Posted on 12/01/2012 6:40:57 AM PST by dirtboy
It may take election experts years to unravel the mystery of why Mitt Romney was convinced he had won the 2012 presidential election, as a new report shows some skewed internal poll numbers, and explains Romney’s two trips to Pennsylvania.
But at the same time, the article from The New Republic’s Noam Scheiber shows inconsistencies with reports from November 5 and November 6 about the numbers that might have convinced Romney and his team that he had a good chance of beating President Obama in Ohio.
Obama’s resounding win is starting to take on more of a resemblance to Harry Truman’s “upset” in 1948, with Romney playing the role of Thomas Dewey.
From the News Desk Latest Videos
Latest News Stories Liberals rallying to pressure 4 local congressmen 500 evacuated Friday night after hazmat spill in Paulsboro As critics scoff, Camden moves ahead on police overhaul She watched bridge collapse, tanker cars fall World AIDS Day highlights challenges of facing the disease More News » News Blogs FLOWERS SHOW: From the (Pea)Nut Gallery 11/30/2012 PHILLYCLOUT: Clarke tweaks zoning proposal related to parking requirements 11/30/2012 Stay Connected Get the latest news and events delivered to your email. Sign up now!
Obama wound up with 332 electoral votes, taking every swing state except North Carolina. Somehow, the Romney campaign was seemingly convinced that he would win one of the final three swing states, or make a strong showing in Pennsylvania.
[snip]
The conclusion is that Romney, based on his internal polls, thought he had at least 267 out of the 270 electoral votes needed to win the election, and the election would be decided in four states: Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Nevada
(Excerpt) Read more at philly.com ...
Romney got fleeced by his pollens and consultants .
Yes he did. With over 70,000 "irregularities," it's hard to be intellectually honest and yet deny that the election was stolen.
What you said about Romney being a terrible candidate is true. But it is also non sequitur. Your argument is a false dichotomy. Face it - there was vote fraud on a massive scale in the swing states, and it allowed Obama to steal a second term, regardless of the quality of the GOP candidate.
“Team Obama, blending Alinsky and Chicago thug tactics played the game to win.”
**********
And that is a fundamental truth that Republicans just can’t seem to grasp. The Dems are vicious adversaries. You have to not only beat them — you also have to contend with their attack dogs in the media.
To achieve victory, you HAVE to be stronger than your opponent(s) to win. You don’t score points playing defense all the time.
Love your post.
So true:
“All the logic in the world won’t change peoples’ minds; only the experience of pain will, as it so often does in our personal lives.”
The Dems simply out shoe-leathered and out-financed us. One account is of Dems going to a home for the retarded, registering every inmate, and then “helping” them with their absentee ballots. The Dems’ so-far unbeatable resource is their system for using tax money and (extorted) union money to fund an almost unlimited voting effort. We may be seeing an unbeatable Liberal voting machine for the next century unless we counter it somehow.
First I recall you were telling people not to vote for Romney
On this website and now your trying to dismiss all the voter fraud !
Your a Paulbot too !
Romney lost by 300,000 in four states !
You can not ignore or dismiss the facts that Obama stopped the voter Id laws in two key swing states and kept early voting going non stop in two other states for one reason !
To steal it !
Team Obama are Daley machine front men !
Ex Mayor Daley ‘s brother was running the campaign from Chicago !
The same guy who tried to steal the 2000 election for Gore !
That’s an interesting example:
A lib would have no problem exploiting a person with disabilities, in “helping” them fill out a form for a Dem, because in their true corrupted soul, they don’t see anything wrong with doing something like that. They TRULY believe that a Dem vote is a vote for that person’s best interest, so it removes the natural moral guilt that a normal human would have in exploiting a disabled person for political gain and self-interest like that. Couple that with the fact the Dems have no morals in the first place in most of their numbers, and it makes a move like that very easy.
I know I, and I believe almost all conservatives, could never think of doing something like that simply under the principle I would feel like the biggest dirt-bag in history for making anyone vote for something, someone, who the person really doesn’t understand what they are doing and myself fully knowing my action would be purely a scheme of self-interest and manipulation. I mean doing something like that is lower than low.
Thank you. There’s something in human nature that makes us resistant to logic. The only thing that causes us to change our ways is pain and fear, usually in the form of what’s often referred to as “life altering events”.
I’m not a complete doomsayer but IMHO the nation is headed toward an economic calamity and it will cause a great upheavel and social “unrest”. A little restoration of sanity may come out of it when we get proof positive that unsustainable spending has real consequences.
