continue to offer them latent support…..

…or are you saying that we should believe the unbelievable polls because it fits YOUR narrative?

Acceptable recent polls:

Rasmussen Tracking 44 47 Romney +3
Reuters/Ipsos 47 43 Obama +4
Gallup Tracking 45 47 Romney +2
FOX News 44 46 Romney +2

Zybalto on April 17, 2012 at 9:07 AM

Cult members only like polls showing cult leader in positive light.

When are these biased polls going to become a major story?

They’ve been doing this long enough that you can rule out incompetence so all that’s left is blatant bias. The Democrats have had, in their own words, a bad week and we get served crap like this?

Two polls that we can leave off of any calculation, that’s for sure.

Acceptable recent polls:

Rasmussen Tracking 44 47 Romney +3
Reuters/Ipsos 47 43 Obama +4
Gallup Tracking 45 47 Romney +2
FOX News 44 46 Romney +2

That said, if you’re really worked up over this poll, it IS an outlyer. Wait and see if it becomes a trend before getting upset and arguing amongst yourselves.

DRayRaven on April 17, 2012 at 5:06 AM

some folks like to ride roller coasters ….

I’m voting May 8th for whoever isn’t Mitt on the gop ballot. Maybe it isn’t too late to get someone that can win.

unseen on April 17, 2012 at 1:43 AM

voting on May 8th as well .. leaves us Newt or ron …

I will probably write in Perry …. and vote for the marriage amendment …

Democrats want the election to be a choice between Obama and a guy whom Paul Begala compares to Thurston Howell III. Republicans want it to be a pure referendum on four years of Hopenchange.

Typical. Liberals=demagogue; Conservatives=Fact finders.

Romney is more likely to change his position on the issues for political reasons,

Democrat political bullchips aside, isn’t a candidate or actual political office holder suppose to represent the voters and therefore to what the electorate wants…whimsical or not?

One has to question the logic employed here. Puting aside one’s personal beliefs in favor of the position their electorate wants is not “flip-flopping”. It’s called representative democracy.