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 3 4 5

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

You think he can govern more conservatively than he can govern? He’s running for POTUS, not DICTATOR.

Basilsbest on April 26, 2012 at 8:49 AM

You think he can govern more conservatively than he can govern? He’s running for POTUS, not DICTATOR.

Basilsbest on April 26, 2012 at 8:49 AM

OMG…my eyes just rolled back in my head so hard I was worried they might get stuck. Mitt’s entire primary campaign was predicated on changing the definition of “conservatism.” It worked to get him the nomination. I’m not as confident that it will work to secure him the presidency, but I suppose we shall see.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 8:53 AM

You think he can govern more conservatively than he can govern? He’s running for POTUS, not DICTATOR.

Basilsbest on April 26, 2012 at 8:49 AM

Sorry, I should have put the emphasis on the word “he”. What if governing as a liberal is as conservative as he can govern? But you have been very decent in my conversation with you in this thread, so I am sorry I put your name in with those others. It doesn’t matter to me if he governs conservatively because that is what he gets to sign from congress, or if it comes from him. All that remains to be seen, and I don’t plan to “dog” him every step of the way. For the sake of the country, I hope he wins.

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 8:58 AM

For the sake of the country, I hope he wins Obama loses.

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 8:58 AM

Am I fair in presuming that’s a more accurate sentiment?

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 8:59 AM

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 8:53 AM

I appreciate your posts. I stuck with Newt until the other day, and I know it’s time to move on. I like the way you put it, you can be a Romney voter without being a Romney supporter. That is as good as it’s going to get from me. Maybe he will suprise us.

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 9:03 AM

Am I fair in presuming that’s a more accurate sentiment?

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 8:59 AM

Yes. Yes you are.

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 9:04 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 would suggest that you take a few minutes and read this.

Syzygy on April 26, 2012 at 9:08 AM

kingsjester on April 26, 2012 at 7:43 AM

I would suggest that you take a few minutes and read this.

Syzygy on April 26, 2012 at 9:08 AM

If I’d have been asking that question, it would have been rhetorical…

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 9:16 AM

How’s everyone out there feeling about this strategy?

“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 a good strategy to capture independents and other moderates, which is exactly what it’s intended to do. This isn’t the strategy to fire up the base. That is accomplished in other ways. But the fact of the matter is that independents and moderates simply don’t view ObaMao in the same way that we do and will not respond to certain types of harsh descriptions. But they can and will respond to the idea that he is not what they thought he was going to be and that it’s not going to get any better in the future.

Referring to ObaMao as a “nice guy” (read beta male) is not the same thing as “being nice” to ObaMao. It’s simply a way of reaching independents and moderates.

cicerone on April 26, 2012 at 9:17 AM

Referring to ObaMao as a “nice guy” (read beta male) is not the same thing as “being nice” to ObaMao. It’s simply a way of reaching independents and moderates.

cicerone on April 26, 2012 at 9:17 AM

Is there a chance, no matter how remote, that Romney may turn off the base with misguided and ultimately wrongheaded efforts to appeal to independents(read: liberals who are too cowardly to self-identify as such)? Wide appeal is one thing, and I can understand the politicians’ quest for it. It tends to be rather elusive. But I’m concerned about the wholesale dismissal of the possibility that Mitt may be losing more than he gains, particularly with an increasing number of polls showing Mitt and Obama in a nationwide dead heat. I mean, think about: If Romney really is the conservative paragon that his knob polishers supporters want us to believe he is, how come I haven’t seen a single poll in the last month in which Romney is trouncing the crap out of Obama nationwide by double digits? Or was there a poll showing that, that I somehow missed?

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 9:23 AM

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 9:23 AM

Why should “the base” be disgruntled by the attempt to broaden the coalition to defeat ObaMao?

cicerone on April 26, 2012 at 9:29 AM

how come I haven’t seen a single poll in the last month in which Romney is trouncing the crap out of Obama nationwide by double digits? Or was there a poll showing that, that I somehow missed?

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 9:23 AM

Whose knob have you been polishing? I don’t see you coming up with a better alternative. All of the paranoid ABR misfits have been jumping around from one failed candidate to another and none of them could beat Romney for the nomination. The fact of the matter is that whether you like it (or have the intelligence to understand it) or not, Romney is the nominee because he’s the best candidate in this cycle with the best opportunity to defeat ObaMao in November, which should be everybody’s goal, especially “the base.”

cicerone on April 26, 2012 at 9:33 AM

Why should “the base” be disgruntled by the attempt to broaden the coalition to defeat ObaMao?

cicerone on April 26, 2012 at 9:29 AM

That’s a good question. I can’t speak for everyone, but from where I stand, I think it’s pretty damn reasonable to be insulted at Romney’s “It doesn’t matter what I do, they’ll vote for me anyway” attitude.

