View Article
The baffling question is how Mitt Romney lost. If ever this was a challenger’s race to win, this was it.
The economy is bad. Obama is an activist in an anti-government age. He has never done a good job of selling his record. He was not a great candidate this year. He bombed in the first debate. And, oh yes, he’s African-American.
All that makes me antsy about tonight. But the overwhelming evidence is that Obama will win.
Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight now puts that probability at over 90 percent. And it’s not just Superstorm Sandy, he says, but a slow, steady rebound for Obama over the last month.
Yes, I hear the Republican bluster about momentum and crowd excitement. But George McGovern and Michael Dukakis had big, enthusiastic crowds at the end, too.
Then there’s North Carolina. The Obama campaign wouldn’t have sent Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama to North Carolina the last weekend if it didn’t see a good chance to win here.
Perhaps the worst sign for Romney: Dick Morris predicts he’ll win a landslide. If Dick’s wrong, he’ll be screaming “fraud” by midnight. And raising money on it tomorrow.
If Romney loses, there are two explanations: the damage Obama’s ads did to his brand in the summer and the damage the Tea Party has done to the Republican brand in the last two years.
And if he loses, the Tea Party will be on the warpath to push the GOP even farther right – nationally and in North Carolina.
Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (4) RSS comment feed |


# dap916
Tuesday, November 06, 2012 1:52 PM
You're right, Gary. This one should be an easy task for Romney...or really, any challenger to Obama. But, Obama & Co. has been smart...especially politically. When everyone complains about all the new people on welfare, receiving housing subsidies, food stamps, medicaid, extended unemployment benefits etc. in addition to the exponential rise in people going on Social Security disability...that's actually music to Obama's ears. Who doesn't know how these people are going to vote, or at least the vast majority? Romney has been adamant about making many of these programs follow existing rules and cracking down on abusers and getting people out of those programs that shouldn't be on them. It's part of that 47% Romney said he'd never be able to influence. Many have made hay with that remark...but, it was true to the bone. That's where Obama's big base is. And, regardless who the challenger would have been, they'd have to fight that. And, let's be honest, a big portion of those people vote because, hey, they don't really have much else to do.
clarence swinney
# clarence swinney
Tuesday, November 06, 2012 2:30 PM
Bush increased spending by 90%
His last budget increased by 17.9%
Obama Record
2010—fell 1.8%
2011---rose 4.3%
2012—set to rise 0.7%
2013—set to fall 1.3% to $3580 Billion
So, if he hits that $3580 he will have increased spending from $3520 Billion
to $3580 or 2%.
clarence swinney
# clarence swinney
Tuesday, November 06, 2012 4:46 PM
We need more than Bain tax returns. What policies are prescribed by Obama and Romney?
Jobs? Deficit? Debt? Middle Class vs Wall Street? Will we tax to Pay our Way or continue Spend and Borrow kids pay tomorrow? How? When? What new industry can create millions of good paying jobs?Will minimum wage be increased? Part D funded? Cost of college decreased?
Run away Medicare spending slowed? Run away Military spending slowed? Part of Wealth transferred back to middle class? Progressive Flat Tax by Group?
# Carbine
Wednesday, November 07, 2012 2:26 PM
No question Obama had just about every vulnerability an incumbent can have this time. A first-rate candidate leading a first-rate campaign could have blown him away. But you know as well as I do that the R's sent their "B" team to this one. Gingrich, Cain, Bachmann, Santorum, etc., Romney was clearly the best of the bunch but that was a pretty low bar to step over.

Post Comment

Only registered users may post comments.
Copyright (c) Talking About Politics   :  DNN Hosting  :  Terms Of Use  :  Privacy Statement