How Can Romney Possibly Win?

[RickJay]

@Martin_Hyde

I think if Romney wants to have a chance he needs to basically take a page from Reagan’s play book. Keep hammering on Obama, of course, but also clearly stand up and give Americans a clear alternative choice. That’s something John Kerry never really did when he ran against George Bush.

Yes, Kerry was a very different choice from Bush, but the campaign rhetoric was all focused on the failures of the Bush regime.

I’d have to agree that there’s a distinct similarity. As a Canadian political pundit once put it, if you apply for second place you’ll win the job.

I have said before, and continue to maintain, that it is far more important to *articulate what people are voting for *than it is to necessary present them with any particular choice. Unless what you’re proposing is found really scary, your best bet is to ensure it’s clear what it is people are voting for. That doesn’t have to be an especially specific idea - Obama’s 2008 campaign emphasized CHANGE and HOPE, the image of the man as a new thing, more than any specifc policy platform. But it was very clear what it was he was selling, even if what he was selling was generic. McCain, by contrast, never really articulated a clear platform.

Nor, for that matter, did John Kerry. Honestly, what did he run for? What was his platform? The incumbent is always mostly running on “Well, you got four years of me and I think it went pretty good; let’s do four more,” and with the exception of some minor shifts in promises that’s what Bush offered in 2004. Kerry offered… well, that Bush was bad. Would be pull out of Iraq? Well, no, not exactly. It was vague as all hell. Doomed to fail.

Romney, I think, has to come out with a really clear and memorable platform beginning with the convention. I think he has to come right out and say it, in fact, whatever it is; an unambiguous, clear plank that can be expressed in a few words. I suspect it should be consistent with Paul Ryan’s reputation; Ryan is a much more interesting person than Romney.

If Romney continues with what worked in the Republican campaign, which was basically to avoid looking like a nut until everyone else had crazied themselves out of the race, he’ll lose. That won’t work here because Obama won’t crazy himself out of the race; he’s not a loon, like Michele Bachmann, or a doofus like Rick Santorum. What worked in the Republican race, which was effectively to me the Last Man Sane, won’t work now. Romney must be aggressive, but in a proactive way, asserting what he’s going to be as President or what Americans will get out of it. If he just runs on “I’m not Obama,” his campaign won’t be effective.

You have to strike a certain balance. I think however that Romney will not do this, the more vague he is the more protected he is from focused attacks on his policy proposals. I think the Romney strategy is “stay in the race as a viable candidate and trust the bad economy to push Obama out of office.” I don’t think the economy is going to push Obama out of office, and I think Romney is too cautious to change that approach, so I predict he’ll lose.

To be honest I suspect your prediction is pretty much bang on; I don’t think it’s in his nature to do what he’d need to do to win. I don’t think he’ll even win Ohio.

[adaher]

I think that WAS the Romney strategy, but the Ryan pick showed that’s no longer the case. Romney is inherently cautious, but he knows how to switch strategies if his original one isn’t working.

The campaign has been especially aggressive on Medicare, to the point where I notice Democrats would rather move to other subjects. Never seen that happen before.

[Jas09]

@adaher

I think that WAS the Romney strategy, but the Ryan pick showed that’s no longer the case. Romney is inherently cautious, but he knows how to switch strategies if his original one isn’t working.

The campaign has been especially aggressive on Medicare, to the point where I notice Democrats would rather move to other subjects. Never seen that happen before.

We will see in the next couple of days how thoroughly he embraces the Ryan vision. So far he has basically backed away from it, to the point that I have seen both interviews of Romney saying he disagrees with Ryan (Medicare, for one example) and Ryan saying he disagrees with Romney (abortion for rape victims).

That type of incoherence is not helpful when trying to present a vision.

The Medicare aggression is, however, great politics. Classic “attack their strength” play, and Romney’s position has the benefit of being the simpler one. The ACA did cut Medicare payments, and the defense takes more than 30 seconds to explain. That gives enough of a cloud to change Democratic attack vs. GOP defense to attack vs. attack - much better ground to fight on.

[adaher]

Romney hasn’t and won’t fully embrace the Ryan plan, but he likes the approach, and is sending a signal that this election is about a choice between two visions of government. Which is actually not the fight he originally wanted to have.