I want Obama to lose so bad that I can taste it. I’m not above helping Romney to win if it means helping Obama to lose. Unfortunately, not all Republican voters feel that way, and I can hardly blame them. I’m not going to pull any punches; I find Mitt Romney to be a repellent political opporunist, and I believe he didn’t deserve the nomination nor does he deserve the Oval Office. The thing is, that ship already sailed. With Santorum having dropped out, and Newt’s exist from the race imminent, my personal feelings for Romney no longer matter. The real way to broaden the Romney voter coalition is not to accept that he’s not being genuine as he insults large blocs of his own party. The way to bring in independent votes is to convince people that Romney is a real alternative who can reverse the damage that Obama is doing. “Obama is a nice guy, but…” is not the way to do that.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 9:36 AM

Whose knob have you been polishing? I don’t see you coming up with a better alternative. All of the paranoid ABR misfits have been jumping around from one failed candidate to another and none of them could beat Romney for the nomination. The fact of the matter is that whether you like it (or have the intelligence to understand it) or not, Romney is the nominee because he’s the best candidate in this cycle with the best opportunity to defeat ObaMao in November, which should be everybody’s goal, especially “the base.”

cicerone on April 26, 2012 at 9:33 AM

There is no alternative at this point, which is why I am casting my vote against Obama and am grudgingly willing to help Mitt Romney in the process. It’s not because I think Romney is a nice guy, or conservative, or anything but a rank political opportunist. It’s because I want to get rid of Obama just that badly.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 9:37 AM

That’s a good question. I can’t speak for everyone, but from where I stand, I think it’s pretty damn reasonable to be insulted at Romney’s “It doesn’t matter what I do, they’ll vote for me anyway” attitude.

That’s just a lie. It’s a lie to say that Romney has “insulted” the base. It’s a lie to claim that he has that attitude. It’s just a pathetic attempt at rationalizing the bizarre level of animosity that some so-called “conservatives” have always had for Romney. It’s not Romney’s problem. It’s yours. And yeah, in case you’re wondering, I have no problem insulting the heck out of people who insist on telling these ridiculous lies.

Unfortunately, not all Republican voters feel that way, and I can hardly blame them. I’m not going to pull any punches; I find Mitt Romney to be a repellent political opporunist, and I believe he didn’t deserve the nomination nor does he deserve the Oval Office.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 9:36 AM

A “political opportunist?” As opposed to the other office seekers? Surely you’re not exempting the likes of Newty and Santy from the list of “opportunists.” That’s ridiculous. But again, this kind of rhetoric is not based on rational arguments but is simply self-serving rationalizations from people who just can’t accept that Romney whipped the other candidates.

cicerone on April 26, 2012 at 9:46 AM

That’s a good question. I can’t speak for everyone, but from where I stand, I think it’s pretty damn reasonable to be insulted at Romney’s “It doesn’t matter what I do, they’ll vote for me anyway” attitude.

That’s just a lie. It’s a lie to say that Romney has “insulted” the base. It’s a lie to claim that he has that attitude. It’s just a pathetic attempt at rationalizing the bizarre level of animosity that some so-called “conservatives” have always had for Romney. It’s not Romney’s problem. It’s yours. And yeah, in case you’re wondering, I have no problem insulting the heck out of people who insist on telling these ridiculous lies.

Oh really? It’s a lie, huh? How about this? There is absolutely a bloc of conservative voters which Romney is taking for granted, and it’s not that he’s setting out to insult him. They feel insulted. And some of them are absolutely refusing to pull the level for Mitt. That’s not speculation, it’s not a lie. It’s a take-it-to-the-bank fact. And if Romney doesn’t deal with it, he’ll maintain this dead heat right up through November. I’ll say it again. I am NOT in the “Mitt can’t win” contingency. I believe he can. But there is clear and present danger, politically speaking, in assuming that he will just because he’s not Obama. For some, that’s not good enough.

Unfortunately, not all Republican voters feel that way, and I can hardly blame them. I’m not going to pull any punches; I find Mitt Romney to be a repellent political opporunist, and I believe he didn’t deserve the nomination nor does he deserve the Oval Office.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 9:36 AM

A “political opportunist?” As opposed to the other office seekers? Surely you’re not exempting the likes of Newty and Santy from the list of “opportunists.” That’s ridiculous. But again, this kind of rhetoric is not based on rational arguments but is simply self-serving rationalizations from people who just can’t accept that Romney whipped the other candidates.

cicerone on April 26, 2012 at 9:46 AM

Do you always insult Romney voters (such as myself) like this? With supporters like you, Romney doesn’t need an opponent. I guess he’s got millions of surrogates just like yourself to tell the Republican base “GFY.”

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 9:53 AM

Do you always insult Romney voters (such as myself) like this? With supporters like you, Romney doesn’t need an opponent. I guess he’s got millions of surrogates just like yourself to tell the Republican base “GFY.”

