● Polls: It seems almost obligatory that we talk about polling these days. So here are two things worth noting. A new Politico/GWU poll claims Romney has a 14% lead on Obama among the middle class. If true, that would not only put the lie to Obama’s class warfare strategy and claims to represent the middle class, but it would also mean Romney is blowing Obama away because 60% of the public is middle class. Interestingly, this figure doesn’t fit with Politico’s topline number of Obama leading by 3%.
The other interesting news was hidden within an article by Dick Morris on why you can’t trust the current polls. We’ve discussed this extensively here, but what Morris adds is that while most polls are using sample turnout identical to 2008, Rasmussen is using a combination of 2008 and 2004. . . not 2010. This explains why Rasmussen is better, but still calls the race a toss up. The electorate in 2004 was one of the most closely balanced in recent history and 2008 was a high-water mark for the Democrats. Neither of those scenarios is likely this time because there is a huge enthusiasm gap in favor of the Republicans and many Democratic voters (like college kids) haven’t even registered. Thus, any poll that incorporates the 2008 numbers will be skewed too far toward the Democrats. Moreover, 2004 is not a good balance for 2008 because it was also a low-Republican turnout election which gave the Democrats the House and Senate. Consequently, even Rasmussen’s numbers appear to be skewed left. I suspect that balancing the numbers against 2010 would show Romney with a 5-8% lead.
● It’s All Falling Apart: It’s been amazing to watch this false narrative being built about the Romney campaign falling apart. This started at Politico as a speculation piece on one of their back pages. The following morning, several MSM outlets and blogs ran with this story as if it were being reported as true rather than speculation. Suddenly, reporters were asking Romney about it and reporting his responses as him denying the truth of the supposed turmoil. Romney has all but laughed these off, but the MSM continues to run with stories about the troubles Romney is experiencing and how they are desperate for a re-set button, etc. They are also weaving in the fake poll narrative now, claiming that these polls are proof that Romney’s campaign is failing. In the latest incarnation, they are spinning it backwards by claiming the polls caused the panic, even though the panic story began before the polls they are talking about.
● Ryan Fires Back: This narrative of internal chaos has been pushed hard by many on the right. Leading the charge is RINO Peggy Noonan, who last week called the Romney campaign “incompetent,” and this week said:
“The Romney campaign has to get turned around. This week I called it incompetent, but only because I was being polite. I really meant ‘rolling calamity.’ A lot of people weighed in. . . . [but] no one that I know of defended the campaign or argued ‘you’re missing some of its quiet excellence.’”This is pathetic logic: “I’m right because I nobody bothered to tell me I’m wrong.” You can prove anything that way. She even claims that an unnamed source inside Romney’s camp secretly agrees with her! Yeah, right. But Noonan is not alone. Others on the left and right ends of the conservative spectrum have been just as harsh. Romney is swinging too far right, not far enough right, hasn’t said enough, says too much, needs to provide specifics, should avoid specifics. Mostly, he just needs to do “better.”
The truth is that our pundit class are idiots. They don’t know what they are talking about, so they try to fake having knowledge by criticizing the campaign while careful avoiding actually saying what the problem is. They do this because criticism is easy and they win no matter what. If Romney loses, they warned him. If he win, it was only because he followed their advice and “did it better.” Moreover, they make their living by drawing attention to themselves. Thus, they look for ways to be controversial and to sound smarter than they really are. This is not helping. These people should be attacking Obama’s myriad of failures, flaws and outrages, but they know they will sell more copies attacking their own side.
Paul Ryan put his finger on this when he said these commentators were wrong and that “I think that’s just the nature of conservative punditry is to do that – to kind of complain – about any imperfection they might see.” Sadly, that is correct.
● Return of the Tax Return: Finally, Romney released his 2011 taxes and the media is frustrated. They have no idea how to smear Romney with these because Romney gave $4,020,722 (29.4% of his income) to charity. Obama gave only $172,130 (21%) of his income and Joe Biden gave $5,540 (1.5%) of his income to charity.
