Posted on 10/20/2012 2:08:01 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
With less than three weeks to go until the election, both camps are on edge, hoping not to make a fatal misstep while praying their opponent stumbles. At this point, gaffe recovery would be problematic and the unfortunate candidate who shoots himself in the foot may think seriously of finishing the job by aiming the gun to his head.
You can smell the desperation in the crazy attacks mounted by both campaigns and their thousands of surrogates on the web and social media in the last 72 hours. Romney’s “binder”comment was inexplicably seized upon by Obama and his twitterites and pushed as some kind of insensitive remark about women — or something. If someone ever figures out if there is anything anyone can ever say that doesn’t offend women, minorities, small animals, trolls, ogres, and other put upon members of society that liberals believe need protection, let me know.
Not to be outdone in the manufactured gaffe department, the Romney campaign and their internet acolytes have latched onto an inartful reference by the president on John Stewart’s Daily Show to the deaths of our diplomats in Libya not being “optimal.” Spoken like a true petty bureaucrat and certainly offensive to the families of the dead. But a game changer? Get out of town. Given the pixels already shed over this remark, one would think evidence had been uncovered that Obama approved of the killing of our ambassador and not that he simply uttered an inelegant description of the impact of the killings. No one outside of rabid partisans on the right actually believes the president was unmoved by the murder of Americans, and it is fallacious to suggest otherwise.
Forget the gaffes. Forget the debates. Forget the polls. Everyone knows the race is very close with the presidency probably to be decided in three or four states by just a few tens of thousands of voters, right? That’s the current conventional wisdom and no pundit or prognosticator worth their their salt will say anything differently. Any other prediction is illogical, unreasonable, and simply wishful thinking.
Except something is happening and it doesn’t fit the polls, or the predictions, or the conventional wisdom — which is really nothing more than commentators playing “follow the leader.” Don’t look now, but in the last three weeks millions of voters have switched allegiances from Obama to Romney. Not undecideds breaking for the Republican, but actual abandonment of the president by millions of supporters. Millions.
Nor does there appear to be an end of it — yet. Romney can certainly help matters by simply doing what he’s been doing; offering himself as a legitimate alternative to a failed president. He has done that by advocating semi-specific policies that sound reasonable. This, compared to the president who has offered nothing — no hint of what he would do in a second term.
If polls have any efficacy at all, at least they are able to discern trends over a period of time. And what they are telling us is that Romney is gaining, Obama is falling, and so far nothing has occurred to stop the direction of voter movement toward the Republican.
The movement to Romney actually started before the first debate after the Republican had experienced a couple of very bad weeks. Obama’s better than expected convention bounce, largely the result of the media going gaga over Bill Clinton’s speech, was augmented by Romney’s unfortunate “47%” comment that soured many voters on the candidate.
But by the time of the Denver debate, there had begun a slow movement back toward Romney. And that movement accelerated after the debate and continues to this day, despite the fierce effort by Obama’s partisans to create a narrative of “decisive victory” at the second debate. That narrative has not taken hold and can be considered just more dust in the wind. Voters aren’t buying it and may be tuning out noise like that from both sides in order to render a decision.
Consider this: Both the CNN and CBS polls after the second debate gave the president a 7 point win over Romney when respondents were asked, “Who won the debate?” But on specific issues relating to governance, Romney slaughtered Obama.
The blog NumbersMuncher broke down the shocking details of both polls:
On the economy, Romney beat Obama by 18% in the CNN poll and 21% in the CBS poll.
The CNN poll had Romney up on handling taxes (7%) and the budget/debt (23%).
CNN poll on if candidates had a clear plan — Romney was -1 (49-50) and Obama was -23 (38-61).
Romney even led on health care (49-46), being a better leader (49-46), and giving direct answers (45-43).
Obama led on being likeable (47-41) and who cared more about the questioners (44-40).
While the polls only interviewed voters who watched the debate, the significance cannot be overstated: something is happening out there to Obama supporters and it doesn’t bode well for the president. It’s hard to see someone who doesn’t think Obama is better at handling the economy or the deficit, or who thinks that he doesn’t have a plan for his second term, pulling the lever for the president on Election Day. There must be millions of Obama voters who think like this but have been unable to admit to themselves that it’s time to abandon the president and try someone new.
There have been social studies examining how we make an individual choice when voting for president. They conclude that the presidential vote is unlike any other vote we cast. It is highly personal, emotional, and intuitive and less dependent on the issues or party than one might think, although the tug of tradition is strong and if your daddy voted Democrat, it’s more likely you will also.
The vote for an incumbent president is even more fraught with emotion. The fellow in the White House has been there for four years. He’s comforted you during national tragedy and shared triumphs like the killing of bin Laden with you. And if you like him, it’s hard to make the intuitive leap and vote against him even if you think his policies have failed and are bad for the country.
