Pollmania: Romney tied with Obama nationally, leads by a point in Virginia; Update: Leads by two in Florida

posted at 8:41 pm on April 25, 2012 by Allahpundit

I owe you something cheery after yesterday’s descent into eeyorish madness.

On the one hand, the economy’s supposed to be our big advantage, right? Maybe … not so much:

That’s a nifty example of why Democrats are so keen to frame the election as a choice between two visions rather than as a referendum on The One. Viewed in isolation, his economic program is shinola and voters know it. The key for lefties is making sure they don’t view it in isolation. On the other hand, there’s this:


The second data set shows the results when voters are asked whether they’d definitely or never vote for Obama. The column for independents is eyepopping, especially when you consider that they split evenly at 37 when the same question is asked about Romney. Problem is, Fox used such a small sample of indies for this poll that the margin of error for the subgroup ended up being eight percent. That’s why Romney merely ties O overall at 46 percent even though he wins independents by 13 points — there simply aren’t enough of the latter in this sample to make up for Obama’s enormous lead among Democrats. (The sample splits 44D/38R.) Even so, it’s worth paying attention to this metric going forward. How many anti-Obama votes are already banked among independents? And how many of them who claim they’ll never, ever, evah vote for O will rethink if we end up with two or three straight months of solid job growth?

Speaking of which, go read Jay Cost on the perils of trusting polls in an era when 90 percent of the electorate is split between the parties and locked down on each side, leaving the fate of the country in the hands of 10 percent who don’t pay much attention to politics and maybe don’t know what they’re talking about a lot of the time. Quote: “They are at the least fickle and at the worst maddening, as they regularly tell pollsters they have settled opinions when in fact they do not!” Makes those “I’ll never vote for Obama” results a little harder to interpret, huh? Oh, and here’s the Virginia poll from Rasmussen showing Mitt up by a point. We’re expected to take that state this time, I think. It’s in the same group as Indiana and North Carolina, just purple enough to break for a Democrat when everything’s going their way but a mighty heavy lift under normal-ish circumstances. That’s the difference between 2008 and 2012, I hope.

Exit question: How’s everyone out there feeling about this strategy?

“There is a pretty broad view that President Obama is a good family man and decent guy, but may be in over his head,” said Mr. Gillespie, a former counselor to George W. Bush, who was brought into the Romney campaign this month. He said the argument against re-election would be built around the suggestion that Mr. Obama “has not displayed strong leadership, but failed leadership and weak leadership.”

Update: Just as I’m writing this, the “Purple Poll” is out with data from battleground states. Romney’s up two in Florida and is tied in Colorado but trails narrowly in Virginia and Ohio. His favorable rating in CO, VA, OH, and FL, respectively:

Second look at the likability gap?


Related Posts:

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

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

I always vote for the most conservative candidate in the race – excluding those who have no realistic chance of winning – regardless of party.

joana on April 25, 2012 at 11:32 PM

So principles don’t weigh into your decision, so much as pragmatism? OK.

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:34 PM

Heh. Looks like you got an obsessed Moby who’s really fixated on ya!

whatcat on April 25, 2012 at 11:27 PM

Yeah, that must be it.

Night Owl on April 25, 2012 at 11:34 PM

I always vote for the most conservative candidate in the race – excluding those who have no realistic chance of winning – regardless of party.

joana on April 25, 2012 at 11:32 PM

So principles don’t weigh into your decision, so much as pragmatism? OK.

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:34 PM

You seem to be confused. I vote for the most conservative candidate on principle.

joana on April 25, 2012 at 11:36 PM

Update: Just as I’m writing this, the “Purple Poll” is out with data from battleground states. Romney’s up two in Florida and is tied in Colorado but trails narrowly in Virginia and Ohio. His favorable rating in CO, VA, OH, and FL, respectively:

Why does the Purple Poll not include MO? Is it not considered a Purple state?

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:39 PM

Yeah, that must be it.
Night Owl on April 25, 2012 at 11:34 PM

Welcome to HA, recent registrant! And thanks for all your concern!

whatcat on April 25, 2012 at 11:39 PM

“There is a pretty broad view that President Obama is a good family man and decent guy, but may be in over his head,” said Mr. Gillespie, a former counselor to George W. Bush, who was brought into the Romney campaign this month. He said the argument against re-election would be built around the suggestion that Mr. Obama “has not displayed strong leadership, but failed leadership and weak leadership.”

It’s becoming consensual this is the best strategy – I believe it’s finally becoming consensual (except among the crazy, who’d rather have a candidate calling Obama a Kenyan Socialist who’s ruining the country on purpose, but that’s additional evidence Romney’s strategy is the right one).

joana on April 25, 2012 at 11:40 PM

I humbly request of Allah and Ed that this be the first post on every remaining thread between now and Election Day.

Just Sayin on April 25, 2012 at 11:33 PM

Thanks, but I think that would interfere with some union contract Bishop has. LOL

Night Owl on April 25, 2012 at 11:40 PM

Why does the Purple Poll not include MO? Is it not considered a Purple state?

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:39 PM

Romney will win MO by double digits.

They should include Michigan instead of Minnesota though.

joana on April 25, 2012 at 11:41 PM

Why does the Purple Poll not include MO? Is it not considered a Purple state?

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:39 PM

I could be wrong, but I assume they don’t consider it a swing state any longer. In a very democratic year, McCain still won MO. Obama has even less of a shot this time around and McCaskill is probably going to lose as well. It’s sort of why most people have already given IN to Romney. Obama barely won that state last time around and most assume it’ll flip back to red this time.

GOPRanknFile on April 25, 2012 at 11:41 PM

I don’t like Romney. A lot of people don’t like Romney. A lot of people who don’t like Romney are going to vote for him anyway. A lot of people who don’t like Romney and are going to vote for him anyway have a right to state their opinion about the things he says and does during this campaign. Your and your ilk will have to deal, without being a$$holes about it. Do you think that our voicing our opinion hurts him? Why? You all said earlier that he was the most electable and that it would just be a matter of keeping his feet to the fire. How will that happen if no one is allowed to say anything critical of him? Why do you feel so freakin’ invested in Romney that none of you can take the slightest criticism of him without resorting to horrible personal attacks? No one is saying you don’t have the right to be an a$$hole, but just because you can doesn’t mean you have to. Night Owl on April 25, 2012 at 11:27 PM

No, you have it wrong. Based on his essence as a free market capitalist I believe Romney will govern as conservatively as he can and that when he does so the Michelle Malkins of this world will claim that he governed conservatively because they held his feet to the fire.

Basilsbest on April 25, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Romney will win MO by double digits.

