And we know that whatever else Romney is, he ain’t stupid. Hard as it might be to imagine, maybe there’s something in Romney’s tax returns that he thinks will actually help him.
Even if it showed that he paid 40% in taxes, it wouldn’t help him.
We know he isn’t stupid. We also know that he makes bad decisions, even when those decisions could have pretty significant impacts on him. I haven’t really seen anything in his campaign that marks him as unlikely to do something to damage his reputation.
Given the complexity of his finances, this may be when his accountants expect to actually have a final completed return.
It’s still only the 2011 return, reflecting only a period after he decided to run. The 2009 one, with the amnesty claim (OK, if that’s the reason for cutting it off there) will still be behind a stone wall.
I don’t think this timing is really the result of a strategic decision, only some bumbling compromise in lieu of facing the problem directly.
I feel pretty confident that Romney could hire however many accountants are necessary to figure out his returns in whatever time frame he desires.
October 15th is the last day to file if you’ve already gotten an extension. So assuming that’s really when he releases them, he seems to have decided to wait as long as he can. Which seems insane.
The smart thing to do would be to release them during the Democratic convention, while the media is focused on that, and so minimize the attention they draw.
I suspect that Gary Johnson, the Libertarian nominee and former NM governor, will be a spoiler in a swing state or two in a manner reminiscent of Ralph Nader in Florida 2000. Johnson, a former Republican primary candidate for president, can syphon votes away from either major party, but I think his candidacy is more harmful to Romney’s electoral college vote total than Obama’s. GJ will certainly take over 10% of the vote in New Mexico and likely over 1% in Florida.
Obama will very likely be re-elected. If the tension between Iran and Israel erupts into full scale war, then the economy could suffer severely with spiking fuel prices and therefore muddying the incumbent’s re-election prospects. Obama’s response to the situation and the rally around the flag effect could somewhat mitigate the electoral backlash from the negative effects on the economy.
I expect that Romney will continue to be vague on various policy proposals while hammering Obama on the economy and mostly dodging social issues until election day.
The debates could be interesting but nowhere near the spectacle of the clownshow GOP primary debates.
Political reform at last! I see a new party being formed…called, say, the Reform Party?
Compared to the rest of the Western world, Canadian Conservatives are right wing. They’re moderate only compared to the extreme right of the Republicans.
Yeah, they managed to rescind on their agreement to the Kyoto protocols. No other country has done so.
Its not just up to him if he has partnership interests, he has to wait for that information from third parties.
The point is that proportional representation opens the system to third parties – that is, it makes possible a multiparty system; where the first-past-the-post single-member-district system both the U.S. and Canada now use tends naturally to force all political factions into a two-party system.
That sounds like a plausible explanation. But is it common for such information to take until five months after the initial April 15th deadline? Seems kinda dick for the “third parties” to be that late.
My opinion of Romney in the “big picture”, or broadest sense, is that he feels since he was an economic success at Bain, and a success at turning around the Olympics, he believes he can convince voters he will be able to turn around the country’s economy. I really think that’s what he’s going on. But since there is no correlation between the two, he has only vague ideas and platitudes to offer, hoping to implant the idea in peoples’ minds.
As for the idea of horrible economic news that might give Romney a chance, I guess it’s theoretically possible, but I’m trying to imagine what that would be. A stock market crash a la 1929 might do it, but of course I don’t see that happening. What reasonably possible thing might do it?
For 2009, too?
The obvious candidate is the Euro crisis. Perhaps a Greek exit from the Euro followed by massive pressure on Spanish bonds perhaps leading to the collapse of a major European bank. Still quite possible but the Greek election and the latest bailout packages have greatly reduced the chances this happening in the next few months. They are stopgap measures and not a long-term solution but from a purely electoral perspective that’s all Obama needs.
Another possibility is an Israeli attack on Iran. Despite some increased noise about this recently I seriously doubt they will attack right before a US election. If they wanted to do they would have done it last year. And the impact on the US election will be unpredictable. There will be a negative economic impact as the oil price rises but it may be limited in the first few months. And there will likely be a rally-around-the flag effect which will help Obama. It may only last a few months but again that’s all he needs to win the election.
The Akin story has me wondering about how social issues will play into the election. I wouldn’t have expected them to be important but this storm comes at the worst possible moment for the GOP right after they selected an abortion hardliner for VP and right before a convention with a hardline abortion platform. Romney’s own position ,pro life with exceptions for rape and incest, isn’t hardline in electoral terms but he now has to work disassociate himself from more hardline views. At the least it’s an annoying distraction at a crucial time when he wants to introduce himself to the broad public.
The Akin story points out something about the Romney campaign - their inability to control the storyline they want to tell. The Democrats have been very effective at keeping the tax return story going, and likely the GOP convention story will be about the hurricane hitting, rather than the content of the convention. All this adds up to keep Romney from building momentum. Now, after the convention he does have a few months to repair before the election - but I don’t see his campaign making the adjustments in this area.
So are you saying you think that a collapse of a major European bank would affect the US economy greatly and that it would be blamed on Obama, and this would lead to a Romney win? I don’t see it.
Then if you feel this way, wouldn’t you say this is not the “reasonably possible thing” I spoke of? Don’t get the wrong idea, I see the thought behind your response and all, I just think these are stretches. We always seem to hear about October surprises, but they never seem to come. 
I gave a flippant answer to avoid derailing too much, but I can see problems developing with proportional representation, too (possibly too many parties because every issue and its uncle will want representation?). And the current system seemed to work fine for three or more parties until the Liberals imploded. Now that Conservatives have a lock on power, reform is suddenly needed. (I’m a lifelong NDP/Liberal voter so getting the Tories out would be fine with me; I’m trying to look at this more objectively.)
Barring the rise of a leftist third party, yes. The GOP with its endless purity tests has rendered itself incapable of winning national elections. The Democrats will claim the middle, and the far left will either remain disorganized and impotent, or they will somehow create a viable third party.
Well like I said I don’t think either scenario is likely now but they aren’t crazily improbable either and I think they are worth discussing. A European financial meltdown could absolutely sink Obama in a close election. It may not affect US GDP much before the election but it would certainly affect US stock markets which would tank very quickly if there is a 2008-type meltdown in Europe. Obama would be blamed regardless of the origins of the shock especially in the context of his low approval ratings on the economy. The US president doesn’t have actually have much control over the US economy but he gets the blame or praise regardless.