Millions of Obama voters must be at this point now. They are telling pollsters they will vote for him, but are seeking a reason not to. Those poll numbers show that a devastating majority have no confidence in the future if Barack Obama is re-elected. But unless Mitt Romney can close the sale by offering a credible alternative to four more years of Obama, they will not take that final step and switch allegiance to the Republican. Voters value safety above all and while they may not believe in Obama anymore, if they conclude that Romney is too risky then they will swallow hard and vote for the incumbent.
Millions of voters have already made that leap and rejected the president. Many millions more are considering it. If this is so, then this is Romney’s race to lose.
What is Obama’s plan if elected for a second term? Blame Bush and Republicans for 4 more years? Another 5 trillion in deficit spending? He has no vision and no plan. And he never did.
Heard a commentator decribe it as “Obama fatigue.”
Voters are sick of “hope and change” in the face of four years of failure.
The debates help Romney. Cuts through the attack ads and he come across very well.
The +8, +10 polls make the race look close. In actuality I believe Obama is in danger of full implosion. His support is soft and his base isn’t motivated. 50% youth and black unemployment in some areas. Why go vote for more of that??
Where in the Constitution does it say that the President is supposed to comfort the people during a national tragedy? Obama didn't even try to do that after Benghazi--instead he flew to Las Vegas and compared his heroic campaign workers to the Americans who had just given their lives in Libya.
I agree it is Romney’s to lose...but what of OHIO? I am hearing scary stories of “early voting” adventures by the literally THOUSANDS of ObamaDrones on the ground there. How many students from other states moved in with other students in a domicile in order to register in advance and early-vote? OFA did this in small scale in 2008. We have utterly no idea to what extent they are extending it this time around. I am VERY concerned about Ohio.
FReeper LS is working the campaign in Ohio and he doesn’t seem concerned.
This article is itself damage control for obozo in that it puts ‘binder’ and ‘not optimal’ in the same class.
Only thing Obama has going for him is Obamaesia..
People willfully ignorant of all Obama has NOT done in the last four years.. but said he would..
AND give him credit for things Bush did, like making Bin Ladens death possible.. and tax breaks for the middle class..
LS also insisted that McCain was going to carry OHIO in 2008 right up until the end...
LS also insisted that McCain was going to carry OHIO in 2008 right up until the end...
I don't recall that so I'll ping him so he can answer your charge.
In 2004, due to discussions with GOP guys, based on Karl Rove's info, we knew that if we got out the R base that would result in a Bush victory. Rove said nothing about Is: all he said was, "get out our base and we win."
So, we did. I did poll flushing that morning in a "key" bellweather battleground precinct in my bellweather battleground county, Montgomery. So it would tell us a GREAT deal about what was happening. If you don't know what poll flushing is, you go to the precinct, check off R names who had already voted, and bring them back to HQ so that callers can contact those who had NOT voted. By 10:00, 40% of all Rs had voted. Really, really good #s.
I get home to find FR in panic meltdown. "Kerry is winning, look at Drudge exit polls, blah, blah."
I said, "According to our numbers, Bush will win."
I went back at 4:00 for round 2, and even better: 90% of all Rs had voted. Come back to FR, same meltdown. I said, "Bush has already won." (Several years later I heard Rove say that he saw exactly the same thing at almost exactly the same time when the poll flushing round 2 was done).
Fast forward to 08. Our county people were told again that all we had to do to win OH was get out the Rs. Turn out the base. So, same thing: looking at early numbers, it was very encouraging. We thought McCain had won. As soon as the first actual returns where you could see how precincts actually voted were released, we selected a deep red precinct in a suburb. Fully one-quarter of the Republicans had voted for Obama. We knew it was over, and we knew that we had not been given correct information.
THEREFORE, when I do any analysis now, I do it with three caveats that I always publish (and you can look at the posts). I think they are fully supportable:
Rs will vote for Romney. Ds will vote for Obama. Indies will split.
Can you really disagree with #1 or 2? Yes, a few Rs will cross over and some Ds will cross over (probably more of the latter than the former) but I'll call it a wash.
Indies? Every poll we have, almost without exception, shows Romney up with Indies. But I don't go with that. I go straight 50/50.
Therefore, I'm 1-1. Both times, used the same assumptions, only one time it ran counter to all logic (that Republicans would vote for Obama). You can be the judge of where we are today.
Thank you for all your hard work, in no way I meant that as an affront to your amazing FR coverage. I remember very well your 2004 coverage, so was doubly gutted in 2008 when we lost. Here’s to your soon to be 2-1 record!
No prob— my credibility took. Huge hit then. To make matters worse, I had. County chairman who was doing his own county polling saying McCain was up 4, and if McCain was up four in our county, he would almost certainly win. State. So I had reassurance from two sources. Turns out, my chairman admitted his polling methodology was really bad.
because of the amount of fraud, I am very against early voting for anyone EXCEPT military personnel.
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.