There are also no strange surprises or deductions the MSM have been able to attack. So the best they’ve got now is Harry Reid whining to the Las Vegas Sun, “He’s hiding something! He’s hiding something! It is so evident he’s hiding something!” Which makes me ask again why Harry won’t tell us where he buried the children he molested. . . it’s evident he’s hiding something.
Thoughts? Additions?
69 comments:
Andrew,
One addition, the MSM is also inflating the numbers of people who show up at Obammy's whine-fests. It has been reported that 18,000 were on hand in Wisconsin. The problem is the venue could only hold 5000 and there were empty seats. Kinda like the polls. I think they needed a little more cheese.....;-)
Joel, I saw that. He couldn't even get 5,000 and they were calling it 18,000! Ha!
Andrew, Excellent as always. I saw the Morris article and I missed that point. I saw the rest, but I really think your analysis on that issue has been much better than Morris's.
I thought it was interesting that he released his taxes and you heard nothing. So much for yet another liberal attack.
"Moreover, they make their living by drawing attention to themselves. Thus, they look for ways to be controversial and to sound smarter than they really are. This is not helping"
One clarification if you will Andrew on this statement. They look for ways to be controversial amoung the conservative ranks because this will garner attention to themselves in the liberal media.
This is also why they never attack Obama.
I am wondering if the Right side of the punditry class of people can read polls the way most of us can. More and more I am seeing idiots like Erick Erickson spouting off that "Romney can Win" this, when it is obvious to any one who actually looks into the polls knows that they are off.
What I would love to see is the right side consistently take apart each poll including Rasmussen and call them on their false bias.
Joel, I saw that about the media way overstating the crowd turn out. It just continues to show the lack of enthusiasm on their side and I think that will translate into a lack of votes in October. I suspect they will be down 2-3% from normal at the voting booth and that will be a huge problem since Republicans and right-leaning independents will be up by several percent.
DUQ, Maybe they were standing on each other's heads? ;)
DUQ, All in all, I thought the Morris article was rather derivative. He didn't offer anything anyone else hadn't already said, except his insight that Rasmussen is using 2004 and not 2010. I think that makes a huge difference because it's the difference between averaging -10 and 0 rather than -10 and +10 in a +3-4 world.
Indi, They attack liberals all the time. The problem is that rather than presenting honest, intelligent analysis, they either go for sensational to get noticed (Ann Coulter, Hannity) or they attack their own side to generate outrage (Noonan, Brooks), because getting noticed is all they care about.
Joel, They should be taking these polls apart, but that would be intellectual and difficult. It's much easier to scream that the sky is falling.
Also, I suspect people like Erick have an incentive in Romney losing. They don't see him as their kind of guy, plus it's a lot easier to blast Obama as president than Romney, so Obama is good for business for them.
Plus, it's a no-lose situation. If Romney wins, it will be because Erick made him stronger. If Romney loses, then Erick was right all along. Spin over substance.
Nicely done. One thing I was expecting but didn't find was mention of the bizarre spin that because Romney overpaid on his taxes (not claiming the full charitable deduction) this proves the point the Dems have been making all along which is that Romney "manipulated" his taxes for "political purposes." It would be laughable if this didn't actually make sense to certain people.
Andrew
Hannity and Coulter are not really part of the MSM punditry class. They are more akin to the talk radio side of the media.
I am thinking about the conservatives that are in the MSM umbrella who for the most part talk about nuance and measured fairness and in the end do nothing but bash conservative ideology because if they didn't they would not keep their jobs.
Hannity can take whatever tack he wishes but as outspoken conservatives they will be either ignored or if they say something liberals can spin as either "extreme" or "stupid" then they will get all the attention but only in a negative light.
If our MSM conservatives acted as a liberal acts then in response to the Politico article they would have dismissed it and began talking about the unfair brazen partinship of Politico, its editor et. al.
