Posted on 09/09/2012 9:44:24 PM PDT by Steelfish
Mitt Romney's Ohio Problem By Z. Byron Wolf
ABC OTUS News - Mitt Romney's Ohio Problem (ABC News) Forget post-convention bounces - the numbers that really matter are in the battleground states, where President Obama's polling advantage is more concerning to Mitt Romney's team than any national numbers. No Republican has ever won the presidency without winning Ohio, and Romney isn't in a strong position to become the first.
According to ABC News' latest race ratings, President Obama is in strong position for 237 electoral votes, when leaning and solid Democratic states and combined. Mitt Romney has only 206 votes he can expect in his column, as of now.
Add in Ohio's 18 electoral votes, though, and Obama stands at 255 - within striking distance of the magic number of 270. Romney would need to win nearly every other battleground state - a list that includes Paul Ryan's Wisconsin, once thought to be safely Democratic - to pull out the presidency without Ohio.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
If this is a very well written editorial, on your part — and not just a vanity rant — please consider posting to Freeper Editorials. Topic freepered as a News/Activism post.
I always intend to have a well written editorial but it always ends up in a rant. lol
Want to do a joint effort? You write the rant, send it by freepmail, and I will source it for an editorial. We can take joint credit.
We already saw that WA was getting Obama ads. Why would Zero need to run ads in MN and WA if he's "safe?"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2928923/posts
I already ranted. The last line was for the ‘I have Romney’s internal poll numbers’ crowd.
I hope you’re right. But I volunteered for the McCain campaign in Pennsylvania and people there were insisting McCain would win PA right up until election day. You don’t get objective information from within a political campaign.
Absolutely right. As I may have said, our county was running nightly robo-polls and we had McCain up 4, which would have given him the state. But they were not well sampled, and we lost the county and the state.
Absolutely right. As I may have said, our county was running nightly robo-polls and we had McCain up 4, which would have given him the state. But they were not well sampled, and we lost the county and the state.
“majority anti-Romney”
Last I checked that’s allowed here, ROMBOT. Romney’s a terrible nominee. The GOP can destroy itself without me.
“I hope you soon realize that this is a ground war between conservatism and liberalism.”
Absolutely. Why do you think I’m fighting Romney rather than supporting him.
Why are you fighting for Benedict Arnold? Do you really think he’s going to lead you to victory? No. He will lose and do considerable damage to conservatives along the way. Every single dollar the Romney campaign vacuums up, is another dollar spent to further the cause of liberalism.
There are much better outlets for our cash than Romney. We need a conservative senate and to get a stronger house of representatives. Let Romney crash and burn, and spend our money for the candidates who are fighting for conservativism.
“Why would Zero need to run ads in MN and WA if he’s “safe?” “
Better question - why are you assuming that the South is going to support Mitt? He’s running ads in Alabama for a reason. Polls down here are showing that yes, Obama is making serious inroads into Romney’s advantage here.
Bottom line, Republicans cannot win by being democrat light. Until the Republicans learn this lesson, they will lose and continue to lose. Like Reagan said - conservativism wins every time it’s tried.
Little bet on AL? MS? TX? Please. I can use the money. Mitt is advertising to northern FL.
A few realities, because clearly you are detached from reality. Ronald Reagan hasn’t been on a ballot since 1988. The so-called “conservatives” in the primaries got whacked bad, and Sarah Palin wouldn’t even run-—so bad was her polling.
“Until Republicans learn this lesson” Blah, blah. Really? So, every non-Reagan who has won-—Bush 1, 2, plus all the Republicans who held the House for all but 2 years since 1994 didn’t “learn that lesson?” Silly.
Conservatism is PART of what wins every time it’s tried IF YOU HAVE THE OTHER PARTS. Obviously Palin, Santorum, or whomever else you choose to cite in 2012 didn’t have the other parts, or they would have won just based on “conservatism.”
And an even better question: why would PPP run so flagrantly and obviously biased of a poll, asking only about Dem National Convention, and asking about a MASS senate candidate in OH (!) unless they were scared as hell (or thought they could intimidate chicken littles such as yourself?)
2010
The folks at ABC News are confused. Democrats are passing all this awesome legislation, they posit, so why are Americans acting so hostile and looking to hand Congress to the GOP? The key problems, ABC’s Z. Byron Wolf deduces, are that Democrats simply have not embraced liberalism enough and Americans have failed to perceive just how great the Democratic agenda has been.
“The imminent passage of a tough new Wall Street Reform bill,” wrote Wolf, pictured right, on ABC’s website, “will cap off a wildly productive two years for Democrats in Washington – they will have passed two pieces of sweeping legislation and an enormous $800 billion stimulus bill to deal with the ailing economy.”
“Your long lost twin, also paid for by the liberal big money machine, was on my parking lot shuttle bus saying the same thing at Ryan’s rally Friday.”
Been saying this all year, sir. Dunno about your friend on the bus. Has he been there all year? Is it better to attack other conservatives who reject your liberal candidate than it is to work at getting him elected?
“And an even better question: why would PPP run so flagrantly and obviously biased of a poll, asking only about Dem National Convention, and asking about a MASS senate candidate in OH (!) unless they were scared as hell (or thought they could intimidate chicken littles such as yourself?)”
Because OH is an important state in this upcoming election? PPP polls in all sorts of places. That Romney is down 5 in a state that he needs to win without taking Johnson or Goode into account is bad news for the Romney campaign.
Now, if you have any empirical evidence that Romney is actually ahead in Ohio, that would be good to see. If you want to convince people that the poll is wrong - then we want to see some solid evidence that supports the position. Blasting the poll as ‘biased’, ‘wrong’, is the reason why FR and many of the folks here have been wrong about everything so far this election season. Rather then seeing the truth for what it is that he is behind, they solder on under misconceptions.
Romney’s been in trouble for awhile now.
“You are a paid shill.”
Well then - who’s paying me? You have any evidence?
“Obviously Palin, Santorum, or whomever else you choose to cite in 2012 didn’t have the other parts, or they would have won just based on “conservatism.” “
So how exactly is Mitt Romney ‘more conservative?’ than Palin et al?
What’s the case to vote for him other than, “He’s not Obama”?
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.