They should include Michigan instead of Minnesota though.

joana on April 25, 2012 at 11:41 PM

MO will be down to the wire. MN isn’t a swing state, you’re right about that.

I could be wrong, but I assume they don’t consider it a swing state any longer. In a very democratic year, McCain still won MO. Obama has even less of a shot this time around and McCaskill is probably going to lose as well. It’s sort of why most people have already given IN to Romney. Obama barely won that state last time around and most assume it’ll flip back to red this time.

GOPRanknFile on April 25, 2012 at 11:41 PM

MO flips a lot, and McCain only won by 3000 votes or so. And a lot of democrats have been moving here from IL the past few years.

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Do you think that our voicing our opinion hurts him?

Well, saying it six hundred and eighty-seven times doesn’t because at that point one would figure it is just a troll and disregards what is being said.

So make sure you say it a lot, over and over and over again.

crosspatch on April 25, 2012 at 11:45 PM

So principles don’t weigh into your decision, so much as pragmatism? OK.

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:34 PM

You apparently believe it’s more principled to lose than to win, even when losing means giving the one man most hostile to your principles a second term. That’s makes no sense morally or politically.

writeblock on April 25, 2012 at 11:46 PM

Personally, I believe Romney will be the best President we have had in a very long time, especially if we deliver a Republican Senate and House.

crosspatch on April 25, 2012 at 11:47 PM

Thanks, but I think that would interfere with some union contract Bishop has. LOL

Night Owl on April 25, 2012 at 11:40 PM

:-)

Just Sayin on April 25, 2012 at 11:47 PM

MO flips a lot, and McCain only won by 3000 votes or so. And a lot of democrats have been moving here from IL the past few years.

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Out of the past eight presidential elections, it’s voted for the Dem candidate only twice. I know McCain barely won last time around, but that’s my point. In a great year for Dems, they couldn’t win the swing state of MO. I don’t anticipate it being that close this time around.

GOPRanknFile on April 25, 2012 at 11:47 PM

Welcome to HA, recent registrant! And thanks for all your concern!

whatcat on April 25, 2012 at 11:39 PM

My only concern is that you really nasty Romney supporters are so ignorant to other commenters if they dare disagree with you. I really don’t see what you hope to gain by that, unless you are a double secret agent troll who really wants to lose Romney as many votes as you can by being so offputting. Hmm…

Night Owl on April 25, 2012 at 11:49 PM

You apparently believe it’s more principled to lose than to win, even when losing means giving the one man most hostile to your principles a second term. That’s makes no sense morally or politically.

writeblock on April 25, 2012 at 11:46 PM

THANK YOU for saying that. I can’t understand that attitude either. It is a “I am going to cut off my nose to spite my face” kind of thing. If I can’t get exactly what I want, I am not going to take anything at all. Those were the sort of “conservatives” that Reagan never got along with, either.

It makes absolutely no sense. But then again, not all people make rational decisions, some are more emotionally driven.

crosspatch on April 25, 2012 at 11:50 PM

GOPRanknFile on April 25, 2012 at 11:41 PM

Rasmussen has MO down to +3 Romney, from +9 Romney last month. It is a tight state, with two major Democrat voting centers. If turnout is decent in KC and STL, and the red counties aren’t energized to vote for Romney, I could definitely see Obama taking the state. It won’t be by much, 1% or less, but still. It should count as a swing state.

I’ve been reading through the purple poll link, but haven’t found a direct explanation of why they chose the states they did.

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:51 PM

You apparently believe it’s more principled to lose than to win, even when losing means giving the one man most hostile to your principles a second term. That’s makes no sense morally or politically.

writeblock on April 25, 2012 at 11:46 PM

If the GOP nominates Arlen Specter, would you still vote for him, just to not lose to the dems?

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:54 PM

My only concern is that you really nasty Romney supporters are so ignorant to other commenters if they dare disagree with you.

Well, here’s the thing. The primary season is basically over. There is no point at this stage in continuing to repeat the anti-Romney venom except to hurt him against Obama. The choices are Obama and Romney.

And there is also the issue that the anti-Romney crowd seems to be very thin-skinned and takes any pushback or disagreement with their position as being “nasty”. It is a matter of logic. There is nothing to be gained by continuing that schtick at this point except to help Obama. There really is no other possible gain from it.

So anyone at this point who continues that line of rhetoric would naturally be suspected of playing for the other side, of being a Democrat Moby, because there is nothing to be gained within the Republican party at this point from continuing that line. The decision has been made, it’s over.

crosspatch on April 25, 2012 at 11:54 PM

I hate when the posts denigrate on here to this in-fighting (and it always does).

“I’m not voting for Romney!”
“Suck it, you backed a loser!”

Blah, blah, blah. It really is sad and this is all I’m ever going to say about this:

First, because the “whose supporters are the bigger jerks” fight is plain ridiculous — I’ve seen plenty of jerky behavior from both the Romney supporters and the ABRomney people (and I’m not excluding myself) — anyone who denies there has been more than enough jerky behavior from both sides to go around is biased.

Second, while we almost never have a nominee who is the ideal of all wings of the GOP, this is not a normal “lesser of two evils” election like say McCain & Dole were (and Romney is in no way demonstrably worse than those two). After 4 years of Obama we know no beyond a doubt that this is lesser than evil v. pure unadulterated evil who wants to destroy the very fabric of this country. The USA has survived mediocre Presidents before, it can survive a mediocre Romney presidency (if that is what you think he will be). However, I have no doubt that 4 more years of Obama will allow him to achieve his stated goal in 2008 to “fundamentally change” this country. We are well on our way there if he isn’t stopped. His henchwoman Pelosi is actually proposing to amend the First Amendment! Think you don’t like your choices now? Wait until after 4 more years of Obama when he completes his transformation of this country into a 3rd rate Banana Republic and installs himself as Papa Doc Barack.

Third, those who say there is no difference between Romney and Obama are beyond reasoning with & it is futile to argue with that. I dismiss this argument out of hand & refuse to address it anymore.

Finally, while the in-fighting between Romney supporters and ABRomney supporters should stop (for the reasons listed) it is unfair for ABRomney supporters to expect the Romney supporters to “make them like Romney” because it seems to me that given that Romney himself plus everything we know about Obama isn’t enough to convince you, and that you are attempting to claim that your vote actually depends on your treatment by some other idiot-anonymous poster on a message board, I can’t treat it as a serious request — that is, I think that your mind is already resolved to not support Romney, no matter what.

Dark Star on April 25, 2012 at 11:54 PM

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:51 PM

I suppose it’s because the polls showed both Romney and Santorum beating Obama there even in the midst of a competitive and bitter primary and they don’t see it likely to flip. I don’t think Romney will win by double digits in MO as someone else suggested, but I do think he’ll win by at least five.