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 9:53 AM

Pretty much. If you ask why they think this is a smart strategy, you will be called “a paranoid ABR misfit”, a “MOBY”, a “concern troll”, an Obama supporter, etc. They will insinuate that if you are childish enough to let what anonymous blog posters say sway you, you are too stupid to vote, and Romney doesn’t need or want your vote anyway. Then you will be called a whiner. It is the most interesting strategy I’ve seen from any candidate’s supporters in my life, and I am excited to see how it works out.

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 10:16 AM

The worst assumption that the Romney campaign can make, along with his supporters writ-large, is that because I [for example] find Mitt to be a repellent non-conservative opportunist, I am ergo refusing to help him with a vote. Nothing could be further from the truth. There are some who genuinely do feel that way, but Romney’s success will literally depend on the ability of his detractors to swallow their pride and do whatever is necessary to get rid of Obama. In fairness to those detractors, Mitt hasn’t given them much reason to do that yet.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 10:28 AM

cicerone on April 26, 2012 at 9:46 AM

Telling it like it is.

A lot of butt hurt ABRs crying like babies.

More popcorn please.

And while your at it, throw a few dogs on the barby. (With this Obama economy we can’t afford steak.)

Gunlock Bill on April 26, 2012 at 10:28 AM

Telling it like it is.

A lot of butt hurt ABRs crying like babies.

More popcorn please.

And while your at it, throw a few dogs on the barby. (With this Obama economy we can’t afford steak.)

Gunlock Bill on April 26, 2012 at 10:28 AM

Except that I’m not ABR, if by “ABR” you mean someone who is refusing to vote for Romney in the general election. But keep it up. I’m sure you’ll win plenty of converts./

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 10:29 AM

In fairness to those detractors, Mitt hasn’t given them much reason to do that yet.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 10:28 AM

Perhaps if you pulled your fingers out of your ears and actually listened to what he has to say, you might be given the reason you are working so hard to not hear.

Gunlock Bill on April 26, 2012 at 10:32 AM

xcept that I’m not ABR, if by “ABR” you mean someone who is refusing to vote for Romney in the general election. But keep it up. I’m sure you’ll win plenty of converts./

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 10:29 AM

The primary was so contentious, but I think it is the zealous Mitt supporters who can’t accept it is over and Mitt won. They are seeing enemies around every corner. So be it, but I am not going to stop holding the candidate to the fire when he sides with Obama on things like student loans.

melle1228 on April 26, 2012 at 10:35 AM

Except that I’m not ABR, if by “ABR” you mean someone who is refusing to vote for Romney in the general election. But keep it up. I’m sure you’ll win plenty of converts./

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 10:29 AM

If the shoe doesn’t fit, then take it off and stop wearing it.

Gunlock Bill on April 26, 2012 at 10:36 AM

cicerone on April 26, 2012 at 9:46 AM

Enough with the hysteria,petunia.

katy the mean old lady on April 26, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Perhaps if you pulled your fingers out of your ears and actually listened to what he has to say, you might be given the reason you are working so hard to not hear.

Gunlock Bill on April 26, 2012 at 10:32 AM

The problem isn’t with me, Bill. I fully intend to do everything I can to boot Obama out of office, up to and including helping Mitt. It’s not my job to persuade my fellow Republican voters. It’s Mitt’s. That’s why he’s running a campaign. Mitt’s failure to win the Oval Office from Barack Obama will be just that — Mitt’s failure to own. I’m still waiting for someone to explain to me how a supposed conservative wunderkind, the best we’ve run since Reagan, could be polling in a statistical dead heat nationwide with the worst president this country has ever seen. This defies logic unless multiple battleground state polls are fradulent, or perhaps maybe the American people aren’t sold that Mitt is what you want to believe he is. I’m really hoping that Mitt seals the deal. If you’d get your fingers out of your ears, you’d realize that I’m not an intransigent anti-Mitt ideologue! They do exist, and they must be dealt with, and as long as Mitt’s campaign continues down this road, it WILL be a dead heat through November. I take no pleasure in pointing this out, but it is a practical political reality.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Perhaps if you pulled your fingers out of your ears and actually listened to what he has to say, you might be given the reason you are working so hard to not hear.

Gunlock Bill on April 26, 2012 at 10:32 AM

Wait I am confused.. Am I suppose to be swayed by his supporter or not? Apparently we are suppose to ignore them when they are jerks, but listen to them when they are saying something of substance..//

melle1228 on April 26, 2012 at 10:38 AM

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 10:29 AM

If the shoe doesn’t fit, then take it off and stop wearing it.

Gunlock Bill on April 26, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Shut up, he explained.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 10:39 AM

If the shoe doesn’t fit, then take it off and stop wearing it.

