Might Romney manage it?

Is this just whistling in the wind? Or has he a chance?

Romney and Obama in Poll Dead Heat

A surge in support for Romney has put him in a dead heat with Obama with about two weeks to go before the US presidential election, according to a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll.

It depends upon the Electoral College of course but, anyone got an unbiased and or informed view on this?

Not that I\’m in any sense excited by Romney. Although I do despise Obama now (supported him last time on the grounds that electing a black man would piss off all the sort of people who deserve to get pissed off).

47 thoughts on “Might Romney manage it?”

  1. Silver is a Democrat. That doesn’t mean he’s wrong, but I prefer unbiased statisticians.

    That said, I think 2-1 is probably fair odds. I think a lot hinges on whether the Republicans can get the generally Dem-leaning mainstream media to look a bit more seriously at Obama’s record, and the various gaffes (‘four dead Americans in not optimal…’), and how the final debate goes.

    In a sense it doesn’t really matter. Neither of them are really serious about rowing back the size of government; it’s just a question of how quick they head for the iceberg.

  2. There’s a case to be made that the election matters mainly because the Pres gets to nominate new judges to the Supreme Court. That sounds to me like the Constitution malfunctioning.

  3. Son of Carter vs. Son of Dole.

    I am beginning to suspect that Romney might just win both the popular vote and in the electoral college. Historically, undecideds tend to break against the incumbent, and Obama has given that block some very real reasons to consider voting for Romney. The other part of the equation is turnout. It seems to me that Romney’s campaign has always believed that if they could keep it close they would win on turnout, and I am coming to the conclusion that they may be right.

    Personally, I never thought I’d see a worse campaign that Mike Dukakis’… But I have to hand it to Obama and his braintrust, this one might just top it.

  4. (supported him last time on the grounds that electing a black man would piss off all the sort of people who deserve to get pissed off).

    Probably wouldn’t be a bad reason again it really is the only difference. There’s no doubt in my mind that if Romney beat McCain then Obama back then, there would have been pretty much no difference. Except Obamacare would be called Romney care and Liberals would still be protesting against all those foreign policy successes”..Gadafi, Osama etc

  5. Yeah – but listen up, guys. Ya forgot one thing. The big one. Mitt – a great guy, by the way, honest as they come and knows how to hold his bourbon – has more dough. Geddit? He’s got more dough.

  6. The postal voters have already voted a couple of weeks ago. Might well be crucial as earlier voters are likely to have voted Obama.

  7. Obama basically has to win Ohio, which will all come down to turnout. Republican voters will all turn out and vote Romney – many with their noses pinched. If the Democrats stay home, Obama loses.

  8. “Silver is a Democrat. That doesn’t mean he’s wrong, but I prefer unbiased statisticians.”

    Where do you find one of them? Silver has his own views but I don’t think any of his predictions have been too far out.

  9. Romney is currently 7/4, was 4/1 a week or so ago.
    As far as I can see the polls factor in at least as much enthusiasm for Obama as occurred in 2008 (and turnout )- seem unlikely.
    As JP says, Romney has more dough- a lot more. Whereas Obama is borrowing money.
    As to the difference it’ll make- that depends on whether and how the senate and the house move. Romney will work with them, as he did in Massachusetts.

  10. The Senate will go Democrat – probably 51-49. The House will remain under Republican control, but with a smaller majority. I can’t see a scenario in which there isn’t more close-down-the-government brinkmanship from the Republicans.

  11. Re #7: Dukakis had a better record to run on than Obama. DTP, IIRC, is an Ohio resident as am I. If turnout can be predicted by a comparison of the number of “lawn signs”, then Romney may well take Ohio and both the PV and EC. I’m from the poorest (“culturally deprived”) portion of Ohio which went heavily for Obama in ’08. Romney drew over 10,000 in his appearance here vs Biden’s 1-200 or so.

  12. John Boehner is not into brinksmanship and more than Mitt Romney is… Both are committed to rearranging the deck chairs; neither truly understands that the ship is sinking. Fiscal conservatives are in for a full dose of disappointment irrespective of who is elected president.

