I have been watching the Presidential race from afar. Neither candidate has done much to garner my support, while both have done plenty to accrue my disdain.
I would have assumed that a sitting President with these economic numbers would be an easy opponent to beat. Even though the election is still 3 1/2 months away, the polls do not reflect that. Forbe’s Real Clear Politics has Obama 2.4% ahead of Romney. (I put zero stock in the Intrade numbers showing the incumbent ahead 55.7% to 41.5%). Florida should be a safe state for the challenger, instead, its a statistical dead heat.
Color me genuinely surprised.
Hale Stewart (Bonddad) makes this observation:
“The real crime of Romney’s candidacy is that he should be able to run as a successful Republican executive of a liberal state that solved one of the biggest problems the state faces (health care costs). He implemented the Republican health care plan (yes, the mandate was first proffered by the Heritage Foundation in 1989 and again in 1994 in response to Clinton’s health care initiative) which is actually doing pretty well at the state level.
This would demonstrate his ability to work across the aisle. (Of course, this is also when he was pro-choice.)
But, the Republican base has moved so far to the right — and become so hyper-partisan — that Romney can’t mention this. And so, his biggest political achievement — which, again, was pretty impressive — is now his biggest liability.”
That is a rather fascinating observation.
It made me think about McCain (whom I supported in 2000). I thought the 2000 vintage McCain could have made it a closer race than the 2008 “New” McCain (George W. Bush made nearly any republican unelectable in ’08);
I wonder if the 2012 Romney is going to do worse than the 2002 Romney would have done . . .
>
See also:
• Real Clear Politics All Polls (RCP)
• Romney Banks Big on Anti-Obama Vote (WSJ)
Category: Politics
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.
Hi, Barry– The election isn’t 5 months away. It’s 3-1/2 months away.
Romney is constantly putting his foot in his mouth and cannot connect with the ordinary person on the street. His only backers are hardcore Republicans, those who think Obama is a non-native American socialist and black to boot (don’t under estimate the native racist tendencies of the electorate that will be offset by the Mormonism is a cult crowd) and the Wall Street Crowd who feel entitled to a tax rate as close to zero as it can get.
He’s also been CEO of a company did lots of leveraged buyouts but created precious little in the way of contributions to the US economy. He has refused to explain a lot of key things about his Bain years – how he accumulated $100M in an IRA, the missing CEO years 1999-2002, and his view on off shoring of jobs. We already had 8 years of an MBA President; do we want to risk another four?
I wonder what would happen if they gave an election and nobody showed up to vote?
Romney is the new Niedermeier or the Niederhauser; both way past done fighting the old pre-Global game of Monopoly wins.
Winston Munn:
We have very low turnout, already. If nobody showed up, the SCOTUS would appoint Bush/Cheney.
Ever since he was fingered in the Washington Post as the dude who cut some other dude’s hair while in prep school, his days were numbered -
to borrow the utterance of Kurtz from the Heart of Darkness- the horror, the horror
Stewart’s observation is right on target. The other thing that will work against Romney: many middle and lower income people are misinformed about how the Affordable Care Act will effect them (due in no small part to a certain quasi-news channel, and the de facto republican party chair’s radio talk show). More and more people are going to realize that “Obamacare” iteself is not a tax, the penalty for choosing to remain uninsured is what the supreme court has deemed a tax – and this is estimated to effect 1% of the population. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the tax effect on the middle class will be a net BENEFIT of $576 billion dollars over the next ten years. Oh yes, and about 20 million hard working Americans whose employers don’t offer health insurance will now have access to affordable coverage. My point here is not about praising this law – my point is that when the middle class, working poor, and just plain poor come to understand the direct benefits to them, and that Romney has vowed to obliterate this law on his first day in office – well that just doesn’t help his chances of getting elected.
2012, the devil you know is better than the one you don’t.
And Hale Stewart is 100% correct. If this was 1996 or 2000, Romney would be mopping up a Democratic challenger.
If the GOP wants Romney to have a chance to win in November the curmudgeon, grumpy old person/Archie Bunker wing of the party needs to shut up. Not likely to happen though.
