Why It's Not Romney's Inauguration

Barron's (sub) ^ | January 12, 2013 | J.T. Young

[CutePuppy]

How the Republican candidate lost the presidential election.

< snip > ..... [Republicans] are concocting explanations and excuses for what they see as Mitt Romney's snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

They should realize that it was economics that sank Romney. His crucial problem was his campaign's failure to make a sufficiently convincing case on the money issues.

Most postmortems have focused on the demographics of the defeat. ..... < snip >

But none of Romney's demographic defeats are as significant as the electoral potential Romney missed on money issues.

Election Day exit polling by Edison Media Research/Mitofsky International for the National Election Pool included three questions that explain a significant part of Romney's weakness.

The first question was on the state of the economy. Amazingly, 23% of voters rated the economy "excellent" or "good." Of these, 90% voted for Obama. Of the 77% of voters rating the economy "not so good" or "poor," 38% supported Obama.

The second question was, "Who would better handle the economy?" The answers amounted to a virtual tie. To the question, 48% said Obama was more capable, and 98% of that group voted for the president. On the other side, 49% chose Romney as more capable, and 94% of these voted for Romney.

The final important money question was, "Who would better handle the federal budget deficit?" Again, it was almost a tie, with 47% choosing Obama to handle the deficit, and 98% of that group voting for him. Of the 49% who chose Romney for deficit management, 95% gave him their votes.

Considering the weak economy, the exploding spending, and huge deficits of the past four years, it's amazing that Romney could not make a better case for managing the economy and the deficit .....

[KC_Conspirator]

Only and act of God, working overtime, can save America. We are truly at Idiocracy.