Gunlock Bill on April 26, 2012 at 10:36 AM

You do realize that Romney is the nominee, right? If you really supported him, you’d be working to win converts to your cause. But you don’t. You love your government mandated gunlocks, your big government statism, and your messiah – Obama.

besser tot als rot on April 26, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 10:16 AM

When you are cheerleading for a liberal disguised as severly conservative it seems to be the done thing to act like a liberal.

katy the mean old lady on April 26, 2012 at 10:42 AM

but 70% of the country thinks America is on the “wrong track”. how is Willard not ahead by at least 20%?????

DBear on April 25, 2012 at 9:06 PM

The Bradely Effect.

mapper on April 26, 2012 at 10:42 AM

but 70% of the country thinks America is on the “wrong track”. how is Willard not ahead by at least 20%?????

DBear on April 25, 2012 at 9:06 PM

The Bradley Effect

mapper on April 26, 2012 at 10:42 AM

The Bradely Effect.

mapper on April 26, 2012 at 10:42 AM

I do hope you’re right, but I have my doubts. The Bradley effect, to my understanding, accounts for inflation of poll numbers. It would not necessarily explain why Romney is only polling within the statistical margin of error, as well.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 10:44 AM

The Bradely Effect.

mapper on April 26, 2012 at 10:42 AM

The scorched earth primary effect that his “supporters” don’t realize should have ended when he sealed the nomination. Or maybe they’ve been Obama supporting mobys all along. Hard to tell.

besser tot als rot on April 26, 2012 at 10:44 AM

The scorched earth primary effect that his “supporters” don’t realize should have ended when he sealed the nomination. Or maybe they’ve been Obama supporting mobys all along. Hard to tell.

besser tot als rot on April 26, 2012 at 10:44 AM

It will be Romney Tiger Beat all the way. When will sheryl be back to croon aboout how dreamy he is.

katy the mean old lady on April 26, 2012 at 10:49 AM

The Bradley effect, to my understanding, accounts for inflation of poll numbers. It would not necessarily explain why Romney is only polling within the statistical margin of error, as well.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 10:44 AM

From Wiki:

The Bradley effect, less commonly called the Wilder effect,is a theory proposed to explain observed discrepancies between voter opinion polls and election outcomes in some United States government elections where a white candidate and a non-white candidate run against each other. The theory proposes that some voters will tell pollsters they are undecided or likely to vote for a black candidate, while on election day they vote for the white candidate. It was named after Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, an African-American who lost the 1982 California governor’s race despite being ahead in voter polls going into the elections.

mapper on April 26, 2012 at 10:51 AM

That’s a good question. I can’t speak for everyone, but from where I stand, I think it’s pretty damn reasonable to be insulted at Romney’s “It doesn’t matter what I do, they’ll vote for me anyway” attitude.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 9:36 AM

I don’t see that attitude at all from Romney.

joana on April 26, 2012 at 11:12 AM

The worst assumption that the Romney campaign can make, along with his supporters writ-large, is that because I [for example] find Mitt to be a repellent non-conservative opportunist, I am ergo refusing to help him with a vote. Nothing could be further from the truth. There are some who genuinely do feel that way, but Romney’s success will literally depend on the ability of his detractors to swallow their pride and do whatever is necessary to get rid of Obama. In fairness to those detractors, Mitt hasn’t given them much reason to do that yet.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 10:28 AM

He’s done plenty to show Americans he’d be a better President than Obama.

Some haven’t yet caught up with it but hopefully they’ll do at some point.

I’m sure many decided to vote for Romney after his terrific speech last Tuesday. What did you think of it?

Like you, I think, I refuse to believe there are people have so much ego that they’ll let the fact their feelings are hurt because of some internet political discussions dictate their vote. Sure, it may happen on very isolated cases, but those are folks are in dire need of medical attention, not political persuasion. I’m sure that we can all agree on this.

joana on April 26, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Can I get an Amen?

ultracon on April 26, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Like you, I think, I refuse to believe there are people have so much ego that they’ll let the fact their feelings are hurt because of some internet political discussions dictate their vote. Sure, it may happen on very isolated cases, but those are folks are in dire need of medical attention, not political persuasion. I’m sure that we can all agree on this.

joana on April 26, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Or it could just be a case of Romney supporters only hearing what they want to hear, since I was one of the one accused of “being swayed by the jerkiness of his supporters.” Most of us have said over and over again that we are reluctantly voting for Romney. It is those that refuse to actually read that need medical attention. May I suggest some glasses maybe?

melle1228 on April 26, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Angryyyyyyyyyyed! Come out to pllllayaay!

thebrokenrattle on April 25, 2012 at 8:47 PM

..RIFFS!!!!

The War Planner on April 26, 2012 at 11:33 AM

There are hard feelings on both sides — both the pro-Romney and anti-Romney folks. Primaries bring out the worst in everyone.