The problem is any Republican candidate had to be squeezed thru the Tea Party/Wingnut/Crazy Trump filter. What came out the other end won’t get non-Tea Party/Wingnut/Crazy Trump fans too excited. He may win anyway in spite of those groups. If he doesn’t, maybe someone will kick Grover’s ass and rational people can take charge again. But, I suppose I’m a hopeless optimist.
This gives us some hope for the old Republican centrists. To quote Bush I: “The circumstances change and you can’t be wedded to some formula by Grover Norquist. It’s — who the hell is Grover Norquist, anyway?”
Barb had the best cut. She quipped of Norquist: “I think he ought to go back to Alaska.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/who-the-hell-is-grover-norquist-anyway-asks-george-hw-bush/2012/07/13/gJQAEzuViW_blog.html
If Obama was a real Dem, he could have been spearheading a populist drive to take back the House. But he’s only worried about his sorry skin and post 2nd term gigs..
“Why Are Romney’s Polls Slipping?”
To paraphrase Carly Simon:
He’s so Bain, he thinks what’s good for the one percent is good for America.
Aren’t the Intrade numbers an indication of relative likelihood of outcome, not polling preference? ie a 2% national polling lead equates to a 55% probability of winning the election. If the polls were at 60:40, Intrade would likely be at 100%. Compare them with Nate Silver’s assessment of likely outcomes – roughly 65% for Obama. So while there are lots of reasons to reject Intrade (especially after the SCOTUS ACA fiasco), this isn’t one of them.
But I agree with the substance of your remarks – McCain 2000 would likely have won in 2008, especially if he’d chosen Romney 2002 as his running mate instead of She Who Must Not Be Named.
well Mitts figure’s would be higher if he would simply state exactly who he had run Bain after he “retroactively” retired.
Sounds as if a hell of a lot investment decisions were made from 1999 onwards so exactly who in Bain was signing off on the paperwork?
Should be easy for Bain to produce the documents with the “true leaders” signature. You reckon?
Starting to look like the Olympic job was cover to insulate Mitt from any blowback on the outsourcing decisions.
BR, I am a little surprised that you are so sure that Obama is a goner, there was an article in the morning’s WSJ: Political Perceptions: Romney Banks Big on Anti-Obama Vote. Following is my comment posted there:
2004 vs 2012:
Conventional wisdom and pundits:
2004: This election is all about Iraq, if Iraq is a disaster, the President is toasted.
2012: The election is all about the economy, if the economy is a disaster, the President is toasted.
Not going to take it anymore true believer primary candidate:
2004: Howard Dean
2012: Rick Santorum
Party nominee(most electable):
2004: John Kerry
2012: Mitt Rommy
Rallying cry:
2004: W stole the election from Gore, Gore “won” by more than a million popular vote
2012: Obamacare (tax and spend is standard fare that’s been around for at least 30 years)
Challenge party sentiment:
2004: Anybody but W, we are all so galvanized.
2012: Anybody but Obama,….
Whatever your political inclination is, beating incumbent is tough.
Slipping? He’s going to be a Dukakis numbers by election day. He is literally a man without a party at this point.
What does it take to understand this……the Republican Party has taken the extreme, far right, head-banging position. This is hurting Romney. This bunch doesn’t understand how far the methodology of Karl Rove is taking them from the needs of this country. The “Ostrich Party” is killing their chances.
Anybody but Obama. Or Romney.
To anyone that makes $50k a year or less [aka most of the country], Romney comes off as a person out of touch with reality or from another planet. Hiding 100s of millions of dollars off shore, using horse purchases as a tax write off, hosting private fund raisers for people that donated $250k, and just plain socially awkward in public appearances – none of this makes him much of an appealing alternative to Obama.
There’s plenty to chew on. Start with Supreme Court appointments. Do we really need another Sam Alito? Feh. Score for Obama.
Romney is one of those sharp businessmen who relies on lawyers for loopholes, and the ends justify the means. That’s one reason his initial positive impression repeatedly curdles on further acquaintance. Score another for Obama.
