Don’t laugh but I honestly believe that the endless right wing email forwards play a significant role. Conservative friends and family used to send these emails to me almost daily. Apparently they got tired of me replying with refutations and they no longer do. I’m convinced that there is some gigantic mis-information mill staffed by GOP propaganda experts cranking these things out. The ones that I saw usually had a lot of names that they had been sent to. A lot of the crap that I hear people spouting in the breakroom seems to come from those types of chain emails. I’m not on Facebook but I’m under the impession that this stuff is passed around a lot there too.
I could count on one hand the number of left leaning ones I’ve ever seen. Maybe I just don’t know enough liberals.
Then again, Indiana only went for Obama by a very slim margin, so it wouldn’t be any great surprise for it to swing back to the Republicans this cycle. If Michigan or Minnesota, say, starts swinging into the red, then I’d be comfortable saying that Obama has problems in the Midwest.
I saw one today in fact which showed 40% Indie, 31% Dem, 27% GOP (yearly averages). Your graph indicates that Dems have usually been ahead for most of the past 6 months (incl. 36-27% 2 months ago); the weekly ups and downs are undoubtedly due to the MOE and sampling errors, thus virtually no stock should be placed in them.
I know a whole lot of liberals and a whole lot of conservatives. The only crap email forwards I get are from stupid people, and while I concede they comprise a small percentage of the conservatives I know, they’re ALL conservatives.
It is a very interesting question (although rather off-topic from this thread). I know a pretty even split of conservatives and liberals, and in each group are a wide range of smart and stupid people, and yet the only chain e-mails I ever see are conservative…
There was one a few years ago claiming that Bush, Jr. had the lowest IQ in Presidential history. I don’t doubt that it was originally written as a joke, but some of the dimmer bulbs of my acquaintance ran with it.
I want to say that the odds are slim that they’ll beat him, but I really thought the same about Bush in 04 as well.
I think it’s anyones game. There are republicans out there who would rather have Hitler, or even Clinton back, than see Obama get a 2nd term. And a large swath of the base have completely bought into the idea tht O is genuinely trying to harm the US.
do you think that a more “ecological”, pro-gay, pro-choice, more taxes, more liberal Republican candidate has any chance? If Obama has moved a bit to the right (as some Dems belief) the Rep candidate cannot compete by getting “closer” to him.
Two weeks ago, I’d have agreed with you, but the turnout in Iowa and New Hampshire is so low compared to 2008, I wonder if that’s true. I think that Republican turnout will be up from 2008 since the specter of the Bush years has faded a little, but I don’t know that it’ll be entirely fired up if Romney’s the candidate.
Also, don’t underestimate the hard right’s willingness to (in their own perception) bring on the apocalypse to achieve a more long-lasting ideaological victory–a “it was necessary to destroy the country in order to save it” mentality.
I don’t think I agree. I really do think they started too early. There were Tea Party rallies screaming “Obama is a socialist!” within weeks of his inauguration. They reached their full head of steam in the 2010 congressional elections, but since then I’m thinking they’ve blown their wad. Glenn Beck has lost his TV show. It’s old news, especially with every indicator I can think of pointing to a modestly successful administration. It will be closer than 2008, but I’m not seeing a sea change.
Then again, I could be wrong. If the market takes a header and unemployment goes into double-digits by October, it will be Romney in a landslide.
Of course I do. Romney’s pro-choice. At least he was before he wasn’t, and as far as I know, Romney’s not a homophobe. I don’t know enough about his positions on ecology and taxes to comment, but yeah, I can see someone more liberal than Romney becoming a Republican candidate. All it takes, it seems, is enough money to outspend your opponents and a tip of the hat to corporate interests.
I don’t agree with that, but it’s also not my point.
I could see a Perry, Santorum, or even a Bachmann loss to Obama forcing the party to reassess itself. But with a Romney loss, who the rank and file of the party don’t care for anyway and already consider way too moderate, just emboldens the conservative base, hence my ‘squeaky wheel’ reference.
As I’ve said before, the Republican party would have to nominate a far-right social conservative candidate, who then loses to the Democrat, before sanity will be considered a virtue again and the party retools. Excuse me if I choose not to hold my breath waiting for it.