Give this a few days for people’s emotions to settle down. Most of the Romney supporters at HA have respected supporters of other candidates and have welcomed them aboard with each primary win. There obviously have been a few demeaning and over-zealous Rombots.

And the anti-Romney people coming on board have a responsibility to give the candidate a fair shake, a fresh start to make his case and unify the party. We have much more in common than what differentiates us — starting with getting rid of Obama.

matthew8787 on April 26, 2012 at 11:34 AM

I have a hard time understanding the negativity around here. Romney’s smart, he’s organized, he’s articulate, he’s informed, he’s got solid family values, he fights hard, he’s steady, he’s for shrinking government and cutting spending, he’s against raising taxes, he’s solid on illegal immigration, he’s pro-life, he polls well against Obama at this stage of the game. Is he perfect? No–but neither were the other candidates perfect. Does he have sharp elbows? Yeah–but isn’t that the kind of candidate we want to go up against the President? Is his record as governor conservative enough? Not if you believe that governing the most liberal state in the Union is the same as governing Texas. Still, he vetoed over 800 bills. He never raised taxes. He cut spending. He achieved what he could as a traditional fiscal conservative, given his context. So why the sour attitudes?

writeblock on April 26, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Bull-schmidt!

Etch-a-sketch is not ahead in Florida. Hot Air is becoming RNC propaganda central.

Jayrae on April 26, 2012 at 11:43 AM

he’s for shrinking government and cutting spending,

Maybe because he says all this and then agree with Obama on student loans which cost the country 6 billion a year. It doesn’t bode well if he is more worried about voting blocs or how Obama is going to portray him than cutting entitlement spending. How is he going to tackle huge entitlement spending like Medicare if he is constantly worried about voting blocs and how Democrats will portray him?

melle1228 on April 26, 2012 at 11:47 AM

That’s a good question. I can’t speak for everyone, but from where I stand, I think it’s pretty damn reasonable to be insulted at Romney’s “It doesn’t matter what I do, they’ll vote for me anyway” attitude.

I want Obama to lose so bad that I can taste it. I’m not above helping Romney to win if it means helping Obama to lose. Unfortunately, not all Republican voters feel that way, and I can hardly blame them. I’m not going to pull any punches;

..etc.

The real way to broaden the Romney voter coalition is not to accept that he’s not being genuine as he insults large blocs of his own party. The way to bring in independent votes is to convince people that Romney is a real alternative who can reverse the damage that Obama is doing. “Obama is a nice guy, but…” is not the way to do that.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 9:36 AM

..having read your considerable — and considerate comments — it is apparent that you are doing a lot of thinking over the upcoming choices. I respect your reasoning and don’t know how this so-called dismissive behavior of Romney will play out.

The more I see of him the more my past reservations fall away and I become convinced that he merely wants to correct the grievous error that was the election of that incompetent fool from Chicago. I also see a person who earnestly wants the support of all — but that’s just my opinion.

For my part, please accept my sincere appreciation for your support of him and I welcome you to the ranks of the terminally ABO. If we are able to eject this butthole from our house in November, then I am 100% on your side in the crusade to make Romney live up to what conservative promises he made.

Thanks gryphon!

The War Planner on April 26, 2012 at 11:50 AM

I think it’s pretty damn reasonable to be insulted at Romney’s “It doesn’t matter what I do, they’ll vote for me anyway” attitude.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 9:36 AM

You “Anybody But Romney” fake conservatives are nothing but a bunch of drama queens who want your rear ends kissed. You guys like to say, “convince me to vote for him, tell me why I should,” even though the question has been answered countless times. If you don’t understand why Obama must be defeated at this point, then you are either no conservative or you are out of your mind. Your whining is becoming more than a little tiresome. Why don’t you actually listen to Romney. Or maybe you need to wait for your favorite talk show host to tell you what to say and what to think?

We get it. You guys want everyone to know what “principled” so-called conservatives you guys think you are. You care a lot about how you are viewed by others on a message board. Hey, if it makes you feel special and important to think you are maintaining some “true conservative” reputation in front of blog readers you’ve never met, then fine…. go for it.

As far as I’m concerned, anyone who has to repeatedly proclaim what a principled conservative they are, while campaigning against our Republican nominee and hoping for an Obama win, is nothing but a self-obsessed, grandstanding poseur.

Real conservatives are for Romney at this point. You’re either for Romney, or you’re supporting Obama’s re-election campaign. Remember the effect Nader voters had on Gore’s chances in 2000? Yep, they helped Bush win. In the same way, so-called conservatives who are now campaigning against Romney are simply useful idiots for Obama. Luckily I don’t imagine there are enough of you delusional fake conservatives to register as more than a blip on the radar screen… I think the majority of you several dozen ABR’s are congregated right here on this blog.

