Posted on 11/05/2012 7:10:38 PM PST by Red Steel
Yup. That’s right. A landslide for Romney approaching the magnitude of Obama’s against McCain. That’s my prediction.
On Sunday, we changed our clocks. On Tuesday, we’ll change our president.
Romney will win the states McCain carried in 2008, plus: Florida, Indiana, Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, Iowa, Ohio, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Minnesota.
In the popular vote, Romney will win by more than 5 points.
The Obama campaign made the following key mistakes:
• It bet the farm on negative ads in swing states. It didn’t realize that Mitt’s convention speech and the three debates would give him the chance to live down the charges and demonstrate — through facts and his demeanor — that they were baseless.
• Obama had no Plan B if the negatives didn’t work. He never really laid in a convincing defense of his record, except to recall the mess that he inherited and to try to make people believe things were better. He had no vision for his second term, except more of same. He never moved to the center — the shift that reelected Bill Clinton.
• Obama drew his list of swing states too narrowly. He did not contemplate that he would be forced to defend Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan or Minnesota and squandered his money contesting unwinnable states like North Carolina. When Romney bypassed Obama’s “firewall” states (like the Germans did the French Maginot Line in World War II), the president had not laid in the necessary prophylactic irradiation of negative ads, and three of the states embraced Romney.
• By focusing on the negative, Obama sacrificed first his personal popularity and then his dignity and presidentiality. No longer was he the hope and the change. He became nothing more than a nasty partisan, throwing epithets at his rival. A president does not let himself be quoted as saying that his opponent is a “bullsh--ter” or that voting is the best “revenge.” Even his dress was wrong. Instead of appearing in a dark suit, he dressed in an open-neck white shirt, trying to be everyman but succeeding only in not looking like a president.
• Since he offered nothing more than a negative campaign and a grab-bag of special-interest pleadings for single women, unions, college kids and minorities, Obama failed to inspire the turnout that he needed. Against Santorum and Gingrich, Obama could have made the case that their prospective presidencies were sufficiently dangerous that liberals and Democrats must rush to the polls to stop them. But against the congenial Romney, the warnings rang hollow.
• In the first debate, Obama was terrible. We’ll likely find out what his excuses are after the polls close. Did he have the flu? Was it the altitude? Had he, as Bob Woodward suggested, just received a dose of bad news? Why did he appear distracted?
• Obama should have gotten the facts out quickly about Benghazi rather than let them drip, drip, drip out over six weeks. He could then have handled the crisis and won points for determination and toughness. Instead, to the very end, he looked like he was covering up the fact of a terrorist attack. Because he was.
• After Sandy, Obama visited New Jersey and surveyed the damage with Gov. Chris Christie (R). He should have stayed on the storm, superintending relief efforts, urging FEMA on, absorbing the lessons of Bush’s failure to cope well with Katrina. Instead, he returned to the partisan wars and the strident speeches in swing states.
None of this should take away from Romney’s brilliant campaign. By staying on the economy and not being tempted into side issues like Libya, Mitt kept the focus where it needed to be and never let up. His campaign’s foray into Pennsylvania, Minnesota and Wisconsin was vital to his chances of victory. More about what Mitt did right in my post-election column on Thursday. But for now, let’s celebrate the new president we are about to elect.
“/s” means “sarcasm”.
Amen, and Amen!
10 Million less in early voting, and 10 Million less on voting day for the Kenyan usurper, as compared to his 2008 numbers, leaving the commie bastard with 49 Million total.
Out of 130 Million total votes, Obama gets 49 Million, and Romney/Ryan get 81 Million, or 37% to 62%.
That would be an even wider margin than I've been predicting with 39% to 59%. Whichever it is, I don't believe this race will be tight at all.
Cheers!
Bookmarking in case of epic fail part II.
She hates Obama, but she is Socially Liberal Musician. FR wouldn't work for her. When she asks me anything, I give her the same response I would Post here, so she is a FReeper by default. She just doesn't know it.
Like I said, I was shocked at her hatred for Obama. If that is a typical response from a disappointed 2008 Obama Voter, the Prez is in deep doo doo. We shall see...
This ends at 7PM today ~ no more mr nice guy fur shur
Romney has to get 59 million for Obama to tie him at 59 million.
If Obama drops another 10 million then if Romney gets the same 59 million McCain got, Obama gets 49 million ~ and that's about 108 million total ~ not 130 million.
The 2010 blowout election still involved a drop of 15 million in the Republican vote ~ against a drop of 30 million in the Democrat vote.
The next biggest drop ever was in 2006 when Republicans had a drop of 26 million votes compared to the last Presidential election.
An informed electorate knows how to really mess with the political class' minds ~ they both vote, and they withdraw their vote. This time they may be doing both.
From your lips to God’s ears, Morris. (Although a disturbing connection.)
So who will the Dems blame for this loss and throw under the bus after Debbie Whatshername Schultz?
So you believe Romney/Ryan will NOT get ten million votes more than McCain/Palin?
Sarah Palin alone brought in the lion's share of those 59 million votes, dragging McCain along like a ball and chain.
In this election, both Romney and Ryan are getting extremely positive receptions. Voters are extremely energized against Obama, and they are also energized for Romney/Ryan.
I see no reason why Romney/Ryan would get less than 69 million votes.
You do the best that you can, with what you have, where you are.
All persons need to be held accountable.
I see no special reason at all for Romney to get more votes than McCain though. And McCain got fewer votes than G H W Bush!
We were on a downward trend, and there's that awful 2006 election where we had 26 million Republican voters just stay home ~ didn't even bother voting for Congress ~ that's an awful lot of people to pull that trick. Same with the Democrats. They had 30 million Democrat voters stay home just two years ago.
Remember, people tend to vote for their own party's candidates, or they simply don't vote for anyone for that slot.
Remember, also, there are NO real independents who actually vote ~ they end up voting for a Republican or a Democrat 98% of the time.
We have also gone through a recent campaign that focused on just a few states ~ supposedly swing states, or states where the two major candidates were head to head. Who's been out there in THE OTHER STATES stirring up interest? I hope you don't think a handful of Broadcast TV ads will do the job ~
The point is this can end up with a very narrow win by one or the other simply because people didn't bother voting. Under certain conditions one side or the other can appear to have had a terrible loss even when the winning side ALSO failed to get out the vote!
Don't believe the polls either. The telephone call technique has failed ~ used to be you'd call people and get maybe 50% response. Recently that's down at 9%! That is such a small number certain motivated radical groups who are willing to do nothing but answer the phone can and do provide distortions.
The Chick Fil A event is a portent though ~ pro family, pro-life, pro-NO-Bama!
Every time the election has been held on November 6 Republicans have won.
When the Redskins lose at the last homegame before the election, the challenging party usually wins.
Those are also portents.
I'm sorry Joe Morris and I couldn't get together with a flock of pigeons at an enclosed courtyard so we could see what happened ~ but, alas, people would imagine that to be superstitious.
That was mentioned during the 'third party' debate on C-SPAN last night. That was fun to watch...Virgil Goode was the only sane one on the stage.
Freepers: taking out the trash since 1998.......
Freepers: taking out the trash since 1998.......
“0’s ppl are getting desperate during interviews
on tv, they chose specific words that sounded
desperate..
.. Stephanie Cutter, Gibbs etc etc... they knew! lol”
Especially Gibbs! His body language screamed defeat. Barely recognized the old Baghdad Bob we’ve come to know.
Or worse: IGNORE THEM!!
What's ticked me off is that RCP hasn't changed their EC Map in a month. They still show NC as a toss-up, Montana 'leaning Romney', FL a toss-up -- Obama's given up there. And ignoring NH where Romney is ahead yet they say toss-up, and Maine where EC Votes get split. And it's like all the anecdotal stories of a Romney surge in Iowa and the dislike of Obama there didn't exist. [EC votes get split there too.]
And now, reports here in IL aren't good for Barry. Chicago early voting is way down. Ditto for suburban Cook County. And those areas are what makes IL Blue. Take away Cook County and Chicago and Bush would have won IL twice and McCain Palin would have been close. IL is in fact a VERY Red state (a sea of Red on maps in 2000 and 2004). So there is an *outside chance* that Obama *could* lose IL. Depends on actual Voting turnout today which favors the GOP. (I wouldn't bet the Rent on it though)
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.