GOPRanknFile on April 25, 2012 at 11:55 PM

My only concern is that you really nasty Romney supporters are so ignorant to other commenters if they dare disagree with you. I really don’t see what you hope to gain by that, unless you are a double secret agent troll who really wants to lose Romney as many votes as you can by being so offputting. Hmm…

Night Owl on April 25, 2012 at 11:49 PM

That’s it. Vote for Romney to frustrate the plans of those trolls.

Now that we have all that figured out, stop whining. It’s beyond pathetic, especially considering how incredibly vicious so many here were towards Romney or anyone claiming to support him, even if without much enthusiasm.

joana on April 25, 2012 at 11:56 PM

My only concern is that you really nasty Romney supporters are so ignorant to other commenters if they dare disagree with you. I really don’t see what you hope to gain by that, unless you are a double secret agent troll who really wants to lose Romney as many votes as you can by being so offputting. Hmm…

Night Owl on April 25, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Not all of them are, but a few probably are OFA employees.

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:56 PM

If the GOP nominates Arlen Specter, would you still vote for him, just to not lose to the dems?

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:54 PM

If the choice is Sphincter or Obama, probably. But first I would work really hard at seeing Sphincter isn’t nominated. But that time has now passed for this primary cycle and for Romney. He’s the nominee, any continued muckraking only helps Obama at this point and the larger goal is to remove Obama from the White House by any means possible.

crosspatch on April 25, 2012 at 11:57 PM

Finally, while the in-fighting between Romney supporters and ABRomney supporters should stop (for the reasons listed) it is unfair for ABRomney supporters to expect the Romney supporters to “make them like Romney” because it seems to me that given that Romney himself plus everything we know about Obama isn’t enough to convince you, and that you are attempting to claim that your vote actually depends on your treatment by some other idiot-anonymous poster on a message board, I can’t treat it as a serious request — that is, I think that your mind is already resolved to not support Romney, no matter what.

Dark Star on April 25, 2012 at 11:54 PM

I’ve said that before. People need to understand how ridiculous they sound when they claim that the deciding factor on their vote will be the tone of the posts on an internet blog.

joana on April 25, 2012 at 11:58 PM

Why do you feel so freakin’ invested in Romney that none of you can take the slightest criticism of him without resorting to horrible personal attacks? No one is saying you don’t have the right to be an a$$hole, but just because you can doesn’t mean you have to.
Night Owl on April 25, 2012 at 11:27 PM

The criticisms aren’t slight. They are stupid and dishonest and tiresome. And the counter-attacks aren’t horrible. They are in kind. Don’t be such a wimp.

Romney is the nominee. The election is in 6 months. There is no point in attacking Romney unless you are trying to suppress turn out. I want Obama out and I will continue to attack anyone who is supporting him, even if they pretend to be conservatives.

Basilsbest on April 25, 2012 at 11:59 PM

really wants to lose Romney as many votes as you can
Night Owl on April 25, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Oh Noes, lose the Demtroll vote?!?! Everyone’s just panicked at the unthinkable prospect that DU-Kos Mobys just maybe might not go for the Republican candidate! We need more concern!1!!!!1!

whatcat on April 25, 2012 at 11:59 PM

No, you have it wrong. Based on his essence as a free market capitalist I believe Romney will govern as conservatively as he can and that when he does so the Michelle Malkins of this world will claim that he governed conservatively because they held his feet to the fire.

Basilsbest on April 25, 2012 at 11:42 PM

That’s funny. You’ve got it all covered, don’t you? As you know, the primary is pretty much over, and I have no interest in going over all the old ground that has been covered here in the past four months or so. Here’s what I think. If we have a Republican House and Senate, they won’t send Romney much of anything that would get him into trouble with conservatives, which is not the same as what you are saying, but if it ends up at the same place, I don’t care.

Night Owl on April 25, 2012 at 11:59 PM

If the GOP nominates Arlen Specter, would you still vote for him, just to not lose to the dems?

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:54 PM

Huh? We nominated Romney, NOT Specter. If you see no difference between the two, you are a complete, blithering idiot.

Adjoran on April 26, 2012 at 12:02 AM

GOPRanknFile on April 25, 2012 at 11:55 PM

There is no possible way on God’s green earth I could ever vote for Santorum. While his position on social issues are conservative, his politics are Democrat. He believes in big powerful central government that rules the people. He said so in his own words. If the Democrats changed their position on abortion, I believe he would change parties.

1. The people have no right to privacy because the Constitution nowhere gives a right of privacy to the people, according to Santorum. He doesn’t understand that people aren’t granted rights by the federal government.

2. The notion that states have all powers not specifically prohibited by the Constitution is “wrong” according to Santorum.

3. The federal government has unlimited power over the individual according to Santorum.

There are more but those are enough. He is a Democrat that simply can’t align with the Democrats because of abortion and gay rights. But POLITICALLY, he is a statist Democrat. He also supports “big labor”. He’s a Democrat running as a Republican, I can’t vote for him. Sure, he’s conservative, but he’s a conservative DEMOCRAT when it comes to the role of the federal government.

Doesn’t matter at this point anyway, it’s over.

crosspatch on April 26, 2012 at 12:03 AM

That’s funny. You’ve got it all covered, don’t you? As you know, the primary is pretty much over, and I have no interest in going over all the old ground that has been covered here in the past four months or so. Here’s what I think. If we have a Republican House and Senate, they won’t send Romney much of anything that would get him into trouble with conservatives, which is not the same as what you are saying, but if it ends up at the same place, I don’t care.

Night Owl on April 25, 2012 at 11:59 PM

Frankly, if the GOP win congress and the WH, and the GOP leadership is still Boehner, McConnell, and Romney after the election, I don’t trust them not to push through amnesty, cap and tax, or a VAT tax. God knows what they’ll do to healthcare, especially if the SC doesn’t kill Obamacare. And I can’t see entitlement reform being brought up after the election season is over. Even if Ryan is veep.

Buckshot Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:05 AM

crosspatch on April 26, 2012 at 12:03 AM

I’m not sure what this has to do with what I posted, but alright.

GOPRanknFile on April 26, 2012 at 12:05 AM

Serious question: Should conservatives vote according to their conscience/principles, or just support the Republican party no matter if the party nominates someone who violates conservative principles?