The primary season is over. Republican voters (thankfully and overwhelmingly!) selected the candidate with the best shot at defeating Obama. If you preferred another during the primary season, then I’m sorry… but it’s time to move on. We’ve all been in that situation.

The name of the game right now is defeating Obama by electing Mitt Romney. We can and will do this.

bluegill on April 26, 2012 at 11:52 AM

You do realize that Romney is the nominee, right?

That fact has been rather OBVIOUS for a couple of months now.

If you really supported him, you’d be working to win converts to your cause.

The open minded ignorant can be helped. The closed minded ABRtards are to be ridiculed and mocked.

But you don’t.

Says you.

You love your government mandated gunlocks, your big government statism, and your messiah – Obama.

besser tot als rot on April 26, 2012 at 10:39 AM

You haven’t been paying attention. No surprise that.

Gunlock Bill on April 26, 2012 at 11:52 AM

The real way to broaden the Romney voter coalition is not to accept that he’s not being genuine as he insults large blocs of his own party. The way to bring in independent votes is to convince people that Romney is a real alternative who can reverse the damage that Obama is doing. “Obama is a nice guy, but…” is not the way to do that.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 9:36 AM

Ok, maybe my last comment wasn’t directed at you, specifically. I can’t tell a lot of you people apart.

By the way, calling someone a “nice guy” is NOT a compliment. Do you not get that?

bluegill on April 26, 2012 at 11:54 AM

o/t

Pictures of the Day: If Barack Obama & George Zimmerman’s Maternal Great-Grandfathers Had Sons….

Resist We Much on April 26, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Like you, I think, I refuse to believe there are people have so much ego that they’ll let the fact their feelings are hurt because of some internet political discussions dictate their vote. Sure, it may happen on very isolated cases, but those are folks are in dire need of medical attention, not political persuasion. I’m sure that we can all agree on this.

joana on April 26, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Or it could just be a case of Romney supporters only hearing what they want to hear, since I was one of the one accused of “being swayed by the jerkiness of his supporters.” Most of us have said over and over again that we are reluctantly voting for Romney. It is those that refuse to actually read that need medical attention. May I suggest some glasses maybe?

melle1228 on April 26, 2012 at 11:25 AM

I don’t know what to make of your comment. Why are you so angry? It seems you agree with me.

You don’t think people who decide to vote against their interests and the future of their kids and this country because they feel butthurt over what some anonymous screen-names said on the internet are somewhat emotionally challenged and could do with some professional care?

If you’re going to vote Romney – as I am -, that’s normal, I wouldn’t expect anything else. I wasn’t talking about us.

joana on April 26, 2012 at 12:02 PM

If you really supported him, you’d be working to win converts to your cause.

besser tot als rot on April 26, 2012 at 10:39 AM

It’s beyond laughable to see so-called conservatives (who are campaigning against Romney) turn around and accuse others (who have enough sense to support Romney) of not doing a good enough job converting people to Romney supporters.

I’m just so sick of the people who come on here and like to act like nothing but a turd in the punch bowl. Anyway, I’m done venting for the day.

Hope you all have a terrific day!

bluegill on April 26, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Anyway, I’m done venting for the day.

bluegill on April 26, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Let us pray.

katy the mean old lady on April 26, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Maybe because he says all this and then agree with Obama on student loans which cost the country 6 billion a year. It doesn’t bode well if he is more worried about voting blocs or how Obama is going to portray him than cutting entitlement spending. How is he going to tackle huge entitlement spending like Medicare if he is constantly worried about voting blocs and how Democrats will portray him?

melle1228 on April 26, 2012 at 11:47 AM

It’s not only a good political move, it’s a just one. Students are caught in a trap sprung by government intrusion into the loan business in the first place–which has radically inflated college tuition costs. They already bear a heavy burden. This is not the place to look for more revenue–and students are not the ones to hit even harder.

As for Medicare, as far as I know no conservative intends to eliminate the program or to ration care. The conservative intention is to make the kind of structural changes that benefit patients while introducing more competition into the process. Who better to handle such adjustments than somebody who has proven his competency over and over when given problems like this to solve either in the private or public sector?

writeblock on April 26, 2012 at 12:13 PM

You love your government mandated gunlocks,

besser tot als rot on April 26, 2012 at 10:39 AM

FYI,

The name “Gunlock” was coined more than a century before the concept of applying a mechanical lock to a gun for the allusion of safety was first foisted upon the public.

Gunlock Bill on April 26, 2012 at 12:16 PM

It’s not only a good political move, it’s a just one. Students are caught in a trap sprung by government intrusion into the loan business in the first place–which has radically inflated college tuition costs. They already bear a heavy burden. This is not the place to look for more revenue–and students are not the ones to hit even harder.

I disagree. Even if we raised the rate back to 6% students are still getting a break. Before Obamacare law took over all student loans; students had to borrow through banks. 6% is better than the rate we were getting with banks. I know because I have loans through both.