If they did this however the liberal establishment they work for would not publish the piece. So its either agree with it, appear to agaonize over it, give "thoughtful (or thoughtless depending on your take) advice and get air time or not be heard or read.
This is why conservatives in general have to stop playing the game that the MSM is anything but bias or that they should have any respect for them because these news agencies are run by people who want to control news and not report it.
tryanmax, Thanks! I know what you mean about the bizarre nature of these claims. According to the Democrats, he pays too much and too little. His giving to charity is somehow evil. They still haven't stopped claiming he paid no taxes.
It's all class warfare and envy. The idea is to get their mindless followers to feel jealous that Romney has money and then they will hate him. It's the oldest trick in the class warfare book.
As an aside, I think it's interested that more people than just you and I are waking up to the problem with our punditry.
Andrew, I'm beginning to feel like John the Baptist [but only a little bit, don't smite me Lord! :)] It's nice to see folks in general finally waking up to the fact that nothing Romney does will ever be "good enough" for the right-wing pundits. Ryan taking them to task certainly opened some eyes.
And I keep reminding myself that the debates haven't started yet. I'm expecting both Romney and Ryan to wipe the floor with their respective opponents. That kind of stuff is hard to spin b/c people tend to make their minds up about the debates while they are watching and some guy on the radio with a different opinion is less likely to change it after the fact. At least, that's what I've observed. You?
Indi, There are certainly two classes of conservative punditry at work here. The first are the establishment types. I would classify that as people like Noonan, Brooks and even the Weekly Standard crew. They will deliver the moderate insider view and will smear anyone who doesn't toe that line.
The other group is the mainstream conservative media. That's people like Coulter, Hannity and Rush. They traffic in anger. They try to outrage people because that's how you get noticed. They play to the fringes because that's how you sell books.
The one thing missing in either group is an actual intent to inform and advise -- what people like Thomas Sowell do. Neither group really understands the ideology or the subject matter and they don't really care because they don't need to to do their jobs and because they know that the kinds of rational pieces it takes to inform aren't things that sell all that well.
tryanmax, LOL! Nice comparison and I agree. Sometimes it feels like we're out screaming in the wood, but I think people are starting to come around.
Like you, I think that Ryan shooting back has opened quite a few eyes because the right likes him. And for him to say this is ludicrous carries a lot of weight. And you are right, no matter what Romney does, he can't win with these people. They will simply change the direction of their attack. And what really struck me about Ryan's attack was how it went straight to their hearts. He basically laughed them off and told people to ignore them. That's the one thing these people can't have. They love to have you praise them or attack them, but they can't survive if important people dismiss them. So what Ryan did was really a devastating attack here.
I agree about the debates, with this caveat. Obama and Biden will "win" all the debates. Those articles are already written, trust me. So expect heavy spin. Romney will be accused of lying, spinning, under-performing, and just having no real answers. He will be described as nervous, unprepared and someone you can't relate to. And Obama will be described as "not brilliant, but he did what he needed tonight."
Andrew, agreed. I should qualify my point that parallels yours on the debates. People leaning left seem more inclined to make their minds up the next day (i.e. wait to see what their favorite opinion-makers have to say). So, yeah, those articles are already written for sure. I was thinking mostly of those who lean right when I observe them making their mind up during the broadcast. For good or ill, it seems to be a point of pride.
Andrew
Rush Limbaugh was sorely needed when he started out. We needed a voice to counter the established bias that was the monopoly of all media. In order to even get heard he had to be agressive and he hade to hit back.
The irony is that at the time the media kept accusing him of inventing lies and hate and creating false narratives but this was not what was going on most of the time, especially in his beggining years. Usually what he would do is take something that had been reported as news and either mock it or answer it. the anger came not as a tactic but because many conservatives were just fed up with distortions and this was an outlet for that.