Romney’s economic program, to the extent he has deigned to share it with us, is just a retread of Bush Jr. He’s learned nothing from a really bad eight years. The Ryan budget, on analysis, is toxic. I’m really not in the mood for another 2008. Are you? Score yet another for Obama.
Romney’s secrecy projects an unhealthy class sensibility. As CEO, he’s used to giving orders. While Romney continues to do favors for the Job Creators who in 10 years have created no jobs, all he has for the rest of us is stern lectures on our need to sacrifice. Well, fork him. Score another for Obama.
When Romney left Bain matters, because he invested in a company that handled fetus disposal for abortion clinics. If Romney can be successfully tied to that little bit of free enterprise, the Tea Party will stroke out before our very eyes. Score one more for Obama.
And word is Romney’s sitting on the his returns because in one or more years, he paid nothing. Steve Schmidt, McCain’s campaign manager, has seen the returns, and if he sings, game over. The win for Obama.
What the hell are you thinking?
A mumbling, stumbling, job-destroying, job-exporting, wall street-type, who can’t tell the same story two days in row whose only constituent class is the one percent, AND a card-carrying member of the financial elite who’ve stolen trillions from this country and driven the 99% into the dust … are you outa your freaking mind??? Obama should be up 10% and celebrating his obvious win.
He’s not because he’s the worst freaking president since Reagan. Or maybe Bush… or Clinton, not W thou, wasn’t he the absolute worst thing to ever walk the earth!!! maybe a little overstated, but just a little.
The real truth is that the same shit gonna happen whoever is president… cause the president is only a puppet. O sure, one or the other of the crap-screaming pie holes will get all smuggly come nov. 7, but that’s just bread and circus for the peasants… government is just a convenient cutout for the real power.
Isn’t it obvious that we’re not capable of governing ourselves??? How many times must we get bitch-slapped by our chosen leader before it dawns on the masses that WE DON’T COUNT. All this bullshit about an election only proves one thing – the masters are still in control and that’s the way the peasants like it.
The Republican Party and the Romney campaign have defined absolute and complete stupidity. How could anybody with a brain bigger than a pea vote for Obama and yet when more than 50% of this country feeds at the public trough and the Repubs offer no coherent solutions why not?
FWIW
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-15/romney-s-bain-yielded-private-gains-socialized-losses.html
I want to see Romney’s earlier tax returns.
In three words – release tax returns.
In hiding it, the public grows more and more insistent that he show them, his efforts to distance himself from Bain from 1999-2002 is also an eye opener.
Simply give up the info and bite the bullet, it only gets worse if he refuses.
Frilton Miedman:
I agree. I think that Mitt is handing Obama the equivalent of a “Birther” issue except that this one looks like it has real documentation to back up the conspiracy theorists which is why the documents won’t see the light of day.
$100 million IRAs, Swiss bank accounts, <15% marginal tax rates, and offshored jobs from 1999-2002 is exactly what the Republican 1% want to be able to do but they can't let anybody know it.
Soft brown stuff meets fan.
I don’t like Rahm E. but the man knows how to hammer an opponent.
“He has released only one year. To the McCain campaign, he released 23 years. And he’s telling the American people, I’m not going to give you what I’ve given John McCain’s people in 2008. And when he gave them 23 years, John McCain’s people looked at it and said, “Let’s go with Sarah Palin.” So whatever’s in there is far worse than just the first year.”
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/rahm-week-why-did-mccain-campaign-pic
I enjoy reading this blog daily even though my politics have become more conservative lately. I also read Mauldin, The Economist, Bloomberg Businessweek, WSJ, NYT and view many of the news shows including even the hated FOX shows. I used to be very liberal voting for Carter, Clinton etc. and strongly felt that Reagan would go down as the worst president in history for his massive expansion of the national debt. As a wealthy white male business owner I am not feeling the love from this administration. Obama and most of cabinet and advisors have little if any real world experience of what it takes to start and grow a business. I have had the good fortune of starting, growing and then selling three different multi-million dollar businesses. Any honest observer of Romney’s business career gives him high marks. Bill Clinton called it a sterling career. This whole class warfare thing disgusts me. Also, disgusting is the illegal way the Chrysler bond holders were dealt with not to mention the arbitrary closing and reassignment go GM dealerships. That is why I am voting “gasp” Republican this year. Ok, fire away with your insults.