[Measure_for_Measure]

@Kenm

How can Romney possibly win? According to Forbes, ** when GM goes bankrupt again**.

I guess Forbes Magazine is delusional. GM’s net income was positive for 2009, 2010 and 2011. It’s been positive for the past 5 quarters as well. The vast sea of red ink occurred in 2008, when somebody else was President. http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3AGM&fstype=ii&ei=GOE6UIDoB-KciALEIA

I went over to the Motley Fool to get another take. Can General Motors Be Saved? | The Motley Fool Can General Motors (NYSE: GM ) be saved?

In many ways, it seems like a ridiculous thing to ask. GM sold more cars than any other automaker last year, while generating record profits. GM’s debt is minimal and it had $32.6 billion in the bank as of the end of last quarter. Companies like that don’t need “saving”.

So why are so many people asking variations on that question?

The competition is making GM look bad
A Forbes article that suggested last week that GM might be headed for bankruptcy was only the latest entry in the ongoing second-guessing of GM’s recovery. Some of this is politically motivated: Fairly or not, GM’s bailout is associated with President Obama, and some of his political opponents would like to argue that the bailout is a failure.

Truth is, GM is healthier than it has been in decades, and it’s not in any danger of bankruptcy – not even close. But it’s also true that there’s still a lot of room for improvement. The Wall Street Journal consistently has predicted an immanent upturn in inflation and long term interest rates over the past 3 years. Those who took their rantings seriously lost money – and yet they continue to possess a reliable and credulous audience. Caveat emptor.

[Jas09]

@adaher

Romney hasn’t and won’t fully embrace the Ryan plan, but he likes the approach, and is sending a signal that this election is about a choice between two visions of government. Which is actually not the fight he originally wanted to have.

Agreed on the last part - I think he has realized that his cautious approach wasn’t going to work without a massive economic downturn that doesn’t seem to be in the cards any more, at least by November.

I think the first part is sort of true - he certainly won’t embrace the Ryan plan but I’m not sure if just naming him is enough if you immediately denounce his plan. It has more than a hint of pandering. He needs to clearly spell out his alternative - he has plenty of time to do it, both at the convention and in the debates.

[Jas09]

@Kenm

How can Romney possibly win? According to Forbes, ** when GM goes bankrupt again**.

Holy crap, that’s a terrible article. If you’re going to predict bankruptcy for a company you may want to at least mention their balance sheet, debts, and assets rather than ranting about how one car magazine hates the new Malibu and how awesome VW’s CEO is.

With a nice gratuitous UAW swipe at the end just for fun.

[adaher]

@Jas09

Agreed on the last part - I think he has realized that his cautious approach wasn’t going to work without a massive economic downturn that doesn’t seem to be in the cards any more, at least by November.

I think the first part is sort of true - he certainly won’t embrace the Ryan plan but I’m not sure if just naming him is enough if you immediately denounce his plan. It has more than a hint of pandering. He needs to clearly spell out his alternative - he has plenty of time to do it, both at the convention and in the debates.

Maybe it’s different with Ryan because his plan is so famous, but it’s not unusual for a Presidential nominee and his VP nominee to be different. Normally voters understand that the guy at the top is calling the shots.

Plus a lot of the attacks on Ryan’s plan aren’t even his current plan, but the 2011 version. The 2012 version he did with Ron Wyden and which also passed the House is the current plan and it keeps traditional Medicare as an option.

[Kolak_of_Twilo]

@Kenm

How can Romney possibly win? According to Forbes, ** when GM goes bankrupt again**.

From YOUR link:

GM is unlikely to hit the wall before the election, but, given current trends, the company could easily do so again before the end of a second Obama term.

How that would help Romney win in 2012 is beyond me. I suggest reading the article you link to before posting in the future.

[Bryan_Ekers]

Well, when it’s Romney v. Clinton in 2016, he’ll be able to stand on GM’s carcass.

[Kolak_of_Twilo]

Hey, I’m still laughing because the article basically concedes this election to Obama.