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:24 PM

come on now, Principled One :-), get off your high horses, it’s not like you’ve never ‘violated’ any ‘principles’ in your entire life :-)..and if you did it once, you can do it again :-)…a l’il bit of ‘flexibility’ hasn’t killed anybody, has it :-)… principles, schprintziples…

jimver on April 26, 2012 at 12:05 AM

sanctimonious criticism.
BettyRuth on April 25, 2012 at 9:46 PM

Hmmmm…not a common word, but another infamous Romney fluffin’ nutball used it earlier. Coincidence, or sock puppet?
cozmo on April 25, 2012 at 9:57 PM

OOOOOH. Yet another conspiracy is hatched. cozmo (who I’ve long thought speaks English as a second language) thinks a very common 5 syllable word is “not a common word” so OMG there must be some kind of collaboratin’ goin’ on. Be sure to email ED and Allah about this!!!! /

Jaibones on April 25, 2012 at 10:28 PM

Ha! Nibble on dogs made me laugh out loud but the whole thing was very well-done. But I have a song in my head now, dammit, based on The Philanderer: He’s a nibbler, yeah he’s a nibbler, he nibbles round and round and round and round…

Buy Danish on April 26, 2012 at 12:05 AM

Eh, as it turns out, it had absolutely nothing to do with what you said, I cut/pasted the wrong comment.

crosspatch on April 26, 2012 at 12:06 AM

So anyone at this point who continues that line of rhetoric would naturally be suspected of playing for the other side, of being a Democrat Moby, because there is nothing to be gained within the Republican party at this point from continuing that line. The decision has been made, it’s over.

crosspatch on April 25, 2012 at 11:54 PM

That part may be over, and I have previously stated that it would be childish to continue to go over the same ground, but the next part is beginning and people have opinions about these new events on a daily basis. Are you seriously saying that ANY criticism of Romney from this point on makes someone a “Democrat MOBY”? A “concern troll”?

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 12:07 AM

People need to understand how ridiculous they sound when they claim that the deciding factor on their vote will be the tone of the posts on an internet blog.
joana on April 25, 2012 at 11:58 PM

Even if such people did exist, they would be too emotionally unstable and erratic to count on for anything.

whatcat on April 26, 2012 at 12:07 AM

Huh? We nominated Romney, NOT Specter. If you see no difference between the two, you are a complete, blithering idiot.

Adjoran on April 26, 2012 at 12:02 AM

? It was a hypothetical question; were does one’s pragmatism end and principles become the dominant factor in one’s decisions.

Buckshot Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:07 AM

Even if such people did exist, they would be too emotionally unstable and erratic to count on for anything.

whatcat on April 26, 2012 at 12:07 AM

They are called independents, and Romney apparently is going to need a he11 of a lot of them to beat Obama.

Buckshot Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:08 AM

Buckshot Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:07 AM

So, wait. Just to be clear: Has “ABO” suddenly become “ABO…unless the alternative is Specter,” or “ABO… unless the alternative is Santorum?”

I’m just trying to keep it straight. :-)

Just Sayin on April 26, 2012 at 12:11 AM

Rasmussen has MO down to +3 Romney, from +9 Romney last month. It is a tight state, with two major Democrat voting centers. If turnout is decent in KC and STL, and the red counties aren’t energized to vote for Romney, I could definitely see Obama taking the state. It won’t be by much, 1% or less, but still. It should count as a swing state.

I’ve been reading through the purple poll link, but haven’t found a direct explanation of why they chose the states they did.

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:51 PM

You’re looking at the wrong numbers. Don’t look at the head-to-head numbers, look at the incumbent’s job approval numbers. If they’re below 50%, he’s in a danger zone. If they’re below 48% he’s at very high risk of losing. Below that he’s toast. The Purple Poll is nothing short of a catastrophe for the president. There’s not a single swing state that has Obama’s job approval higher than 47%, and in a lot of them he’s much lower. His regional job approval numbers are horrific as well.

writeblock on April 26, 2012 at 12:11 AM

crosspatch on April 26, 2012 at 12:03 AM

So if Santorum had been nominated, you would stay home or vote 3rd party, because he’s too liberal for you?

How does that differ from not voting for Romney, because he supports mandates and cap&tax and abortion and gun control?

Buckshot Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:11 AM

So, wait. Just to be clear: Has “ABO” suddenly become “ABO…unless the alternative is Specter,” or “ABO… unless the alternative is Santorum?”

I’m just trying to keep it straight. :-)

Just Sayin on April 26, 2012 at 12:11 AM

I’m starting to wonder if they know who Specter is, maybe I should have just said Stalin or something. Though, that might be a bit too obscure as well.

Buckshot Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:13 AM

Frankly, if the GOP win congress and the WH, and the GOP leadership is still Boehner, McConnell, and Romney after the election, I don’t trust them not to push through amnesty, cap and tax, or a VAT tax. God knows what they’ll do to healthcare, especially if the SC doesn’t kill Obamacare. And I can’t see entitlement reform being brought up after the election season is over. Even if Ryan is veep.

Buckshot Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:05 AM

Come on! I’m trying to be optimistic! I know what you mean, and if I had the guts and the time to wait, I would do what you are doing, based on principal. But I am scared to death of another Obama term. The country might make it through that, but on a personal level, I fear I won’t. I wish there was a viable third party, but right now there isn’t.

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 12:14 AM

Are you seriously saying that ANY criticism of Romney from this point on makes someone a “Democrat MOBY”? A “concern troll”?

No, I don’t think it does, it is fair to express one’s feelings from time to time. But not over and over and over and over like some of the trolls in here seem to do.

I wasn’t supportive of Romney in 2008, even after Santorum endorsed him as the only “real conservative” in the entire field. I wasn’t supportive of Romney as late as this fall. It wasn’t until I really started digging into things and began to learn that a lot of the criticisms against Romney weren’t Romney’s doings. A lot of them were, in fact, bills or parts of bills that Romney vetoed and the legislature passed anyway or were passed with such overwhelming support in the legislature that it would have been pointless to veto it.

But I urge people to do their own research. Once I finally broke down a researched both Romney and Santorum, my choice suddenly became obvious. I will admit that I was vehemently against Gingrich, though. I mean very vocally against Gingrich.

crosspatch on April 26, 2012 at 12:15 AM

You’re looking at the wrong numbers. Don’t look at the head-to-head numbers, look at the incumbent’s job approval numbers. If they’re below 50%, he’s in a danger zone. If they’re below 48% he’s at very high risk of losing. Below that he’s toast. The Purple Poll is nothing short of a catastrophe for the president. There’s not a single swing state that has Obama’s job approval higher than 47%, and in a lot of them he’s much lower. His regional job approval numbers are horrific as well.

writeblock on April 26, 2012 at 12:11 AM

Obama is also a democrat incumbent, a much rarer thing. Statistically we need a larger sample size to see if the >50% rule applies to modern Dem presidents. They own the media and have other advantages, that a weak Republican incumbent wouldn’t enjoy.