  13. Mike: one of the most noticeable thing in this election is the voter gender gap, which is somewhere between 15-20 points. Now, which gender go disproportionately to rallies and puts up signs? (clue: not the laydeez). My friend in Ohio reckons it’s too close to call.

    Matthew: although the Cracked point on the irrelevance of money is generally true, this is exactly the kind of election where it isn’t – twice the spending may only buy one percentage point, but that’s exactly the margin required.

  14. (Tim, edit function, please…)

    Also regarding your point about the gender gap, I think that’s almost entirely the Republicans’ fault. They’ve really scored an own goal with the whole “War on Women” thing.

  15. Pat wrote:
    “As JP says, Romney has more dough- a lot more.”

    The opposite is true, but people believe the spin:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/us/politics/romney-and-republicans-began-month-with-34-million-advantage.html

    The headline and first paragraph are leftie spin. The truth is in the details.

    Romney campaign has $62 million
    Obama campaign has $99 million

    The RNC has more money than the DNC, but with all the elections being fought countrywide, it isn’t all going toward the Presidential race.

    Don’t.Believe.The.Spin.

    Barring an October surprise (Mitt shagged his dog, etc) I’m going with a Romney win. How big is unclear. Long term it would probably be best if Romney wins the popular vote comfortably but Obama is returned by the Electoral College. Then the Leftards will own the coming bust/burst, which probably not even a Senate owning mandate for the Repubs + Romney can avert.

  16. Then the Leftards will own the coming bust/burst, which probably not even a Senate owning mandate for the Repubs + Romney can avert.

    Of course they wouldn’t avert it. They don’t even want to try. All the Republicans care about is lowering taxes, not cutting spending to match. All the Democrats care about is raising spending, not raising taxes to match. Both parties are deep in denial and neither has the political will to do what’s necessary.

  17. Matthew, your”own goal” statement would implie that the Republicans invented the “War on Women”, whereas it’s actually Dem / media hype (OMFG, Binders!).

    The Republicans’ socially conservative positions on abortion, etc, will certainly cost them a lot of younger single women votes. But older married women are much more concerned about the economy and are heading to the Romney camp along with the rest of the wakeful.

  18. All the Republicans care about is lowering taxes, not cutting spending to match.

    True so far, but a landslide mandate would indicate that the people aren’t going back to sleep and will be holding feet to the fire.

    What is difficult / impossible is reeling back federal government. The Depts of Education and Homeland Security (theater) should just be abolished. Ha, ha, ha, etc.

  19. Oh well, it looks like Romney has handed the 3rd debate to Obama by following the Dem advice to not attack. What a floundering putz. I’m off to bed.

  20. The issue is that a lot of polls assume Democrats turn out like it’s 2008. They don’t make their assumptions clear. Romney is trending well and should be considered the slight favorite.

    Gallup, the poll without party ID, shows Romney up substantially.

  21. [email protected] don’t disagree and just expect to be (much) less disappointed if Romney.
    Ever getting your blog back?

    [email protected]’t the case here, turnout for Romney was about 60-40 female. If you are considering single, bi-coastal and/or women in education, then yes-advantage to Obama. But overall, the gap has narrowed as married and older women seem to be moving otherwise.
    Your friend may be correct-depends on the turnout in Cleveland, Toledo, east side of Columbus and how many students , et al are able to double-vote.

  22. Mike-

    I may ramp the blog back up soon. Then again, I may not. If I do, it will be in a much different form that in the olden days.

  23. but a landslide mandate would indicate that the people aren’t going back to sleep and will be holding feet to the fire.

    You what? All a landslide mandate says to politicians is “you can do whatever you want”. The advantage the US has is the midt-terms. All we get is the occassional bye-election (which are often as not fought on local issues rather than as a statement on the national government.)

  24. Well, as a believer in “the big Mo” I’m piling into Romney President.

    The only thing that bugs me is how many outright frauds might be committed to prevent a Romney win. The vigorous campaign waged by the Dems against voter ID has to have some purpose after all.

  25. I disagree with a lot of Obama’s policies, and so does Romney when he talks to his supporters (but reportedly not so much in the debates, which I haven’t watched). The trouble is that there seems to be no intersection between Romney’s disagreements and mine.