As things evolve you have talk radio that is better and worse. I think Savage is the worst. Levin is the most aggressive but he I beleive truly understands conservatism and does speak intelligently about it but he is abrasive.
Hannity is actually more cordial in his tone but he is at times on the extremes and not big on substance at times as well.
Bill Bennett does a good job but too often he falls into the MSM side in his attempt to be nice but I don't think he intends this. ther narrative of the MSM is leftist and conservatives who accept it can be conned into a trap sometimes but Bennett is usually samrt enough to bring across his point.
Breitbart really changed the game I think bringing a cultural focus to it and explaining that it is this liberal culture that you are fighting.
What you want, conservatives that intelligently discuss the issues is not coming about until you have a conservative owned newspaper or network that gets the press and finds a way to force itself into the mainstream. Problem is any conservative outlet that tries is going to have to fight the attacks from those who do control it.
Having a monopoly level control over the media is an extremely powerful political force. This started to get put in place with the Roosevelt administration and as conservatives we are still fighting it 60 years later.
tryanmax, Agreed. And don't get me wrong, I know what the pundits will say and everyone on the left will parrot the spin and the pollsters will find the right sample to prove the spin right.
But the public at large doesn't fall for that. And I think you will see a significant shift afterwards toward Romney and away from Obama. I think that will be the moment the polls finally break and it become impossible to fake the numbers even to show a close race.
Indi, I agree about Rush, though I don't think he was actually all that outrageous or nasty at first. He was, to the contrary, a solid example of conservatism. He was positive, smart, principled and funny. And that is what won people over and what so annoyed the left because he spoke the truth they didn't want to hear and he did it in ways which made people laugh at the left. I think he's lost a lot of that lately, but it doesn't change what he was initially.
And you are right, we NEEDED him. The only real conservative outlets at the time were a couple weekly editorials and National Review, which had a circulation of 25,000. Rush reached millions and gave people a rallying point to start talking openly about being conservatives again.
After Rush, I think talk radio just got worse. As it proved profitable, a lot of people with no business preaching conservatism got involved. And they quickly learned that they could build an audience by playing to the fringe -- angry, thoughtless, knee-jerk, self-righteous. They became the parody liberals had created for Rush.
Then came Breitbart and he changed the world, and I really mean that. First, he slaughtered this stupid idea so many conservatives have that culture doesn't matter. It absolutely does, but conservatives didn't want to hear it. The RINOs thought politics was only for election reports and the so-cons see the culture as evil and to be avoided. Brietbart woke everyone else up to the need to fight back in the culture and he made it hip -- which no Republicans/conservatives had been able to do, because he wasn't trying to force the culture through a so-con or old white guy lens.
Then he taught people to use the same tactics the left uses right back at them. So when they said something racist, he screamed in their faces until they backed down. When they said something hateful, he called them on it. And that has totally shaken up the political world.
The only problem now is the imitators, who don't understand that there was a lot of brilliance behind Breitbart and they think they can substitute anger and knee-jerk thoughts. That hurts our cause.
Andrew
I think Nolte's articles on the Bigs are very well done. So I think their is hope the Bigs will keep on mission despite Andrew's passing.
Ned "Scotty" Scott: What if we haven't enough voltage?
Hendry: Just keep swinging at it's arms.
tryanmax:Re Romney taxes. Do you think someone in the Romney campaign planted those "he paid no taxes" rumors on purpose? Kind of made the Obama campaign and Reid in particular look like jerks, didn't it?
Indi, I like Nolte's articles a lot.
K, I doubt Romney planted the "he paid no taxes" rumor. I think that was Harry Reid trying to find some way to spin his refusal to release his taxes.
Andrew,
This is what I am seeing, like Rush, Romney is working in a competitive vacuum. Simply put, Rush became so wildly successful because NO ONE ELSE was doing what he was doing. Romney, the same thing. Romney is conservative to moderate, which is where most of the United States is right now. Very few right wing pundits are right there with him. They are too conservative or too moderate or too establishment and aren't understanding Romney.