As for Medicare, as far as I know no conservative intends to eliminate the program or to ration care. The conservative intention is to make the kind of structural changes that benefit patients while introducing more competition into the process. Who better to handle such adjustments than somebody who has proven his competency over and over when given problems like this to solve either in the private or public sector?

writeblock on April 26, 2012 at 12:13

Time will tell if Romney’s business acumen is a net positive or a net negative. I am up for giving him a chance..

melle1228 on April 26, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Bull-schmidt!

Etch-a-sketch is not ahead in Florida. Hot Air is becoming RNC propaganda central.

Jayrae on April 26, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Wrong. He’s not only ahead in FL but he’ll take most of the swing states, including my own, PA. Why? Because he’s trapped in the mid 40s in job approval, never getting better than 47% approval–and not even that in most swing states. He’s at 45% in PA, 46% in FL, 43% in CO, 45% in VA. Those are terrible numbers. No incumbent under 48% is likely to win since most undecideds will break for the challenger when the incumbent’s approval numbers are weak. Obama is toast.

writeblock on April 26, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Pictures of the Day: If Barack Obama & George Zimmerman’s Maternal Great-Grandfathers Had Sons…

http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2012/04/pictures-of-day-if-barack-obama-george.html

Resist We Much on April 26, 2012 at 12:31 PM

I disagree. Even if we raised the rate back to 6% students are still getting a break. Before Obamacare law took over all student loans; students had to borrow through banks. 6% is better than the rate we were getting with banks. I know because I have loans through both.

But the bank loans were backed by government guarantees–which was what drove up costs. Same as the housing bubble. The road to hell is always paved with good intentions. No way banks would have been so free with loans except for this, so government was involved from the start. In my view students need all the help they can get at this point, especially with job prospects being what they are. It would be wrong to burden them even further, especially when there are whole departments–like Energy and Education and the EPA–that could be severely cut without negative effect. Others can be consolidated–and will be if Romney’s elected.

writeblock on April 26, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Wait I am confused.. Am I suppose to be swayed by his supporter or not? Apparently we are suppose to ignore them when they are jerks, but listen to them when they are saying something of substance..//

melle1228 on April 26, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Does it not stand to reason that people who factor in the behavior of a politician’s supporters when deciding what degree of support they themselves will give that politician have overly emotional, screwed up priorities from the start? If you say that it doesn’t, why exactly would you say that?

Bizarro No. 1 on April 26, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Anyway, I’m done venting for the day.

bluegill on April 26, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Thanks, now that you have destroyed the ozone layer.

SparkPlug on April 26, 2012 at 1:37 PM

Ok, maybe my last comment wasn’t directed at you, specifically. I can’t tell a lot of you people apart.
By the way, calling someone a “nice guy” is NOT a compliment. Do you not get that?

bluegill on April 26, 2012 at 11:54 AM

That’s funny, we can spot you people a mile away.

Anyway, I’m done venting for the day.

bluegill on April 26, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Let us pray.

katy the mean old lady on April 26, 2012 at 12:11 PM

LOL!

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 1:46 PM

Does it not stand to reason that people who factor in the behavior of a politician’s supporters when deciding what degree of support they themselves will give that politician have overly emotional, screwed up priorities from the start? If you say that it doesn’t, why exactly would you say that?

Bizarro No. 1 on April 26, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Your premise is incorrect. You assume that people who comment on the stupidity of some of Romney’s supporters are swayed by anything said by such people. Some of us are truly curious why you would think being rude to people you should want to sway is a good move toward reaching your goal of getting Romney elected. It makes one wonder if that is really your goal at all, because it really does not make sense. It seems like the people who act in such a way are the ones who are overly emotional, stupid and possibly unbalanced.

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 1:51 PM

Your premise is incorrect. You assume that people who comment on the stupidity of some of Romney’s supporters are swayed by anything said by such people. Some of us are truly curious why you would think being rude to people you should want to sway is a good move toward reaching your goal of getting Romney elected. It makes one wonder if that is really your goal at all, because it really does not make sense. It seems like the people who act in such a way are the ones who are overly emotional, stupid and possibly unbalanced.

Night Owl on April 26, 2012 at 1:51 PM

My premise was incorrect? Defensive much? lol please don’t answer that question, as I already see from reading your whole post that there’s no need for you to do so! :)

I should point out to you that I asked my question of melle1228 specifically because I was interesred in where s/he was coming from, not because I was unaware, as you apparently are, that there are plenty of people right here at HA who have self-incriminatingly been complaining about Romney’s supporters and the negative impact those supporters have supposedly been having on “potential” support of Romney.