    So, if you’re a Romney supporter, please tell us three of his policies you think are better than Obama’s. Not including being an inch taller and having an R after his name.

  26. Unsurprisingly, I side mostly with Gary Johnson, although it is a very mixed bag. Somewhat surprised to find I side most with Romney on science issues (although he has Ryan as his witch-doctor, I suppose, and his answer on Evilution {sic} is either disingenuous or yet another quirk of Mormon orthodoxy I wasn’t away of.)

  27. Romney is Obama-lite as Camerunt is Bliar-lite (if Bliar being any lighter than he is is even possible). They are both the shite-scum of the Earth. Hell, all four of them are.

    Shame on you Tim for supporting an obvious POS like Oscumma in 2008.

    There is, at all times and places only one vote that is worthwhile: NONE OF THE ABOVE.

  28. So Much For Subtlety

    PaulB – “So, if you’re a Romney supporter, please tell us three of his policies you think are better than Obama’s. Not including being an inch taller and having an R after his name.”

    I am not much of a Romney supporter, but I might try to pretend. He is fiscally more conservative. Which is important as America has to stop its slide into Argentina-dom. He is pro-growth. Which is vital because America has been the engine of growth for the rest of the world these last 60 years – if they don’t grow, no one grows. And he is pro-America. Obama’s obsequious groveling to Second and Third World dictators has to stop.

    Admittedly the US will probably be stuck with Obamacare. And the DREAM act. But it could be worse. Obama is out of his depth and never had a clue. He has also never had a job for as long as four years and he looks like an ADHD kid who just wants to be somewhere else. So I hope they let him.

  29. Dennis the Peast #21: “Both are committed to rearranging the deck chairs; neither truly understands that the ship is sinking. Fiscal conservatives are in for a full dose of disappointment irrespective of who is elected president.”

    Sad. Very sad. But true.

    And when the US goes …

  30. That’s instructive. There are apparently no policy areas in which Romney supporters think he’s preferable to Obama. But we do have SMFS’s suggestions.

    1) Romney is fiscally more conservative. How can one tell? The things he seems to be keenest on are cutting taxes and big increases in military spending.

    2) Romney is pro-growth. That’s not a policy, it’s an aspiration. Obama is pro-growth too.

    3) Obama grovels obsequiously to Second and Third World dictators. But this is just an outright lie.

    SMFS’s final paragraph gives it away: it’s not really about policies, he just doesn’t like Obama. Of course the allegation that Obama is out of his depth is absurd: Obama consistently shows a deep grasp of policy issues, and his executive actions have been effective. In reality the problem is rather the opposite: Obama is a pragmatic introvert who explains his thinking by careful reference to fact and logic. This comes across as patronizing to people who prefer to rely on a few made-up factoids and their gut instincts, in the style of the previous president.

    Me, I like pragmatic introverts.

  31. PaulB, sorry, you’ve been drinking the Koolaid again. Obama doesn’t show anything that even vaguely resembles a “deep grasp of policy issues”, perhaps you could point to some of this depth ? And far from a “pragmatic introvert”, he’s far more the introverted narcissist who believes that he knows far better on every subject than his advisers, speech writers, policy wonks, the lot.

    And I call bowing to the King of Saudi Arabia amongst others, as obsequious, although maybe you’re correct that saudi isn’t really “second or third world”, if that was your intent.

  32. Try reading this (starting at page five if you’re not interested in the rest). Compare it with this.

    I agree, Obama shouldn’t have bowed to Abdullah. Who are the “others”?

    It’s charactisic of Obama that he likes to be polite, and sometimes he goes too far with that. But really, is that a problem? Which do you prefer, (over)politeness in public combined with good policy, or the Bush approach of being in the Saudis’ pockets?

  33. Bush isn’t a candidate in this election so it matters not whether one prefers the Bush or the Obama approach. The Bush approach is not on the menu.

  34. ChrisM: quite true. The choice is between Obama, the Romney from the third debate who agreed with Obama about everything but wanted him to be more shouty about it, and the Romney who appointed all those Bush guys to be his foreign policy advisors.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *