Romney has really made the mistake of aligning himself to mainstream conservative republican rhetoric. He didn't seem to have that early on the primary. Maybe it seemed that way because of the other extreme candidates.
Argument like "Obamacare is really Exhibit No. 1 of the president's political philosophy, and that is that government knows better than people how to run your lives," should be left to Glenn Beck.
The election will come down to who can get the undecided voters...Romney is doing a great job at cornering himself with the conservative crowd. The problem is: he doesn't believe half the thing he says and they got stuck with Romney.
Dick Morris: 'If the Election Were Held Today Romney Would Win'
Dick Morris confidently predicted on Hannity that Mitt Romney would win the election and, barring any debate meltdowns, by a comfortable margin of "4 or 5 points", and that he'd also win Florida, Ohio, Nevada, Virginia and Pennsylvania. Sean Hannity guffawed some but Morris kept on, insisting the public polling done this year was heavily skewed in Obama's favor and that it couldn't be trusted (except for Rasmussen, and a few others of course).
I don't think so . . . Dick.
"When you're surrounded . . . by Redskins'"
The Romney campaign is already conceding the first debate to Obama.
He is largely correct about the polls,but I doubt Philly at the moment.
How do you reconcile +9 point Obama leads if Romney leads with BOTH independents & Republicans? And do you REALLY believe that Obama is doing better among democrats than Romney is among republicans by enough to make up for that difference. Do you REALLY?
John Nolte puts it best:
In 2004 the vote was R+4.
In 2008 the vote was D+3
CBS/NYTs is reporting that in 2012 we will see D+9.
In 2004 the vote was R+5
In 2008 the vote was D+8
CBS/NYTs is reporting that in 2012 we will see D+9
In 2010 the vote was D+3
In 2008 the vote was D+7
CBS/NYTs is reporting that in 2012 we will see D+9.
Again, why won’t the media report the dramatic news that Democrats are expected to turnout in record numbers against Republicans?
Because the media doesn’t believe it.
This isn’t reporting, this is propaganda and frankly after Romney wins should be treated as an in-kind contribution to the DNC, these are also not the tactics of a side that is winning.
“These are the ideas that people come to America to get away from.”Rubio
How should society view a cure for a ailment of limited duration that takes another's life to 'cure'?
It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion. ...Dean Inge
From what I've read, pollsters aren't predicting the number of voters that say they are democrats, the numbers themselves are rising in their polls they are taking. The simple fact seems to be that there are more people defining themselves as democrats now than 4 years ago, and the polls are backing up those numbers.
"We do not weight for party ID," said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute, which is conducting battleground state polls along with CBS News and the New York Times. "We do not predetermine how many Democrats, Republicans and independents will be in our sample."
The reason, he says, is that "party ID is a changing statistic. People will over time change back and forth in terms of how they view themselves politically."
Instead, Brown says the polls are weighted by "immutable characteristics - race, gender, age." Respondents are then asked their party identification during the interviews.
"We do that because there is a set standard that we can compare ourselves with to make sure we're getting an accurate demographic representative. And that standard is the United States Census Bureau data," said Brown. "What we get is what we get," he added.
Moreover, some pollsters argue that using the 2008 turnout numbers to draw conclusions, as Gillespie and others have done, ignores the fact that state demographics are likely to change over a period of four years.
In an interview with CBSNews.com, Miringoff pointed to the fact that "there are a lot more Latino voters this year than there were four years ago. Exit polls from four years ago aren't going to pick up that change." Similarly, he argues, 2004 exit polls wouldn't have suggested that Mr. Obama could compete in traditionally Republican-friendly states like North Carolina and Virginia - but he won both in 2008.
But seriously, every single election both sides try to play down expectations, though it is more often the side with the less talented politician. They want to be able to frame it so that their guy is seen as coming out ok as long as he at least seems competent against the other "heavyweight" debater. It can almost give them an underdog vibe.
I also think that part of it is the Political Wisdom that nobody wins Presidential Debates, but that it's possible to lose one.
And that, frankly, if you say one thing that, taken out of the whole debate, makes you look bad, then you lost.
twa you said all this wame crap four years ago, you were wrong then too. BTW, I'm still not convinced you're not Dick Morris.
Last edited by RedskinsFan44; September-27th-2012 at 06:45 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)