BR: “I thought the 2000 vintage McCain could have made it a closer race than the 2008 ‘New’ McCain”
But the 2000 vintage McCain could never have attained the Republican presidential nomination in 2008. Here’s what McCain had to say about the failed massive tax cuts that overwhelmingly benefited the Rich & Corporate which were being advocated by Chimpy Bush and his fellow Republicans back then:
“There’s one big difference between me and the others – I won’t take every last dime of the surplus and spend it on tax cuts that mostly benefit the wealthy”
“I am disappointed that the Senate Finance Committee preferred instead to cut the top tax rate of 39.6% to 36%, thereby granting generous tax relief to the wealthiest individuals of our country at the expense of lower- and middle-income American taxpayers.”
The Republican party has gone so far to the Right, they are like one of those extreme fringe parties in Europe that everyone thinks has gone round the bend.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/is-this-the-most-boring-election-ever-20120507
Businessweek
Campaign Fundraisers: You’re Cordially Excluded
By Paul M. Barrett on July 12, 2012
You can’t accuse Mitt Romney of being inconsistent. Well, you can about health care, abortion, gun control, and whether the American car industry should have been rescued. You can’t, however, accuse him of inconsistency when it comes to raising money from wealthy executives and financiers in sumptuous private settings. In that he is unswerving and highly skilled, as demonstrated by his estimated $3 million take from a trio of events on July 8 in the Hamptons. The highlight of Romney’s Long Island beach jaunt was a $50,000-per-person dinner at the home of billionaire David Koch.
We don’t know what Romney told guests at Chez Koch, because, like most fundraisers he attends at supporters’ homes, it was off-limits to all but those opening large wallets. As usual, journalists were kept at a safe distance, and the campaign wouldn’t release Romney’s remarks. It’s safe to assume he revealed something–in substance or tone–that he wouldn’t want the public to hear. Why else the secrecy?
President Obama is almost as tight-lipped about the lavish dinners he headlines. His handlers allow reporters to witness boilerplate opening remarks before herding them to the curb. But Obama is so determined to make sure there’s no record of his less formal comments that campaign workers confiscate guests’ phones and put them in plastic bags before some fundraisers, including one held on May 14 at the New York home of Blackstone (BX) President Tony James.
…
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/61544-campaign-fundraisers-youre-cordially-excluded
I sincerely doubt that the right-wing evangelicals will vote for a Mormon presidential candidate. OTOH, Obama is a snake who screwed us and will continue to do so in his next term. I will not vote for him, but I won’t vote for Romney either. I do expect Romney to lose big.
—————-
Businessweek
How the Mormons Make Money
By Caroline Winter on July 10, 2012
Late last March the Mormon Church completed an ambitious project: a megamall. Built for roughly $2 billion, the City Creek Center stands directly across the street from the church’s iconic neo-Gothic temple in Salt Lake City. The mall includes a retractable glass roof, 5,000 underground parking spots, and nearly 100 stores and restaurants, ranging from Tiffany’s (TIF) to Forever 21. Walkways link the open-air emporium with the church’s perfectly manicured headquarters on Temple Square. Macy’s (M) is a stone’s throw from the offices of the church’s president, Thomas S. Monson, whom Mormons believe to be a living prophet.
On the morning of its grand opening, thousands of shoppers thronged downtown Salt Lake, eager to elbow their way into the stores. The national anthem played, and Henry B. Eyring, one of Monson’s top counselors, told the crowds, “Everything that we see around us is evidence of the long-standing commitment of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to Salt Lake City.” When it came time to cut the mall’s flouncy pink ribbon, Monson, flanked by Utah dignitaries, cheered, “One, two, three–let’s go shopping!”
