Eh, if you’ve got something against me, feel free to open a Pit thread.
Unfortunately, Obama is on record as saying his re-electiability will be tied to the state of the economy. If that bursts anyone’s “liberal fantasy” then that’s their problem, not mine.
I never understand how people can make such unwittingly ironic claims. The GOP JUST failed to rally around a nominee they didn’t care for 4 years ago. They handed Obama the Presidency.
In fact, Romney wanted to be that GOP candidate that the GOP didn`t really like and wouldn’t rally around last time and he wound up being their 3rd choice.
It’s not like you have to go back 20 years to find a parallel situation where they failed to support their candidate because they didn`t like him.
Since the OP specifically says, “in addition to the economy getting better,” and is also specifically talking about how Romney is tying himself to the economy getting worse/staying the same, what is your point?
Those are just Stalinist/Maoist/Potist, not “liberal”.
[ul]
[li]Do you know who Herobrine is?[/li][li]Do you know a talking cat?[/li][li]Have you ever seen a 50yr old fat man in a dress?*[/li][li]Do you know what humor is?[/li][li]Do you know what fantasy is?[/li][li]Are you hiding my Cosmic Moon Scepter?[/li][/ul]
If you answer YES to any of those questions, please call me, I’m in the book. 
How did we get from Minecraft to obese male Sailor Moon cosplay?
Last I checked it is Independents that decide if a vote will be close, not the party members. This could turn into a big win for Obama if the economy keeps getting better and Romney keeps being destroyed by the Repubs. Can you even imagine if Newt or Santorum get the nod? It could be a Reagan level win for Obama.
[quote=“Foggy, post:25, topic:612602”]
[li]Have you ever seen a 50yr old fat man in a dress?*[/li][/QUOTE]
Does Milton Berle count?
I never had the sense that Uncle Miltie was fat…
Certain body parts were said to be ungodly huge…
I only allow my fantasies to take me so far afield. I anticipate independents breaking pretty evenly for Obama and Romney. Let’s face it, the Republicans have had some success in casting Obama as something other than he is. Heck, many Republicans believe Obama’s a liberal.
The economy improving, no doubt, helps Obama. However, when you have an opposing party willing to bring the nation to near-collapse by obstructing anything Obama proposes, even if such proposals align with their philosophy, and even if enactment of such proposals would benefit them and their constituents, just to defeat him, then just about all bets, in my estimation, are off.
Regardless what happens with Romney and his internecine fight with Santorum and Gingrich, Democrats who count their chickens too early, believing Romney will be weakened come his face-off with Obama, will be in for a rude awakening. Don’t think the party doesn’t know what they’ll be up against and aren’t gearing up for a no holds barred take-down of Obama. They’re going to throw everything at him, including the kitchen sink, and employ the Rovian tactic of attacking his strengths. There will be lies and obfuscation aplenty, and it will all have an effect because the Republicans are really good at building a considered narrative out of whole cloth and playing the victim when called on it.
Santorum or Gingrich will not be the nominee as such a turn of events would mean the Republicans have ceded the election to Obama, and with all the money being collected I see no evidence of the Republicans throwing in the towel, quite the contrary actually.
My fantasy is Obama wins, by whatever margin possible, and somehow, although I don’t see how at this point, the House switches back into Democratic control.
:mad: Well, dammit, then let the Obama team take off the gloves and counterattack Romney on his . . . wait . . . oh, fuck . . .
Zactly.
How about on true Scotsmen?
There is rallying and rallying. If the Super PAC donors decide their money is better spent on House and Senate races, they may feel they are rallying around something more important. If the extreme right says screw it, I’m staying home rather than vote for a Mormon, the same. There is a column in the Times today how successful candidates inspire passion (even Bush II did) and Romney does not.
I think Romney is going to continue to put his foot in it, and is going to say things, as the economy improves, which will make him sound negative. That is going to hurt him.
The last election was largely a referendum on the Bush Administration. No Republican was going to win it, no matter what. McCain carried the GoP faithful. Obama carried the Dem faithful, plus the all important swing vote, as well as his young/first time voter group. The young/first time voters aren’t as enthusiastic this year, and the swing voters are in play. Each side is going to carry their own regulars, as they usually do. The battle is over the swing votes in the middle. Romney has stronger appeal to those voters than McCain did. The question is whether he can grab enough swing voters to tip the balance in his direction. I think he can. We’ll see.
I put Obama’s odds of victory at 57%.
Define “tight race”. I think Obama could win in a landslide (35+ states) if the economy bounces back, as it has been known to do while exiting a recession. That does not conflict with my odds of victory assessment. The economy could have strong, tepid or even negative growth if Europe implodes. US electoral destiny rides on such random variables.
It is February. If Romney ties this up by late March, the base will rally around Romney, like good little robots. Heck, McCain wasn’t popular at this time 4 years ago either: his commitment to campaign finance reform made him suspect among the Republican establishment.
I think that the Fair model, which is mostly based upon incumbency and election year economic performance, will correctly predict the popular vote within 3 percentage points. A serious third party effort would upturn the model, but that looks unlikely this year. Super PACs are not part of the historical record, so they potentially could upturn the model as well – but that possibility favors Romney.
Wrong. Obama faced a septuagenarian running with a patently unqualified vice Presidential nominee. Hey don’t believe me: McCain’s team acknowledged this when they refused to have Palin host a single press conference. Nonetheless Obama did respectfully against McCain (controlling for the objective state of the economy) but not spectacularly. Specifically, he beat the prediction of the Democratic popular vote by 1.5 percentage points. That’s less that 2.1, which represents the standard error of the model. Not bad certainly, but not great either. Possibly average or even mediocre considering the quality of the opposition.
I don’t see where Romney would appeal to an independent more than Obama would. Assuming that independent considers the actual Obama and not the fictional one portrayed on Fox News.
And yet he does appeal to many independents all of whom cannot be influenced by FoxNews. Perhaps you should rethink your premise.
Perhaps you should rethink yours. How does Romney appeal to independents?!
