Chick-Fil-A appreciation day was a dry run for getting out the vote and voting against him.
Posted on 10/30/2012 1:50:48 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
What's the explanation for Mitt Romney's unparalleled breakout? A few weeks ago, the Romney campaign was regarded as dead in the water. The polls (with the exception of Rasmussen) had the campaign uniformly down, giving Obama up to half a dozen points. Voter interest was phlegmatic at best. A combined Chicago-media offensive appeared to have put Romney on the ropes. The consensus was that Obama would cruise to another victory, one paralleling and perhaps even exceeding his triumph over John McCain four years ago.
Today, little more than an electoral-cycle heartbeat later, the situation is utterly reversed. The big mo belongs to Romney. The polls, excepting a few weird left-wing holdouts of the Reuters variety, show Romney with comfortable leads ranging from 2% to 5%. The swing states are trending in his direction. The expectations of the GOP are those of the 3rd Army roaring into the Reich. As for Obama, he has displayed every sign of a man on the run -- desperation moves, incipient hysteria, vast and expensive efforts to magnify minor Romney gaffes, appeals to Big Bird and Gloria Allred. His expression in the debates was that of a man facing his karma, more haggard and haunted with each appearance. At least one person in the campaign knows full well that the game is up.
This remarkable turnaround is unmatched in recent American political history, and as such, it requires an explanation. Not many have been floated as of yet. The most popular so far holds that Anne and Tagg Romney, acting as Mitt's consiglieres, pushed aside most the campaign's professional political operatives in a successful effort to encourage "Mitt to be Mitt."
Everyone involved denies that anything of the sort occurred, and that may well be the truth...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
MSM push polls (either during the poll or its use after its completed) meeting reality as the real poll approaches.
Continuing from the article:
“Occam’s razor applies to politics as much as any other field, and the simplest and best explanation in this case is that no large-scale change occurred within the campaign or without — that in fact, things are unfolding pretty much as they were planned to. That it’s happening this way because it was meant to.
There is no conspiracy, and there was no mistake. What we’re seeing is an example of straightforward campaign strategy in action. Romney has been underestimated as a politician all along. This is true to some extent of most politicians.
The general view of politicians among political professionals, media, and academics is that they are simple folk who must be led by the hand and told what to say by trained and experienced pros, and in spare moments left in a corner with a shiny object to play with. This may be true in some cases (I recall a Jersey pol whom I encountered at a political meeting called to obtain support for his candidacy. His response to every question was to, without fail, turn and gaze at his campaign manager. He was elected, served three terms, and was considered quite a success by NJ standards), but it’s not true of Romney.
As a successful businessman in a tough, complex, and cutthroat field, Romney learned as much about strategy, planning, and the vagaries of human nature as it is possible for one mind to hold, and he has not forgotten a single comma of it.”
Romney's turnaround is a result of information reaching the masses unfiltered by the press.
I maintain it was NEVER close...and he was NEVER dead in the water. Had the election been held 6 months ago...the outcome would have been the same...
< Fingers crossed >
It's less that Romney improved and more that the pollsters blinked. It's time to put away the BS polls and put one out that covers the MOE. When Mitt polls ahead by 6, the only way to cover is to put him in the lead...
I have in the past month pondered the observations you outlined in your last paragraph. You expressed my thoughts much better than I could have. Thank you.
“As a successful businessman in a tough, complex, and cutthroat field, Romney learned as much about strategy, planning, and the vagaries of human nature as it is possible for one mind to hold, and he has not forgotten a single comma of it.”
Agree with you on this, and regardless of the purity of his conservative creds (which are not that great, in my book) I respect him tremendously for his business acumen. The idea that his moves *accrue* to his cause over time (vs the spaghetti-on-the-wall gambits tossed out there by 0bama et al) is something that *can not be faked*. Well more than half of the crap 0bama pulls ends up detracting from him/his cause after a few days percolation time; and to me, this is what will cause Romney to gather up those ever-so-elusive independents. They see, on one hand, a guy whose moves are aligned and which gather real, measurable, effective strength. And on the other hand they see a flailing improviser and frankly, thug. Yeah, the playground insults are nice bumper stickers, but 2 days later they are used dogfood.
Mitt is simply more or less normal, while Barack was unable to live up to his hype.
Well, I think Romney has done well over the past few weeks. And he was absolutely sterling at the Al Smith Memorial Dinner, although I don’t know how many people saw that.
But as the article indicates, mostly Romney just had to stand out of the way while Obama made a blithering idiot out of himself. Not to mention sitting back and watching Muslim terrorists murder an Ambassador and three heroic Americans, while lying his head off about it.
Mighty fine article. If Romney wins, it will be seen as insightful. If Romney loses, it’s entirely idiotic.
“As a successful businessman in a tough, complex, and cutthroat field, Romney learned as much about strategy, planning, and the vagaries of human nature as it is possible for one mind to hold, and he has not forgotten a single comma of it.”
Agree with you on this, and regardless of the purity of his conservative creds (which are not that great, in my book) I respect him tremendously for his business acumen. The idea that his moves *accrue* to his cause over time (vs the spaghetti-on-the-wall gambits tossed out there by 0bama et al) is something that *can not be faked*. Well more than half of the crap 0bama pulls ends up detracting from him/his cause after a few days percolation time; and to me, this is what will cause Romney to gather up those ever-so-elusive independents. They see, on one hand, a guy whose moves are aligned and which gather real, measurable, effective strength. And on the other hand they see a flailing improviser and frankly, thug. Yeah, the playground insults are nice bumper stickers, but 2 days later they are used dogfood. And after seeing this pattern of “toss-it-out, smirk, then watch-it-fall flat” a mere 2-3 days later, 0bama’s cred is little more than an open running sore.
As Obama himself might say: Romney’s turnaround is unprecedented.
Money quote:
“He has not forgotten what others have not yet learned.”
That was an excellent read. Well worth the time. Thank You!
Chick-Fil-A appreciation day was a dry run for getting out the vote and voting against him.
People finally realizing what a dour, sour, petty small-minded man Barack Obama really is and saying “enough already!”
2-3% is unparalleled?? Seriously?
The GOP leads by a couple of points and everyone wants to pretend like its never happened before, as if its something strange if a Republican wins. And this is from “our” side.
Okay... now I can read the rest of it. lol
Pretty much says it all. Excellent article. Written as if the direction and result of this campaign are nothing more but a fait-acompli!
This is beginning to look like Clinton-Bush 1992. By sometime next Tuesday early ‘afternoon’, everyone’s going to know who ‘won’!
There is only one reason Romney will win: The economy (etc.) is too bad for an incumbent to win.
As one who previously did not trust Romney (I used the term RINOmney, along with a couple of other things I am now ashamed of), I am now a strong Mitt supporter. It is clear that Obama couldn’t run a lemonade stand, whilst Romney clearly demonstrates executive level talent.
Hopefully, after he wins, Romney will show a limited respect for what few ideas liberals have that actually work...but will temper this with the knowledge that liberal ideas are like cement airplanes...the look might be right, but the performance is tragic.
He had to have a certain amount of political skill just to be able to make something like Bain work as advertised. Companies are full of politics at normal times, and it only gets exacerbated when they are in trouble. Mitt had to be able to walk Bain in there and keep the herds of cats from flying apart.
“....few ideas liberals have that actually work.....”
Can you think of any?
I am trying!
Much appreciated, but all admiration is due to the author, J.R. Dunn.
For what it's worth, I share his thoughts, and consider myself a fair wordsmith (when I'm so motivated :-)
By whom?
"This remarkable turnaround is unmatched in recent American political history, and as such, it requires an explanation."
By whom?
The MSM. Absolutely. 100%.
I tend to share your opinion but I ask myself if is because I dislike Obama show much that I cannot fathom how anyone can possibly like him.
My opinion..
Prior to the first debate we saw only the glimpses of Romney the MSM felt obliged to run.
These were quick snapshots, usually as unflattering as the MSM could dig up.
He was portrayed as stiff, aloof, snobbish, etc.
Suddenly the public saw a totally different Romney than what they/we had been led to believe.
A man smart, concerned with the average American/ Country, personable.
A good alternative to their unsatisfactory present president.
And BTW, I was one of the ‘anybody but Romney’ folks. Changed my mind.
We voted today. Two votes against Zero/Bite-me Felt great...
Good read.
I disagree. Even though the polls in September were skewed +D, it still was a tie at best. People defaulted to Obama until they knew that the challenger was someone capable. They probably just defaulted their choice until a credible choice presented itself. That first debate was the catalyst, and the preference cascade has started. People are jumping off the Obama bandwagon now, as they see that it is ok to do so.
“What’s the explanation for Mitt Romney’s unparalleled breakout?”
He finally revised his economic plan and started talking about economic growth -— low tax rates, stable money, free trade, and cutting red tape.
Then the poll numbers started to turn in his favor. The people want the growth message and they finally got it.
Thanks, Vet. I devoured every single word. Since Perry went down, I’ve been supporting this candidate in every way I can.
The article you posted was like sitting in the stands on the first base side. You hear the bat connect and suddenly everything is slow mo. All things, technical, quality, scientific, experience, passionate, and skilled have connected with the swing of that bat. The ball sails effortlessly over the centerfield fence. And we cheer.
We’re gonna win.
Liars (libs) have to live in a bubble.
So Obama believed the “experts” who
said, You need to be more animated
in the next debates.
Crowley hit for Team Zero; and
Romney’s hand dropped down.
That’s when he knew what he
had to do at the last debate,
and it worked.
Romney will be elected - but, then comes the hard stuff...
My hope is that we take the Senate majority. If we don't get that, and if a conservative majority in Congress doesn't take a meat-ax to government spending that gets Presidential approval, and the approval of the electorate, Romney may become a disappointment.
If on the other hand, Romney immediately opens drilling on all coasts, in Alaska, OK's that pipeline from Canada, and lowers the price of gasoline to a buck fifty within a few months of taking office, this nation won't forget it - and he may become as popular as was Ronald Reagan.
Yes.
"Unparalleled?" Was 1980 that long ago? Carter had Reagan on the ropes in the polls in September 1980.
I wasn’t sure but it sure seemed like this should be Reagan/Carter II. Obama disappointed people and they were just waiting to see Romney be a plausible alternative. The debates provided that unvarnished look.
btw, have people noticed that Obama’s campaign has been to duplicate the Romney campaign and pretend Obama is a free market, middle class loving conservative or at least moderate?
But it’s not believable in Obama, just like Mondale in the tank.
The real unfortunate surprise is Obama should be losing by more.
I would have voted for him 6 months ago, true, just to get Obama out. I have to say watching the first debate was a HUGE relief that Mitt truly understands the issues and could convey them despite the media attacking him without mercy. Whatever was thrown at him he matter of factly batted out of the park with a solid answer! He didn’t go McCain soft on Obama in all three debates!!!
He GOT my vote already!
Man, you are such a sourpuss.
I especially enjoyed the discussion about the “47%” video. You know the 0bama campaign is gnashing its collective teeth about having to pull that rabbit out of the hat prematurely. Had things gone according to plan, they would have whipped it out sometime after the last debate (or maybe the first one, to change the subject of 0 bombing so badly), and let their minions in the media (you know, the ones who can't be bothered to cover Benghazigate) ring the clarion call from the CBSNBCCNN towers.
It just didn't work out that way. Sorry David.
But it’s not believable in Obama, just like Mondale in the tank.
I've noticed. The Won is like a sci-fi chameleon creature. He becomes whatever he needs to be to fool the masses.
(It was Dukakis in the tank.)
What's interesting about J.R. Dunn's article, is that he looks at both Romney and Obama from outside the lens of politics altogether, and instead focuses on their relative strengths and weaknesses as players in a large and complex game.
Nowhere does he mention where either man sits on the political spectrum. In focusing on their experience, knowledge, attitudes, and ability to properly read an opponent, then develop and execute an offensive strategy, he lays bare Obama's utter unsuitedness to not only a large and structured personal battle, but the duties and responsibilities of the presidency itself.
Altogether, it's a brilliant piece, I think.
” Romney is very fortunate in one thing only - he has a despicable opponent that this nation can hardly wait to kick out of office. “
And Obama was horrible in the first debate. That finished him off.
He won’t be the first Republican President.
IMO, all this stuff is overrated.
Elections are about fundamentals.
Good economy: incumbent wins
Bad economy: challenger wins (provided he is a plausible alternative, which Romney most certainly is)
I think it’s simple. Obuma showed himself as a sneering, 50 IQ Marxist with dead, black eyes and no soul or heart.
Yes, and it's disgusting. I'd have far more respect for an Obama who sold liberalism unashamed under an honest label, rather than calling it conservatism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.