Also the Purple Poll has Obama’s approval numbers at 47%, but Romney’s favorables are at 38%, with his unfavorable at the same point as Obama’s disapproval numbers, 48%. That doesn’t really look promising. But the Purple Poll is including WI and MN as swing states, so that might be affecting the numbers.

Buckshot Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:18 AM

So if Santorum had been nominated, you would stay home or vote 3rd party, because he’s too liberal for you?

No, I would not stay home. I will still vote against Obama and I would cast a ballot for Santorum in that case. Obama is not only incompetent, he is actively harmful. He seems to go out of his way to cause the most possible damage with his decisions. Things like cutting the social security payroll tax just when the country was going cash flow negative on social security is one example.

I would, however, be very vocal when/if Santorum started pulling any crap from DC such as attempting nationwide bans of some thing or another. We have state governments for a reason and Santorum is NO federalist.

Staying home and not voting is just a passive-aggressive way to vote for Obama.

crosspatch on April 26, 2012 at 12:20 AM

Oddly enough, Romney’s favorable rating is lower everywhere except the South. I assume his higher rating there is due to Florida more than NC or VA. In the Rust Belt, Heartland, and West swing states, his favorable ratings are all 35-36%. Hmm.

Buckshot Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:25 AM

Poll out today showed Obama and Romney tied in Colorado.

I think there are some surprises in store.

crosspatch on April 26, 2012 at 12:29 AM

Finally, while the in-fighting between Romney supporters and ABRomney supporters should stop (for the reasons listed) it is unfair for ABRomney supporters to expect the Romney supporters to “make them like Romney” because it seems to me that given that Romney himself plus everything we know about Obama isn’t enough to convince you, and that you are attempting to claim that your vote actually depends on your treatment by some other idiot-anonymous poster on a message board, I can’t treat it as a serious request — that is, I think that your mind is already resolved to not support Romney, no matter what.

Dark Star on April 25, 2012 at 11:54 PM

What started this whole thing was someone who clearly stated that they WERE VOTING FOR ROMNEY, but expressed an opinion on something he said or did, and was told that Romney didn’t need or want her vote by a rabid Romney supporter, simply because the rabid Romney supporter didn’t like what she had to say. She didn’t say anything about letting some moron on the internet affect her decision. The Romney supporters go into that schtick every time they can fit it in. It is old, stupid, and untrue.

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 12:30 AM

If I give Romney OH, IN, VA, NC, and FL, but no other state pickups from McCain ’08, Romney still loses slightly. He really needs NH or CO. And his approval is actually higher in CO than in OH. And Obama gets higher approval numbers in OH, than in CO, FL,or VA.

Buckshot Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:31 AM

Poll out today showed Obama and Romney tied in Colorado.

I think there are some surprises in store.

crosspatch on April 26, 2012 at 12:29 AM

Which poll? All I see on RCP is PPP polls, and they’re a dem polling group, so basically worthless. They’ve got Romney losing CO by -13%, with Obama at 53%.

Buckshot Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:34 AM

Oh Noes, lose the Demtroll vote?!?! Everyone’s just panicked at the unthinkable prospect that DU-Kos Mobys just maybe might not go for the Republican candidate! We need more concern!1!!!!1!

whatcat on April 25, 2012 at 11:59 PM

Do you really have fun with this? I’m bored.

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 12:36 AM

You apparently believe it’s more principled to lose than to win, even when losing means giving the one man most hostile to your principles a second term. That’s makes no sense morally or politically.

writeblock on April 25, 2012 at 11:46 PM

my sentiment exactly….

jimver on April 26, 2012 at 12:39 AM

Lessee here – the anti-Republican candidate trolls are vowing to do everything they can to try to re-elect Obama and they claim it’s because someone on an internet forum made them feel butthurt. Yeah, makes sense we should care about anything they say.

whatcat on April 26, 2012 at 12:39 AM

That’s it. Vote for Romney to frustrate the plans of those trolls.

Now that we have all that figured out, stop whining. It’s beyond pathetic, especially considering how incredibly vicious so many here were towards Romney or anyone claiming to support him, even if without much enthusiasm.

joana on April 25, 2012 at 11:56 PM

I’ll vote for whoever the hell I want to vote for, and nothing you or any of your sort had any influence on it either way. I don’t need an anonymous poster on a message board to help me make decisions. You are beyond pathetic, boo-hooing about how “incredibly vicious so many here were towards Romney or anyone claiming to support him, even if without much enthusiasm”. (That’s whining)

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 12:47 AM

I’ll vote for whoever the hell I want to vote for, and nothing you or any of your sort had any influence on it either way. I don’t need an anonymous poster on a message board to help me make decisions. You are beyond pathetic, boo-hooing about how “incredibly vicious so many here were towards Romney or anyone claiming to support him, even if without much enthusiasm”. (That’s whining)

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 12:47 AM

When Newt won SC they blamed anti-Mormon bigotry amongst the conservatives there, when they thought Mittens had won NH and IA, they boasted that he would run the entire primaries, and now, when Mittens is about to be nominated, they continue to attack anyone who doesn’t support Romney and attack those who do support him but refuse to openly praise him.

They are sore losers when defeat is in the air, braggarts when they smell victory, and horrible winners when the game is done.

Buckshot Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:53 AM

Obama is also a democrat incumbent, a much rarer thing. Statistically we need a larger sample size to see if the >50% rule applies to modern Dem presidents. They own the media and have other advantages, that a weak Republican incumbent wouldn’t enjoy.

Also the Purple Poll has Obama’s approval numbers at 47%, but Romney’s favorables are at 38%, with his unfavorable at the same point as Obama’s disapproval numbers, 48%. That doesn’t really look promising. But the Purple Poll is including WI and MN as swing states, so that might be affecting the numbers.

Buckshot Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:18 AM

You’re mistaken. The 50% rule applies to all incumbents for whatever office, of either party, with or without media bias. Undecideds break for the challenger some 86% of the time according to the experts. This was why Jay Cost called Obama the underdog this week. And he is.

You’re mistaken as well about favorables and unfavorables. Charlie Cook has made a clear distinction between job approval for an incumbent and his favorables. A president can be well liked and his challenger very much unliked, but if the president’s approval numbers are poor, he loses. All the challenger need do is show competency–which Romney has in abundance.

As for Romney’s unfavorables, they’re the result of a fiercely fought donneybrook this primary season. His numbers will improve accordingly–though it won’t matter in the end what they are. Americans are not looking for a nice guy, they’re looking for somebody up to the job. This election will be a referendum, not a popularity contest. It doesn’t matter that Romney’s not cool, that he’s too rich, that he fired a lot of people, that he’s mean to animals, that he has a car elevator in his garage. What matters is how the public perceives Obama’s presidency. Job approval numbers tell us all we need to know.