Couple that with the HUGE desire to get rid of Obama, and you get almost a perfect storm. Yes, the MSM will do it's best to stop Romney, but they have been reduced to spluttering inarticulate rage or articles which are based on flawed polls that consistently are shifting right.
The really annoying part is the Faux Conservative Punditry seem to be doing their level best to stop Romney as well. Which strangely enough really isn't hurting Romney.
When too many of these Faux Conservative Pundits have gleefully ambushed most of the Conservatives in the Primary Season, then come around to help Romney win... well The Usual Suspects come to my mind. I am sure it is coming to others as well.
Lawhawk, We'll see if myth becomes reality. I doubt that will happen in this election.
LawHawk,
I found out about that Ohio poll over at Instapundit. A post that came out at 7:01 AM talks a little about it and shoots you over.
Joel, I agree. I think Romney stands ideologically where a large majority of Americans stand. And I further agree that our pundits do not stand in that same place. They are either to the right or the left of him and they just don't like him. So they don't see him as their kind of conservative.
Add in the Anybody-But-Romney attacks and they probably feel that they can attack him without fear of losing their popularity. So they do. Add in the need to keep audiences and attacking suddenly becomes a solid game plan. Add in the fact they can't be held accountable and suddenly attacking sounds like a great plan.
What's funny about you mentioning FOX is that several conservatives I know have been highly critical of FOX in the past week. They see all this talk about the polls being fake and they wonder why FOX doesn't expose that -- instead, FOX just runs with the same bad polls and just spins them. They wonder why Fox seems as critical of Romney as they do of Obama. They wonder why the pundits FOX hires keep spitting out MSM talking points and playing up Obama as this formidable, incredible candidate who can do no wrong.
As you know, I have little respect for FOX, but it seems more people are beginning to question them now too.
K, I have to agree with Andrew. I think it was just Harry Reid trying to up the ante on the class-warfare meme against Romney. In a sane world, obvious rumor mongers like Reid couldn't even hold public office, but such as it is, whoever can fabricate the most outlandish charges seems to get taken the most seriously. That is, at least among our liberal friends, knowing as much as they know that isn't so.
LawHawk,
What browser do you use?
tryanmax, I agree with that. I think Reid simply created the lie because it sounded like a plausible reason Romney might not want to release his taxes. He knew it was false when he said it... and repeated it repeatedly. But he didn't care because he knew this would be enough to get the irrational left all excited.
And now that his prior attacks have all failed, he's reducing to trying again with "he's obviously hiding something!"
The man should be ashamed of himself, if he had a sense of shame.
Andrew,
Here is something from American Spectator which should help with understanding the polls today.
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/09/25/how-carter-beat-reagan/print
well, a personal favorite of mine is Jay Carney. Watching him twist in the wind is proof positive that no amount of spinning on the planet makes his job easy. And as a former Time dweeb, I could not laugh louder. The media is trying hard to ignore theLibya thing, but it continues to make O look bad. Hard to spin that one.
Andrew
I want nothing to do with Harry Reid. Are you trying to embarass me!
Joel, Thanks. I'll check it out when I get the chance. Here's the link: LINK
I've seen that before, by the way, about Carter beating Reagan at this point. I think that's almost always true, that the leftist candidates are head in the polls before the elections.
Shame, Do us a favor and go see Harry Reid. He needs you... badly.
Jed, It's all about spin these days, but the problem is that at some point the spin starts to become counterproductive because no one believes you anymore and no one even knows what you are talking about. I think Carney has reached that point where no one listens to him because nothing that comes out of his mouth is even close to reality.
And then you have the problem, like Libya, where they keep spinning in different directions and end up boxing themselves in because they've attacked all the alternatives.
And let me add something to what Lawhawk is saying.
It does NOT help, when comments start disappearing that a couple of you insist on trying to re-post the comments that have already vanished. That results in more things vanishing.