Watching a religious leader celebrate a mall may seem surreal, but City Creek reflects the spirit of enterprise that animates modern-day Mormonism. The mall is part of a sprawling church-owned corporate empire that the Mormon leadership says is helping spread its message, increasing economic self-reliance, and building the Kingdom of God on earth. “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints attends to the total needs of its members,” says Keith B. McMullin, who for 37 years served within the Mormon leadership and now heads a church-owned holding company, Deseret Management Corp. (DMC), an umbrella organization for many of the church’s for-profit businesses. “We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.”
…
http://www.businessweek.com/printer/articles/61700-how-the-mormons-make-money
We desperately need a center-right party, but at this point the closest thing to that is the Dems, and they aren’t nearly close enough.
Why didn’t McCain select Romney as VP?
Just a thought that in the end, contrary to the media popular belief, it really isn’t the economy that will be the deciding factor (assuming that the perception is that the economy isn’t seriously worse than now on election day).
Both candidates are, in regards to the economy, wounded by their histories. If people want to fire someone for poor performance (regardless of much, in reality, that the President has very limited influence over the health of the economy), they don’t shrug and say, well, the next guy can’t be worse – they expect someone who will better. So far, Rommey hasn’t convinced them that he would be, and I suspect, he can’t effectively. So, unless that belief changes, it’s an emotional draw between the two on that score.
The only major policy difference between the two – in the public’s eyes right now – is the health care act. A majority of likely voters don’t approve of the mandate part, but of those, it’s split between those who really hate the idea, and those who grumble, but will sigh and think of it along the lines of mandated auto insurance. By the way, the first state to require auto insurance was Mass, back in 1927, it took decades for it become the norm.
However, a majority do like most of the rest of the affordable health care act. Add Rommey’s own history on the subject, and that policy difference ends up not being very consequential in the voting booth.
That leaves social issues, which works to the President’s favor. The two big ones are the social libertarian ones: a whether a woman has the right of choice when it comes abortion, and same-sex marriage. I used the term libertarian deliberately, while the current emphasis is widely seen – via Ron Paul – as minimal government, laissez-faire markets, it also includes the notion that people have the freedom to chose how they want to live, without government constraints, as long as those behaviors don’t hurt others (which is how Paul reconciles his anti-choice views with his political philosophy, fetuses are human from conception, therefore it’s murder).
If, there isn’t really a spit worth of difference when it comes to the economy, if health care is a split decision, then, then those social issues inevitably will come to mind. Why, the election is so close in the polls…
You assume that the electorate is intelligent and informed and what the candidates platform and accomplishments are will determine the winner, actually it will be the candidate that Joe Sixpack would rather have a beer with.
We need a tough SOB like H Truman or T Roosevelt and our chices are Carter 11 vs Boy Bush 11, although I am not certain who is Carter. Television has lowered the quality of politicans.
Obama reminds me of the employee that spends 11 months a year goofing off and applies himself the month before his evaluation and raise.
I wouldn’t spend 5 minutes standing in line to vote for either candidate.
Romney’s getting Swift-boated. In a page out of Karl Rove, his strength as a pragmatic, effective hands-on business guy is being turned into ‘tax-evading lying job-killer.’
Pretty scary that with this IRA nonsense and the 15% carried interest loophole he probably paid less than 10% tax on his Bain income.
The Dems are a center-right party (to paraphrase: we’re so far right it looks like left to us). For example, we have “Obamacare” — a plan originally drafted by the Heritage Foundation, who now paints it as being radically left wing,
We need someone left of center.
One reason Romney is not doing well is because Obama has been very effective at changing the topic from the economy to that of Romney himself via negative campaigning, the irony of which is that Romney used a great deal of negative campaigning to beat his Republican challengers. The other reason is that Romney himself in many respects was the worst choice to beat Obama for two reasons, first running private equity does not give the same credentials for creating jobs and understanding the economy as running a traditional business and second his governorship record in health care does not give him the ability to critique Obamacare.
The idea that Romney would make “Obamacare” a (the) major campaign issue is beyond ironic all the way to disturbing. What does this say about his character? Sure politicians spin and nuance stuff but to run against your greatest achievement . . . not good.