[Oakminster]

How can Romney win? This ABC/Washington Post Poll gives him a “solid chance”, and a 1% lead among registered voters. Dems that think this is going to be a cakewalk are deluding themselves. It could go either way.

[Measure_for_Measure]

@Oakminster

How can Romney win? This ABC/Washington Post Poll gives him a “solid chance”, and a 1% lead among registered voters. Dems that think this is going to be a cakewalk are deluding themselves. It could go either way.

Definitely. And OBTW, the ~30% odds reported by 538 is also a “Solid chance” – and there are other models that are less optimistic for Obama.

Heck, if I picked up a pair of dice, I’d have a decent chance of rolling doubles. And the odds of that are 17%. 538 maintains it will probably be a close race, with Obama getting 50.7% of the popular vote. The chances of a blowout are small. I say that with a heavy heart.

That said, if the Republican convention can’t give Romney at least a thin and brief lead in the conventional polls of likely voters, the optics will be bad for the GOP.

[Saint_Cad]

@RickJay

I have said before, and continue to maintain, that it is far more important to *articulate what people are voting for *than it is to necessary present them with any particular choice. Unless what you’re proposing is found really scary, your best bet is to ensure it’s clear what it is people are voting for. That doesn’t have to be an especially specific idea - Obama’s 2008 campaign emphasized CHANGE and HOPE, the image of the man as a new thing, more than any specifc policy platform. But it was very clear what it was he was selling, even if what he was selling was generic. McCain, by contrast, never really articulated a clear platform.

And don’t forget his platform of “I’m not George W. Bush.” Hell he won a Nobel Prize based on that. I rememeber people argued with me that Obama never had a plan for his presidency other than "Change: and I would argue that because of that he has been largely ineffective over the last 4 years.

[adaher]

He could have been at least popular if he’d implemented change. He promised to change politics and it doesn’t take an act of Congress to do that. But instead he decided to engage in the usual backroom dealing, paying off campaign contributors, and spinning. None of that improved his performance in office, so it’s reasonable to assume that if he’d NOT done those things he’d be popular enough to win today.

[septimus]

@Martin_Hyde

unlike most liberals I actually have a deep understanding of and appreciation for the science of economics.

Do we need the self-serving snark? I could say the same thing, substituting Septimus for Hyde and conservatives for liberals and the statement would be at least as accurate.

The cuts I (a Republican) would like to see:

Your proposals may be good. But what purpose does it serve to connect them with your alleged Republicanism, when “real” Republicans do not do not support them? (If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?)

[gamerunknown]

@adaher

paying off campaign contributors

Could you demonstrate an instance of this? How does it sit with your views on SuperPACs, the involvement of prior staffers and cooperation?

[Evil_Captor]

@Saint_Cad

And don’t forget his platform of “I’m not George W. Bush.” Hell he won a Nobel Prize based on that. I rememeber people argued with me that Obama never had a plan for his presidency other than "Change: and I would argue that because of that he has been largely ineffective over the last 4 years.

Got NOTHING to do with the EXTRAORDINARY obstructionism of the Republican Party during Obama’s term.

Mitch McConnell: “Our highest priority over the next four years will be seeing that Obama is a one-term President.”

Meanwhile, Congress has it’s lowest favorability ratings among Americans ever.

It’s amazing how political blinders can keep some people from seeing the obvious.

[Martin_Hyde]

@BobLibDem

Christ. He said “there you go again”. That’s it. Just like “I am paying for this microphone” won him the nomination, “there you go again” won the election. A former B-movie actor could have done it.

That was just his most famous retort, but he basically countered every claim Carter made one by one about his right wing extremism in that debate. “There you go again” resonated because Carter had clearly repeatedly failed up to that point, and the audience knew it.

[Kenm]

@Kolak_of_Twilo

I suggest reading the article you link to before posting in the future.

Don’t get your knickers in a knot. The OP asked how Romney could win. I posted a link answering it. Romney also could win if Martians landed on the White House lawn and destroyed the place and the Capitol Building with a disintigrating ray.

The story exists. Read it or don’t. Discuss its shortcomings and propaganda value or don’t. Rip it apart or don’t. I linked to it. I didn’t write it.

I suggest you read the forum name under which the OP posted the query.