Bizarro No. 1 on April 26, 2012 at 2:49 PM

I should point out to you that I asked my question of melle1228 specifically because I was interesred in where s/he was coming from

MY response: I was being sarcastic about the inconsistency of zealous supporters who say we shouldn’t be swayed by their “attitudes” but we should pipe up and listen when they have something of substance to say.

Does it not stand to reason that people who factor in the behavior of a politician’s supporters when deciding what degree of support they themselves will give that politician have overly emotional, screwed up priorities from the start? If you say that it doesn’t, why exactly would you say that?

Bizarro No. 1 on April 26, 2012 at 12:52 PM

And to your statement, I don’t comment on the mental state of anyone I don’t know. I do know that I think it is crazy to insult people that you want on your side whether you think that they are “butthurt” or mentally instable. A vote is a vote even one from someone you deem crazy.

melle1228 on April 26, 2012 at 2:58 PM

The Bradley effect, less commonly called the Wilder effect,is a theory proposed to explain observed discrepancies between voter opinion polls and election outcomes in some United States government elections where a white candidate and a non-white candidate run against each other. The theory proposes that some voters will tell pollsters they are undecided or likely to vote for a black candidate, while on election day they vote for the white candidate. It was named after Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, an African-American who lost the 1982 California governor’s race despite being ahead in voter polls going into the elections.

mapper on April 26, 2012 at 10:51 AM

That’s what I mean, mapper. The Bradley Effect tends to apply when a black candidate is polling AHEAD. Obama isn’t polling ahead. He’s in a statistical dead heat with Romney. Assuming that the Bradley Effect is in play, this bodes very poorly for Obama. Unfortunately for the pollsters and pundits, statistics can’t really do a good job of measuring the qualitative, and Obama is the most polarizing politician I’ve ever seen in my lifetime (nearly 34 years). Any prediction I make between now and November are strictly opinion and based on my personal oberservations and feelings…

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 4:23 PM

For my part, please accept my sincere appreciation for your support of him and I welcome you to the ranks of the terminally ABO. If we are able to eject this butthole from our house in November, then I am 100% on your side in the crusade to make Romney live up to what conservative promises he made.

Thanks gryphon!

The War Planner on April 26, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Thank you. While I don’t necessarily share your admiration for Mitt Romney, I do consider being called “reasonable” a high compliment, particularly when it comes from people that disagree with me. It looks like Mitt has finally settled in to his role as the Republican nominee, and from here to November (and hopefully beyond), I’ll welcome whatever help I can get from the blogosphere and my fellow commenters to ensure that Mitt Romney stays an honest man.

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 4:26 PM

By the way, calling someone a “nice guy” is NOT a compliment. Do you not get that?

bluegill on April 26, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Hey Blue. You’re a nice guy.

/UberSnark

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 4:27 PM

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.

Aside from Mittens work on passing his Individual Mandate known as Romneycare, where did he lead as Governor of Mass?

Romney: The GOP version of 0bama.

DannoJyd on April 27, 2012 at 4:50 AM

MY response: I was being sarcastic about the inconsistency of zealous supporters who say we shouldn’t be swayed by their “attitudes” but we should pipe up and listen when they have something of substance to say.

What’s inconsistent about that?

If somebody makes a true statement in an obnoxious manner, I am going to agree with the person even if I don’t like how they chose to phrase it – the way I see it, if I expect the person to focus more on their attitude/delivery than on the substance/truthfulness of what they’re communicating, there’s something wrong with me.

Does it not stand to reason that people who factor in the behavior of a politician’s supporters when deciding what degree of support they themselves will give that politician have overly emotional, screwed up priorities from the start? If you say that it doesn’t, why exactly would you say that?

Bizarro No. 1 on April 26, 2012 at 12:52 PM

And to your statement, I don’t comment on the mental state of anyone I don’t know. I do know that I think it is crazy to insult people that you want on your side whether you think that they are “butthurt” or mentally instable. A vote is a vote even one from someone you deem crazy.

melle1228 on April 26, 2012 at 2:58 PM

I agree with 100% you that it’s not a good initial move to insult potential supporters, and I agree in general that it’s not the wisest course of action to comment upon the mental state of people you don’t know. However…once someone has injected others’ mental states into a conversation by attempting to make the focus about them, I believe it’s foolish to not throw the attempt right back into his lap and ask the person to explain himself.

Bizarro No. 1 on April 27, 2012 at 6:44 AM

By the way, calling someone a “nice guy” is NOT a compliment. Do you not get that?

bluegill on April 26, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Hey Blue. You’re a nice guy.

/UberSnark

gryphon202 on April 26, 2012 at 4:27 PM

Now, that simply was uncalled for – stop being so mean to bluegill! lol

Bizarro No. 1 on April 27, 2012 at 6:56 AM

The name of the game right now is defeating Obama by electing Mitt Romney. We can and will do this.

bluegill on April 26, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Well said bluegill!! I’m with you 100%!!!

Marco on April 27, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5