Dr. Jill Stein, Green Party
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/13/us/politics/jill-stein-green-party-candidate-and-the-chances-of-making-a-difference.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all
The only real choice we have.
‘Anybody but Obama. Or Romney.’ — billybob
The Media insist on casting these polls as ‘Obama vs. Romney.’ That’s all wrong.
I read the poll average as showing that 91.2% of those polled support Mitthouse Obamney, the unopposed candidate of the PIRP (Permanent Institutional Republico-democratic Party).
Grateful citizens can be confident that the PIRP will win this election with a huge margin, as it has every election for the past 150 years.
Exercise your ‘choice’ wisely!
Interesting that McCain was mentioned. I was drawn to him briefly when he was facing Bush2, before he succombed to the political pressure and assumed the role of a good Republican soldier. I still remeber the disgusting attacks on his family…just so far out of line.
But, I see parallels with Romney’s candidacy. I think the Republicans are going to “let this one slide” in order to focus more on building their base back up in Congress and in the courts. They’ll throw out some ads to remind the faithful that they’re still the party of capitalism and moral authority, but I don’t expect too much of an effort.
Bottome line: let’s let Obama/Dems take the blame for an economy that’s suffering, ironically, in part because of Republican-backed policies. And, when the time is right, they’ll come in and “rescue” us.
“I wouldn’t spend 5 minutes standing in line to vote for either candidate.”
I second! I personally don’t care which independently wealthy slime bag upholds the status quo of both houses being betrothed to K street, the middle class being enslaved and destroying the country. For “the 99%”, this is a vast amount of money being wasted to ensure that an honest, hard working and educated man never gets into office. And we wonder why only 45% of the population votes.
What we’re witnessing is an object lesson in why a political party shouldn’t encourage its most radical element to act as the base of its party platform. Once welcomed into the fold in order to score political points during the healthcare debate (remember all those congressional meet and greets interrupted by the Tea Party crowd?), the Tea Party conservative is now a huge liability to the GOP. Unless the GOP intends to win national elections without the support of women, Hispanics and Latinos, lesbians and gays, the under- or unemployed, and the chronically ill, they need to seriously rework their party message.
It is ironic, perhaps poetically so, that some conservatives are beginning to realize that corporate interests do not necessarily reflect their own. It’s difficult to reconcile the Citizens United decision, for example, with common sense. It’s difficult to justify the rallying cry of “Government is not the answer; it’s the problem” with the government bailout of General Motors. It’s difficult to reconcile the Tea Party’s insistence that President Obama release his birth certificate with Romney’s reluctance to release his tax returns. Inconsistencies such as these cripple political movements.
When asked how he was able to garner so much support when leading England during WWII, when everything seemed so bleak, Churchill explained that the people will go to great lengths to support a leader who is trustworthy. They will tolerate a Prime Minister who makes mistakes. They will tolerate a Prime Minister who is limited in his understanding of the economy, or military tactics, or is limited in his understanding of history or foreign diplomacy. What they will not tolerate is a leader who comes across as disingenuous or insincere. Mitt Romney? Really?
Romney’s biggest problem isn’t his offshore money parking. It’s his Latino problem. If you look at the number of Republican votes in Florida from 2004-2008 the increase in new GOP voters is nearly non-existent. Yet Hispanic population growth in Orlando, Tampa and Miami has been enormous. Since the more friendly to Hispanics George Bush, Hipsanics have been moving toward the Democrats. The deficit in new voters is staggering at least 5 to 1. Consider the 2010 elections that gave us Marco Rubio. With low Democrat enthusiasm and the Tea Party on maximum revs, the Florida Republicans barely mustered a 1% victory. That tells you A) Rubio has a hispanic problem himself and B) Florida Republicans can not match a heavy Dem turn out. And don’t think this problem for Romney is ends in November 2012. Over the next three or four elections Florida has the potential for joining California, NY, NJ, PA as blue states which would give any Dem nominee a huge advantage in the electoral college. As it stands now, if Romney loses the Hispanic vote in Florida, Colorado and PA, he’ll pretty much have to sweep everything else to even come close. The problem for Obama is that they actually need to come out — this is the whole election in a nutshell. I wonder if the Arizona law and Obama’s order not to deport the illegal children will have done precisely just that. Romney’s needs a Florida Hispanic, and not really Rubio who has too much baggage in his past, namely a foreclosure and a record as a fiscal liberal in Florida. Not just for Romney’s sake but for the party’s future Presidential elections.