In the west his job approval is 46%.
In the hearland it’s 46%.
In the rust belt it’s 45%.
In the south it’s 45%.
In CO it’s a mere 43%.
In VA it’s only 45%.
In OH it’s 47%.
In FL it’s a dismal 46%.

No way Obama can win with those numbers.

writeblock on April 26, 2012 at 12:57 AM

Which poll? All I see on RCP is PPP polls, and they’re a dem polling group, so basically worthless. They’ve got Romney losing CO by -13%, with Obama at 53%.

Buckshot Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:34 AM

It was some sort of “swing state” poll, I will see if I can locate it.

Try this:

http://minx.cc/?post=328746

crosspatch on April 26, 2012 at 1:01 AM

Another interesting datapoint from that poll:

“Rust Belt”: Ohio(O leads by 5), Pennsylvania, New Hampshire (Obama leads overall by 2)

The idea is that if Obama is ahead by 5 in OH and leads OH + PA + NH by only 2, then Obama is likely behind in PA and NH, too.

crosspatch on April 26, 2012 at 1:03 AM

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 12:47 AM

Buckshot Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:53 AM

What bothers me is not so much the over-the-top enthusiasm, which in some here manifests as near worship. That’s annoying but largely harmless. No, what really bothers me and, frankly, worries me, is the unrealistic expectations that some people seem to have of a Mitt presidency (should he win). It’s not that I am terribly concerned if people are disappointed; rather, I am concerned that expectations are so high among some that they will be willing to overlook, twist, obfuscate, lie, whatever, to gloss over the very real failings we can expect – anything to avoid accepting disappointment. It’s not as bad as it was with Obama, but I can already hear excuses being made.

Just Sayin on April 26, 2012 at 1:08 AM

f the GOP nominates Arlen Specter, would you still vote for him, just to not lose to the dems?

Buckshot Bill on April 25, 2012 at 11:54 PM

If it were a choice between Specter and Obama, I’d choose Specter in a heartbeat. Specter ushered Roberts and Alito through his committee–something Obama would not have done in a million years. Specter’s a run-of-the-mill old time liberal. Obama’s a radical. Specter cares quite a bit about legal parameters, Obama doesn’t.

writeblock on April 26, 2012 at 1:15 AM

Romney is now the better of the two still running, even though we all know Ron Paul is no longer running, just no one really asked him to exit. With that said, there is almost no chance that the things that would be needed to happen to get me to vote for him will happen. The stage is set.

astonerii on April 26, 2012 at 1:20 AM

or if that link didn’t work, maybe this one:

http://minx.cc/?blog=86&post=328746

crosspatch on April 26, 2012 at 1:41 AM

Another interesting datapoint from that poll:

“Rust Belt”: Ohio(O leads by 5), Pennsylvania, New Hampshire (Obama leads overall by 2)

The idea is that if Obama is ahead by 5 in OH and leads OH + PA + NH by only 2, then Obama is likely behind in PA and NH, too.

crosspatch on April 26, 2012 at 1:03 AM

Yup. Right now Obama’s job approval is at 45% in PA. He’s likely to lose PA this time around.

writeblock on April 26, 2012 at 1:42 AM

Just Sayin on April 26, 2012 at 1:08 AM

I get what you’re saying. I don’t think the excuse making is going to wait, it’s already started.

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 1:55 AM

What bothers me is not so much the over-the-top enthusiasm, which in some here manifests as near worship. That’s annoying but largely harmless. No, what really bothers me and, frankly, worries me, is the unrealistic expectations that some people seem to have of a Mitt presidency (should he win). It’s not that I am terribly concerned if people are disappointed; rather, I am concerned that expectations are so high among some that they will be willing to overlook, twist, obfuscate, lie, whatever, to gloss over the very real failings we can expect – anything to avoid accepting disappointment. It’s not as bad as it was with Obama, but I can already hear excuses being made.

Just Sayin on April 26, 2012 at 1:08 AM

Look, what we know is on record: he’s smart, he’s steady, he’s articulate, he fixes things, he’s cool-headed, he’s organized, he wants to cut spending and shrink government, he’s pro-life.

He’ll do just fine.

writeblock on April 26, 2012 at 1:56 AM

Romney is now the better of the two still running, even though we all know Ron Paul is no longer running, just no one really asked him to exit. With that said, there is almost no chance that the things that would be needed to happen to get me to vote for him will happen. The stage is set.

astonerii on April 26, 2012 at 1:20 AM

What things would that be? I’m going to bed, but I’ll look back in the morning to see if you answered. Good Night!

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 1:58 AM

Just Sayin on April 26, 2012 at 1:08 AM

Mitt Romney’s background is different and his skill set is different from most Presidential candidate. He has shown a track record of being able to step into very tough situations and turn them around. In fact, he has made his career out of taking on very difficult circumstances. He isn’t afraid to do that and he isn’t afraid to gore a sacred cow or two or propose unorthodox solutions. In that respect I fully believe Romney has not only a unique set of skills, but also has formed a network of very capable people around him.

So for mostly the above reasons I believe Mitt Romney’s leadership potential is far and above any candidate we have fielded since Reagan.

crosspatch on April 26, 2012 at 2:16 AM

What started this whole thing was someone who clearly stated that they WERE VOTING FOR ROMNEY, but expressed an opinion on something he said or did, and was told that Romney didn’t need or want her vote by a rabid Romney supporter, simply because the rabid Romney supporter didn’t like what she had to say. She didn’t say anything about letting some moron on the internet affect her decision. The Romney supporters go into that schtick every time they can fit it in. It is old, stupid, and untrue.

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 12:30 AM

OK, I’ll say one more thing, then I will not say anymore.

One, you’re assuming that anonymous, idiot poster is a “Romney supporter” because he/she said so when really you know nothing about him/her. I’m an actual Romney supporter and I’ve never said Romney doesn’t need or want anyone’s vote or “gone into that schtick every time I can fit it in” — maybe that can be a litmus test around here: if a poster tells you that a candidate doesn’t “need or want your vote” he/she can be written off as a troll and/or straight up lunatic — take your pick, because only one of the two can be true and nothing else.

Second, it doesn’t matter why the eff it started tonight — it always starts here for one reason or another, especially in the late evening. Whatever started it tonight is pretty much irrelevant.