I analysed the election is some detail recently here. There's a reason Romney, as well as a lot of others, thought that he would win. It's because the polling and the indicators were saying he would. The only polling that had Obama ahead consistently was the MSM polling, and those that rely on it derivatively (like RealClearPolitics). I would argue that the only reason the MSM polling seemed to be correct is because it coincidentally agreed with the post-election fraudulent results. If vote fraud had not been seen on the massive scale it was this time around, the MSM polling would have been as wrong as it usually is, and the professional polling houses would have been right as usual.
No mystery at all.
RINO’S HAVE THEIR COLLECTIVE HEAD UP THEIR COLLECTIVE BUTT!
You’d have to be braindead not to see the differences in the policies espoused by Romeny and Obama. Sorry, the “lack of choice” holds absolutely no water and is a total cop-out. Well, I’m not really sorry. It is what it is.
I don’t agree, but I suppose it depends on how one defines voter fraud. I do agree that a number of things led to this outcome, and turnout on our side and in the middle needed to be higher. I do think the democrats use the combination of early voting, absentee and loose ID laws to get more votes. I do believe they create registered voters that so not exist and use them to create extra votes. I do believe they provide financial incentives to get people to go to early voting in the big cities. There is plenty of evidence and also lots of anecdotal evidence. Does anyone believe that pockets of Philadelphia, Cleveland, and south Florida have essentially 100% turnouts when the rest of the country does not. Are those area made up of more highly motivated, independent people or are those areas filled with preoe with a lack of motivation and work ethic. Why would people who don’t have work ethic have near unanimous response once every four years. It could be simple get out the vote, but I have a hard time believing after four years of the worst economy of any ones lifetime that they had more motivation to get out to the polls normal. Doesn’t pass the smell test.
I agree. We can’t simply blow off this loss as ‘stolen’ because we have to present a winning platform and candidates to get the votes, and I fully see where Romney was a bad choice and didn’t win the votes he should have. I won’t dismiss the ability for the dems to get their vote out in ways that simply don’t match with their record or campaign message.
Republicans, BAL, do not fight and by that right should cease to exist. Democrats, quite literally, will rob, maim, steal, cheat, and extort to win. In all fairness, then, shouldn't they?
Was he, though? If you want to run, you have to keep your hopes up. You can't walk around day after day assuming you're going to lose.
But that story that Romney only wrote one speech, assuming he'd win, is questionable to say the least. When Romney had finished his victory speech a reporter asked him if he'd written a concession speech.
Romney said that he'd only written one speech at that point. Somehow this gets translated into the idea that no concession speech was prepared, which is unlikely.
I agree with you. I’m not happy about my family’s personal prospects during the expected calamitous time though.
We’re in Manhattan now, and will be in the NJ burbs starting in July for at least 2 years.
I’ve convinced the wife to move to Texas in one of the burbs north of Irving after 2 years (we are having our first child in April this year and want family support for the first 2 years- which means sticking around in NJ), since my company HQ is there and I can easily transfer from the NYC office to that one. She actually was excited about the house size and town quality we could afford there versus in these elite NJ burbs we grew up in.
I’ve got a good low six-figure gig, but with the son coming and only a few grand in savings (no debt though!), I’m sure to be hit extremely hard by this regime’s stupid policies and our country’s poor decisions in general.
Oh well, what can you do but hunker down? I also feel constantly stupid by never having any debt, when it seems debt really means nothing at all. All my peers have tons and tons of it, and it doesn’t seem to impact their daily life one bit. I just can’t mentally deal with owing someone money, even if it is a bank. I pay all my credit cards at the end of the month in full. I feel like owing money is a form of slavery and since I read so much history I’m well aware for a long period of time debtors prison was the norm.
1996 Dole 37,816,307 2000 Bush 50,459,211 2004 Bush 59,130,092 2008 McCain 59,948,323 2012 Romney 60,265,579
I agree. That is why I held my nose and voted for our terrible standard bearer. But I can see people not voting at all. Especially those who dont understand what zer0bama stands for.
Romney sucked big time and people stayed home. Just a fact we have to think about. And possibly think about replacing the worn out Republican Party with a viable one.
There is no evidence of vote fraud that would stand up in court, Yash. Therefore, there is no evidence.
And it does relate to the candidate, Romney. If there were demonstrable evidence of vote fraud, the point man for that protest would.....Romney.
Assume you’re right for a moment. Where is the Golden Boy? (Hint: he’s STILL not fighting your cause.)
Did you factor in population increases in that time period
There is no reason to commit fraud in a black precinct, ncal.
I’ve been a Romney opponent all along, and I put my X next to his name on the ballot because of Obama killing people at Benghazi. Even Romney wouldn’t be that anti-life.
So, you’re going to defend Romney as a great candidate???
Be my guest.
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.