The other issue for Romney is that he lacks a bsic requirement for the job, the ability to connect with $50K a year earner. There’s only been one President in the last 32 years who managed getting elected without this ability, Bush Sr. and that was in large due to Reagan’s coat tails. And Romney just isn’t a very skilled politician, perhaps the worst from the GOP yet. I still give him 51/49 odds but if he does win he will be one of the most unpopular Presidents in recent memmory since he’ll have no Dem support and half of his own party (the Tea Party side) will abandon him once they get wind of the fact that he’s a Keynesian at heart and isn’t interested in rocking the boat with steep cuts to anything. Neither will his ideas light the economy on fire anymore than Obama’s will not. What’s more, this really is no evidence at all of anything but higher spending when government goes from divided to one party control. An ironic reality for those voting against Obama because of the current trillion dollar annual deficits, they will be voting for still higher spending.
fraudney. phonier than a three dollar bill.
Is it ok to take the other side of the whining one-lotters? The debates will determine the election.
If Romney talks about taking the 2000 Olympics from a big money loser to a money maker and explains that even when Steve Jobs was getting a transplant and not making day to day decisions during rehab, Jobs was still the CEO of Apple he will be insulated from that attack.
When, during the debates, he explains that the Greeks kept spending and now they can’t pay for insulin for diabetics, he will get the independents.
When he expains that ObamaCare is going to cost at least about double what Obama said and that 26 million people still won’t be covered ( March 2012 CBO Updated Estimates for ACA, page 3 )
When Romney explains that even MIT’s Jon Gruber’s GMSIM didn’t account for pre-existing conditions and that the cost curve bends up not down and people will now be paying 19% more in premiums,
Game over!
Cheers!
While the grumpy old white dudes running the Republican party tell Romney what to say, the people Romney SHOULD care about are independent voters because they will determine the winner in November. Romney will remain out of touch and Obama will win re-election.
The G.O.P. doesn’t deserve the “G” anymore – nothing Grand about capitulating to Tea Partiers and voters who think The Flintstones is a documentary.
When the Republican nominees economic plan is “First, I’m going to give myself a big tax cut”, then the majority of Americans will be turned off. Romney = John Kerry
What can Romney possibly talk about? Every single issue he had to switch from moderate to extreme. Tax, health care, immigration, foreign policies if he has any, gun controls, etc. Even the issue of business he tries to build his campaign on is being doubted seriously due to his ineffective responses.
Lower tax, free market, less regulations; any 3rd grader can recite GOP/Romney economic plan. The same points people have been hearing day after day for decades with failed realities. Seriously you need to talk big issue? Come up with more elaborate talking points than that.
Romney Comes Clean, Admits He Made $32 Trillion In 2006
http://www.theonion.com/articles/romney-comes-clean-admits-he-made-32-trillion-in-2,28792/
thenoz,
“If Romney talks about taking the 2000 Olympics from a big money loser to a money maker and explains that even when Steve Jobs was getting a transplant and not making day to day decisions during rehab, Jobs was still the CEO of Apple he will be insulated from that attack.”
Except just last year, Romney signed an FEC document stating that he “has not had any active role with any Bain Capital entity and has not been involved in the operations of any Bain Capital entity in any way.”
As has now been well documented, he lied on a Federal Election Commission disclosure form.
“When, during the debates, he explains that the Greeks kept spending and now they can’t pay for insulin for diabetics…”
Except our massive federal deficits & debt are the result of tax cuts which overwhelmingly benefited the Rich & Corporate, not “spending”.
And Romney proposes $5 trillion in additional tax cuts which would overwhelmingly benefit the Rich & Corporate and futher explode the federal debt.