Dark Star on April 26, 2012 at 2:56 AM

What bothers me is not so much the over-the-top enthusiasm, which in some here manifests as near worship. That’s annoying but largely harmless. No, what really bothers me and, frankly, worries me, is the unrealistic expectations that some people seem to have of a Mitt presidency (should he win). It’s not that I am terribly concerned if people are disappointed; rather, I am concerned that expectations are so high among some that they will be willing to overlook, twist, obfuscate, lie, whatever, to gloss over the very real failings we can expect – anything to avoid accepting disappointment. It’s not as bad as it was with Obama, but I can already hear excuses being made.

Just Sayin on April 26, 2012 at 1:08 AM

Well, that’s a big problem around here from my view: people seem to be worried about crossing bridges before we even get to them (or they’re putting the cart before the horse — whichever one of those is the applicable one here). I’m supposed to worry now about Romney living up to expectations once he’s elected? How about worrying about deposing Obama by getting Romney elected in the first place? Pointing out we need to stop the infighting & concentrate on defeating Obama in November is not having unreasonable expectations for Romney or lying & twisting things on his behalf. It is the reality because we only have 2 choices now: Romney or Obama. That’s it. Trust me, I’ll be the first one holding his feet to the fire if/when he actually has the power to effect policy from the bully pulpit. Although I, admittedly, only expect better than Obama at this point, which is setting a low bar, and I’ve been a Romney supporter since Perry — the only other one I thought had a realistic shot at taking Obama out in the GE from the field we had — dropped the ball & dropped out. I’m also one who would have voted for whoever the GOP candidate was regardless, even Santorum, who is the one I liked least in the field because I honestly believe he had the worst chance against Obama in the GE because the entire contest would have been on his social conservative record, not Obama’s record. Maybe my dispassion for the entire field, including Romney (and my early acceptance of Romney as the best one we had & never buying into the brokered convention fantasy before he was the only one we had) makes me an anomaly around here.

And a certain % of people are always going to overlook, twist, obfuscate, lie etc. about a candidate they supported regardless of what he actually does once elected because they don’t want to admit they were wrong and/or fooled — about 30% of them. You can’t do much about them. Look at the Obama true believes — do you think they will ever admit they are wrong? Is it even worth fighting with them about it?

And that’s why, btw, that Romney’s tack of saying “Obama’s a nice guy but he’s in over his head” instead of calling him an awful, terrible, mean, con man (like Malkin said on Hannity, even though she is right, that is what he is) is the most effective one to take — people who voted for Obama in 2008 don’t want to admit they were fooled, but some of them (not the diehard ones, obviously) can accept that Obama failed to deliver & not vote for him again.

Dark Star on April 26, 2012 at 3:58 AM

No, you have it wrong. Based on his essence as a free market capitalist I believe Romney will govern as conservatively as he can and that when he does so the Michelle Malkins of this world will claim that he governed conservatively because they held his feet to the fire.

Basilsbest on April 25, 2012 at 11:42 PM

RINOs actually scared that Mitt Romney might really govern conservatively.

hawkdriver on April 26, 2012 at 5:39 AM

No, you have it wrong. Based on his essence as a free market capitalist I believe Romney will govern as conservatively as he can and that when he does so the Michelle Malkins of this world will claim that he governed conservatively because they held his feet to the fire.

Basilsbest on April 25, 2012 at 11:42 PM

That’s an interesting choice of words. It’s not based on Romney’s actions as a free market capitalist. It’s not based on Romney’s history of free market capitalism. It’s based on his essence as a free market capitalist. If that isn’t evidence that the rombots engage in argument by assertion, I dunno what is.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 6:28 AM

That’s an interesting choice of words. It’s not based on Romney’s actions as a free market capitalist. It’s not based on Romney’s history of free market capitalism. It’s based on his essence as a free market capitalist. If that isn’t evidence that the rombots engage in argument by assertion, I dunno what is.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 6:28 AM

You said that better than me.

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 6:40 AM

Dark Star on April 26, 2012 at 3:58 AM

Good points that echo an Op-ed about his strategy

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/mitt_sketches_threat_ihA7no77GtyiA9SLR5YiFN

Oh and Hawk the only people really wetting their bed about a candidate are the self professed truecons, who see themselves as the keeper of the conservative word and litmus test. All the negatives said about Romney…

fortunately the adults in the party and in the Romney campaign have taken the lead again. It will anger the spt group mightily.

Bradky on April 26, 2012 at 6:46 AM

fortunately the adults in the party and in the Romney campaign have taken the lead again. It will anger the spt group mightily.

Bradky on April 26, 2012 at 6:46 AM

Why do Romney supporters consistently seem to appoint themselves as arbiters of who the “adults” are?

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 6:56 AM

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 6:56 AM

Because the more childish members of the party need leadership of the adult kind. “I’m not going to vote. Just downstream..blah blah blah” Now if you call that a mature reaction of an adult our definitions are too far apart to reconcile.
Besides we should all be Romney supporters.
I was a Newt fan when it all started — ouch was that a bad choice!

Bradky on April 26, 2012 at 6:59 AM

…we should all be Romney supporters.
I was a Newt fan when it all started — ouch was that a bad choice!

Bradky on April 26, 2012 at 6:59 AM

I call bullshit. I can be a Romney voter without being a Romney supporter. Getting rid of Obama is just that important to me. That doesn’t mean I have to polish Mitt’s knob like some around here seem absolutely intent on doing.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 7:01 AM

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 7:01 AM

Seriously? Which posters are “polishing his knob”? As compared to the Palin worship that ran for 3 years straight?

You and I agree on the reason to support him at least with a vote. So the definition of supporter must be where we are not agreeing.

Bradky on April 26, 2012 at 7:06 AM

Seriously? Which posters are “polishing his knob”? As compared to the Palin worship that ran for 3 years straight?

You and I agree on the reason to support him at least with a vote. So the definition of supporter must be where we are not agreeing.

Bradky on April 26, 2012 at 7:06 AM

It’s been said already on this thread, though I suppose it bears repeating. Mitt Romney is not conservative. That is what is hurting him. Not the fact that I and others are pointing out that he is not conservative. We can all be in blissful denial of the statist, progressive things Romney has done throughout his government career, but at the end of the day, the arguments for shutting up and ending criticism of our nominee to be amount to:

Based on his essence as a free market capitalist…

Basilsbest on April 25, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Not his actions. Not his history. But his “essence.” That is knob polishing in the first degree and that is the sort of support I refuse to engage in.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 7:12 AM

Dog-eater may get a bounce from appearing on Jimmy Kibble.

BHO Jonestown on April 25, 2012 at 8:45 PM

Bwahahahahahaha – Love you guys! Jon Stewart not even impressed with Barry’s appearance on Fallon – claimed “he doesn’t have to do this stuff anymore”

Guess Obama saw the FOX poll showing Romney leading him by 4 points (49 to 44) with voters under 35.