Andrew, I too thought it was interesting that the tax issue all but fell apart. They seemed to put so much stock in it, but now it's basically been ignored.
Ellen, I think they were hoping to find that Romney had deducted lavish vacations and gave almost nothing to charity. The probably hoped for lists of servants and the such. But apparently, he's got none of that. So they're stuck passing lies... as always.
Andrew, that's a good way to put it with the +/- numbers.
Thanks DUQ!
LawHawk,
I was hoping that it was your browser. I used to use Internet Explorer and then I started to see all my blogger comments go away. Now I use Google Chrome and it doesn't happen as often. For some reason, Blogger has decided your ISP is pure spam.
The only other thing I can think of is get another ISP assigned.
I'm to the point where I don't want to see another poll from anyone ever again. Either Obama's up by 10 or losing independents by 12 points or he's splitting the Catholic vote or whatever. I'm just like "f@#k it." If Romney wins, great; if not, I'll just be confirmed in my contempt for humanity in general. Yes, I'm going dark.
"Dark" as in "grim, brooding, etc.," not as in "getting off the Internet." Just to clarify.
T-Rav, LOL! Usually going dark means hiding... or turning off your headlights at night. Nope... never done that, not even a half dozen times when I was younger. ;)
The polls are really frustrating and it's worse than in the past because there is this constant barrage. You used to get 1-2 polls a week and that was it. Now you're getting a dozen a day, and they're all poorly done for various reasons.
That said, I agree with you... Romney wins, great. Obama wins, my contempt for humanity will be confirmed.
Indeed. Also contributing to my morbid thoughts: Today is the final deadline for good ol' Todd Akin to withdraw from the race--and with about an hour left in the business day, he's still in it. So now that this Christian warrior has overcome those enemies trying to tear him down, he can roll on to a sure victory in November. Or something.
I'd like Nolte more if he wasn't such a fascist in having me banned from Big Hollywood in the pre-revamped look days, but hard to deny he's evolved into quite the culture warrior.
Still, I'm of the mindset AlfonZo Rachel is the truest successor to Breitbart's. Personable, one helluva talented musician, intelligent and funny. Deadly quadruple threat.
Larry Elder's another personal fave, has been ever since he led me to the light, away from modern liberalism with "10 Things You Can't Say in America," a book which never will but should be required reading on any collegiate PoliSci course.
T-Rav, He won't quit. He thinks he's on a mission from God... like the Blues Brothers. I don't know if he has a chance of winning or not, but he certainly thinks he will.
Wow, I have another good reason to vote for Romney. Madonna has threatened to strip naked if Obama is re-elected. That should get a few evangelicals out to vote. ;-)
Eric, LOL! That's a good reason to not like him. Care to tell us what got you banned?
I love Alfonzo. He's witty, hilarious and very intelligent. He's a great spokesman and he's very, very hip. I don't know about his writing skills or how he would be on a more serious show (like Fox) but he's very much a great successor to Breitbart in the cultural arena.
I haven't paid much attention to Larry Elder.
Andrew, I'll say this much. It won't be the biggest blowout in recent history, as Karl Rove was claiming a couple weeks ago. The fact is, whatever Akin's said, a lot of Missourians (myself included) really, really don't like McCaskill, and are going to vote against her regardless. So it'll be narrow, I think. But do I think he can win? No.
Joel, I liked Drudge's choice of words: Madonna "threatens" to strip naked if Obama wins. That's a rather succinct commentary on her present status, no? :-)
Joel, That should get out lots of voters, all desperate to stop that from happening.
Why does Madonna remind me Grandpa Simpson these days?
T-Rav, It will be closer than people expect, but I don't know in which direction. I think Akin will lose by 3-5%, but it's hard to tell. I wouldn't put money on it either way.
T-Rav, Absolutely! LOL! I wonder if Madonna realizes how many of us now see her that way?