“When he expains that ObamaCare is going to cost at least about double what Obama said”
It won’t “cost at least about double” anything, as it LOWERS the deficits.
“( March 2012 CBO Updated Estimates for ACA, page 3 )”
Obviously you cannot read a CBO report.
The fundamental problem for the GOP is that they have moved very far to the right without wanting to admit they have moved very far to the right. As a result, their policies are insane and internally inconsistent. How can you say you’re going to cut taxes by trillions and balance the budget without cutting Social Security, Medicare, or defense? How can you say you’re going to improve health care by repealing a policy you used to endorse and replacing it with nothing? How can you say you want the Latino vote and that you think 11 million people should be deported? How can you say you care about education and cut scholarships and research funding, and support superstition like intelligent design? How can you complain about bailouts and the economy but oppose financial regulation and support the gold standard? I could go on.
During the GOP primary, there was much moaning among the conservative punditry about how terrible the candidates were. But the truth is, only fools and liars could claim to believe in the GOP platform. Any rational candidate would have been witch-hunted out. Romney knows this. In the end, the primary voters chose the liar (Romney) over the fools (Paul, Santorum, Gingrich), probably only because a liar is less immediately repulsive than a fool.
And here’s the rub: Mitt Romney is both a terrible and a prolific liar. He says whatever he thinks you want him to say. But it’s obvious that he’s only saying what he thinks you want him to say. Remember his ridiculous book about how America risked becoming “this century’s France”? Well, at the time it was fashionable to trash France. So Romney found the bluntest instrument he could and went to work.
Weird BR.
How many political races has Romney run? How many has he won?
He is not likable.
He was not a good governor in MA. 47th in job creation.
He believes in super-rich tax cutting. He hasn’t said much else (except anti-healthcare… which he invented).
He has swiss AND Cayman bank accounts?!?
Private equity is a dirty business of screwing employees and the govt through games. (File bankruptcy, still win!?)
Did I mention what a douche the guy seems like? “Corporations are people.” “My wife Ann needs a Betty Ford clinic for horses”. Etc.
He has an car elevator in his house. Seriously.
The more people know… the more Romney will be laughing stock. I haven’t even started in on the Mormonism… which was invented by a con-man to have multiple concubines (this stuff is fairly well documented). Many great loving people… but lots of weird baggage, like heaven is everyone getting their own planet… oh and horrible polygamy stories. Really that stuff is “middle east” bad for “women” (and by women I mean 12-15 y.o. girls who are basically sold. In Utah!)
So yeah… sounds like he’ll be president.
Oh, and your oddest comment… “seems like Florida should be easy for the challenger”?!?
Except the Republicans would like to end / privatize social security and medicare.
That will crush them in FL.
Joe Friday,
Sorry that you didn’t understand the Apple analogy. As for the cost of Obamacare, wait until the 23rd. I probably revealed more than I should have.
thenoz,
“Sorry that you didn’t understand the Apple analogy.”
You should be sorry you made such a ridiculous analogy.
“As for the cost of Obamacare, wait until the 23rd.”
Oh brother.
They are 10 year projections.
“I probably revealed more than I should have.”
Trust me, you’ve “revealed” PLENTY.
thenoz,
Well, well, well.
The independent non-partisan CBO just published a newly updated estimate of the ‘Affordable Care Act’ and its impact. The estimate reinforces what we already knew. The legislation, when fully implemented, will dramatically reduce the number of Americans without health insurance, and it will also REDUCE THE DEFICIT.
Joe,
What a genius! If you don’t understand then you don’t understand. Costs for patients with pre-existing conditions are not included which raises costs between 20% and 39%. Look at the number of uninsured ( not paying premiums). Stop drinking the Kool-aid and try to understand.
So, lemme get this straight.
The independent non-partisan CBO doesn’t know how to score congressional legislation (which is their job), but YOU do ?
Just as an example, why would I want to “Look at the number of uninsured ( not paying premiums)” ?
THEY ARE SUBSIDIZED.
Obviously, you do not comprehend the legislation.