BabysCatz on April 26, 2012 at 7:18 AM

For the record, it’s worth mentioning I’m not in the “Romney can’t win” camp. I’m not big on polls-as-predictors of the future, but I am of the opinion that polls showing Romney and Obama in a dead heat are the best reflectors of current reality. I don’t see this turning around anytime soon, ergo there is a very real chance that Romney might not win. And if he doesn’t, then God save America. Cause I’m not sure anyone else can.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 7:18 AM

Guess Obama saw the FOX poll showing Romney leading him by 4 points (49 to 44) with voters under 35.

BabysCatz on April 26, 2012 at 7:18 AM

Problem is, there are voters over 35 too. Romney hasn’t sealed the deal yet.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 7:20 AM

I’m still waiting for one of the “Mitt supporters” to explain to me how Romneycare is the “fruit” of a Conservative, and why a “Conservative” would brag about passing it for years afterward.

kingsjester on April 26, 2012 at 7:43 AM

I’m still waiting for one of the “Mitt supporters” to explain to me how Romneycare is the “fruit” of a Conservative, and why a “Conservative” would brag about passing it for years afterward.

kingsjester on April 26, 2012 at 7:43 AM

I hope you don’t have any pressing matters to attend to today!

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 7:56 AM

I just heard a Hall and Oats song parodied into “Watch out boys, he’ll chew you up, he’s a dog eater”. This is apparently not over yet!

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 7:58 AM

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 7:56 AM

Just work. This ig’nant ol’ Southerner wants these brilliant “Mitt supporters” to explain to me how a state-run healthcare system anywhere is something a Conservative should brag about implementing.

kingsjester on April 26, 2012 at 8:00 AM

Polls six months out do not impress me one way ro the other.

We all know the media wing of the Democrat-Media Complex at some point is going to show their boy Obama dipping after the RNC convention and then a miraculous fight back to the top up to election day, so don’t waste any capital on this nonesense until at least September.

By that time we can get our grumbling on.

insidiator on April 26, 2012 at 8:00 AM

Why do Romney supporters consistently seem to appoint themselves as arbiters of who the “adults” are?

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 6:56 AM

It’s their own purity test. People only get the TruSquish ™ seal of approval when they show they can compromise like a madman and adopt Bradky’s faux-Maher attitude toward Palin. Who’s been “dying” for the past 3 years, I’m told.

Romney isn’t going to wear well at all. By September he’ll be down by at least 8 across the board. Bank on it.

ddrintn on April 26, 2012 at 8:00 AM

Not his actions. Not his history. But his “essence.” That is knob polishing in the first degree and that is the sort of support I refuse to engage in.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 7:12 AM

That “essence” has a liberal smell to me.

katy the mean old lady on April 26, 2012 at 8:26 AM

Guess Obama saw the FOX poll showing Romney leading him by 4 points (49 to 44) with voters under 35.
BabysCatz on April 26, 2012 at 7:18 AM

Problem is, there are voters over 35 too. Romney hasn’t sealed the deal yet.gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 7:20 AM

Problem is you are reaching for something negative to say about Romney. Obama won this age group by double digits in 2008. He’s in trouble.

Basilsbest on April 26, 2012 at 8:35 AM

If all the republicans who voted for Obama because it was time
for a “change” and time for a black (well, half black) president
NOW vote for Romney, he will win.

It is my opinion that the issue for republicans is getting out
the vote. There is not a lot of excitement for Romney himself.
However, there is increasing excitement about getting rid of Obama.
Republicans need to have a big push for getting out the vote.

Which reminds me – When Harold Washington was running for Mayor of Chicago, I happened to be traveling on Western and 290 that day.
What I saw was mind boggling (at the time). School buses were
lined up outside the housing projects and people with bullhorns
shouted encouragement as his supporters were practically dragging people to the bus.

I am anxious to see what he does with Palin. Does he ignore her
or take advantage of her star power with conservatives and have
her stump with him? It will be a measure of the man.

Actually, I am anxious to see each state’s republican leaders
come out full press for Romney. Rudy is another great speaker
people will come out to see.

If repubs can amp up the excitement Romney will win hands down.

Amjean on April 26, 2012 at 8:37 AM

I’m still waiting for one of the “Mitt supporters” to explain to me how Romneycare is the “fruit” of a Conservative, and why a “Conservative” would brag about passing it for years afterward. kingsjester on April 26, 2012 at 7:43 AM

This was explained to you ad nauseum. You are unfortunately a slow learner. Here’s the short form: Heritage Foundation > Individual Responsibility > Freeloaders.

Basilsbest on April 26, 2012 at 8:40 AM

That “essence” has a liberal smell to me.

katy the mean old lady on April 26, 2012 at 8:26 AM

He also said Romney would “govern as conservatively as he can”. I find that a little ominous as well.

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 8:41 AM

Problem is you are reaching for something negative to say about Romney. Obama won this age group by double digits in 2008. He’s in trouble.

Basilsbest on April 26, 2012 at 8:35 AM

The most negative thing I can say about Romney viz-a-vis the polls is that given Obama’s performance in office, it shouldn’t be this close. It should be a cakewalk for Romney simply because he’s not Obama. The fact that Obama is polling 40% against Romney in a virtual dead heat in any poll as the worst president in the history of the republic says just as much about Romney as it says about Obama.

If repubs can amp up the excitement Romney will win hands down.

Amjean on April 26, 2012 at 8:37 AM

Good luck with that. I’ve already as much as pledged my vote against Obama, and I am about as unexcited as they come.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 8:41 AM

I’m still waiting for one of the “Mitt supporters” to explain to me how Romneycare is the “fruit” of a Conservative, and why a “Conservative” would brag about passing it for years afterward.

kingsjester on April 26, 2012 at 7:43 AM

Ann Coulter already covered that. Mitt’s conservative because he got concessions from Dems or something. At least that’s the way I understood it…/

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 8:42 AM

It’s their own purity test. People only get the TruSquish ™ seal of approval when they show they can compromise like a madman and adopt Bradky’s faux-Maher attitude toward Palin. Who’s been “dying” for the past 3 years, I’m told.

Romney isn’t going to wear well at all. By September he’ll be down by at least 8 across the board. Bank on it.

ddrintn on April 26, 2012 at 8:00 AM

Romney can’t get above 25%.

Romney won’t take the fight to Obama.

By September he’ll be down by at least 8 across the board. Bank on it.

What we can count on is that after Mitt is elected POTUS, you will more predictions for us. President Obama thanks you.

Basilsbest on April 26, 2012 at 8:45 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5