You'd have to ask John, Andrew. My only guess is I called him out publicly on being a phony and a liar. Seems he also forgets he reached out to me for employment advice less than a month before Breitbart plucked him from the running-on-fumes Dirty Harry's Place to make him BH's editor-in-chief. Offered a couple times to bury the hatchet (and mutual friend Christian Toto even tried to broker a peace, unsuccessfully), but Nolte doesn't seem interested.
Still, since I realize petty in-fighting's a dead-end street for Hollywood conservatives, will give credit where it's due. It's also a plus John's using Floyd and Rufus as guest contributors at Dirty Harry's Place gave them the launch-pad to start Threedonia, which has worked out pretty OK for me. ;-)
Eric, Well, I'm glad there is a silver lining. :)
I never saw Dirty Harry's Place, but I know ScottDS raves about it. And I do enjoy Threedonia, I just haven't had the time to visit much lately.
I am SO sick of polls. I don't believe any of them anymore and they hit you with them day after day like they are trying to brainwash you.
On this taxes thing, let me say again that it's pathetic that any American would care what another American earns. That's commie bullshit. It's nobody's business.
Doc, You and me both. Every day is another 3-4 polls, each with ridiculous samples, bad methodology and unbelievable results. Right now I would say that 0.0% of all the polls put out in the past six months have been even usable.
I agree that it does not matter how much any other American makes. Worrying about that is pure spite and it flies in the face of the American spirit.
At least Madonna isn't threatening to sing...
Bev, That would indeed be too much. LOL!
Andrew and Doc, Thomas Sowell likes to bring up this fable from ancient China or wherever, of a man who found a magic lamp and released a genie that granted him one wish, for whatever he wanted. The guy wished that his rich neighbor would be made poor. Says a lot.
T-Rav, It does. And what's interesting (just like with "might makes right"), is that everyone left and right would say, "Oh, that's horrible, I would never be like that." And yet, liberals then run out and promote both ideas in principle.
Right now, liberal economic theory has collapsed and basically holds only two tenants: (1) take from those who have more and (2) spend as much as you can through the government. There's literally nothing more left in their ideological box.
The only critism I have heard about Romney that I would agree with is he hasn't given people a good reason to vote FOR him. Plenty of reasons to vote AGAINST Obama. The convention was supposed to start this but we mostly got just what a great guy he is. Fine but I don't want the nice guy Romney who loves his kids. I want the hard working, make tough decisions Romney that made Bain successful.
Rush whipped out the Magic Negro song today. For some reason it still makes me laugh.
I think Romney should be winning by a comfortable margin and I think he will win (most Americans are unhappy with the state of the union) but one would think that if everybody were gaming the polls somebody (at least Romney's campaign) would put out the real, pro-Romney numbers.
The sad truth might be that the electorate is sufficiently polarized that competence is of only marginal importance. Still, I think some former Obama supporters will support Romney and many more will stay home.
I don't understand why Romney released his tax returns (though doing so does him no harm) since that distraction seemed to have been overtaken by events.
I agree about the analysis of pundits being of little importance. A lot of them don't seem to grasp that the overwhelming majority of people don't know or care about the small stuff that dominate newscycles for days.
Koshcat, That is true. Romney hasn't outlined a clear, simple, positive agenda yet that inspires people. I'm not sure he plans to either. What needs to do is to come up with a vague, but specific sounding vision that can be sold in a few words and start promising that and treating the election like it's over.
Anthony, The polls are really frustrating. None of them can be trusted, but it's still frustrating to see the same numbers day after day because you begin to worry that people will believe them.
I agree with you about the electorate, sadly. I think it is too polarized and the candidates don't matter to most people anymore -- they have their side and that's that. I also think the independents make up their minds stupidly, often looking to personality rather than ability.
Romney promised to release his 2011 returns, which is why I think he did it.
I agree about the pundits, they don't get that the public does not obsess about whatever minor detail they've all decided to focus on for the day.
Post a Comment