Well, yeah, clearly the Republicans really really want to win Florida. But so do the Dems. It takes more than being in the margin of error and them clearly wanting to win to just give him the state thus making it really close overall (potentially if other states line up too). I mean your thread could just as easily have been about how Obama wins Florida and by changing nothing else he wins by as little as a 31 vote margin in the EC.
Phill:
Kate Delaney does a late night (early morning) radio talk show, (i.e. "America Tonight"), which airs on various stations across the country. She has sources in our nation's capital who clue her in (confidentially) on what is going on in politics. So I'm out driving this morning listening to Kate and she mentions the imminent announcement by Mitt Romney of his running mate. According to Kate, a source who she identified only as "JP from DC" emailed her to let her know that Romney's running mate will not be wearing heels or stockings - which would seem to rule out Kelly Ayotte whom I had predicted would be Romney's Vice Presidential choice.
Kate relayed another interesting morsel from her confidential source who is (supposedly) in the know: Marco Rubio will not be Romney's running mate. According to "JP," the change in immigration policy announced by Janet Napolitano a few weeks ago took Rubio out of the running. It also appears that Obama's surprise policy shift also took Florida out of the running as well. Team Obama seems quite confident that they will pick up tens of thousands of extra votes in Florida thanks to the policy shift. If this assessment of Florida is correct, then my thesis that Romney could win Florida and make the race really close is (obviously) a flawed supposition. It may turn out that Obama's immigration policy announcement was a political master stroke.
You've hit on something I've wondered about myself.
If you listen to Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, and most of the rest of the right-wing talkers, they constantly harp that Obama's "class warfare" rhetoric isn't working. Well, if that's true, why does Obama keep doing it - and why do Limbaugh, Hannity, et al. keep insisting that it's not working - and why do the polls in the swing states keep running so close?
this election being "close"(i don't think it is) wouldn't speak to whether or not Obama's strategy is working.... going against a candidate that inspires as little confidence as Romney, Obama should be crushing(which he is)
The same people who need to produce ID to vote
are the same people who need to produce ID to get
food stamps.
Case closed.
Wat?
Anyway, the election is a lot closer than Riverman thinks. Yes, Mitt has to win FL, VA, OH and another small state and he is behind in OH and VA and tied in FL. However, if one state moves his way, it's probably because of a national trend that will pull the other states closer too.
But Obama does have an advantage and I think he could lose the popular vote by a few tenths of a percent and still be re-elected.
(Then again, Nate's model says Obama has a 1.9% chance of winning the EC and losing the popular vote while Romney has a 3.2% chance. Frankly, I don't see how this is true.)
You've hit on something I've wondered about myself.
If you listen to Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, and most of the rest of the right-wing talkers, they constantly harp that Obama's "class warfare" rhetoric isn't working. Well, if that's true, why does Obama keep doing it - and why do Limbaugh, Hannity, et al. keep insisting that it's not working - and why do the polls in the swing states keep running so close?
If they weren't they wouldn't be swing states imo.
(Then again, Nate's model says Obama has a 1.9% chance of winning the EC and losing the popular vote while Romney has a 3.2% chance. Frankly, I don't see how this is true.)
I would guess that those figures are about the chance of losing the popular vote given that each wins the EC. So given that Obama wins the EC, the chances he does so while losing the PV are 1.9% while given that Romney wins the EC, the chances he does so while losing the PV are 3.2%.
Maybe I'm confused about what you're confused about, though.
Jimmy Carter was winning in lots of polls, Reagan took 49 states. Romney will destroy Obama in the debates and win by a significant margin. I can't wait to see Obama without his teleprompter.
lol Romney may squeak it out but this has to be a level
ETA: And Reagan didn't win 49 states v. Carter, that was Mondale. I thought I'd go ahead and correct you since this is the second thread (at least) you've poasted this in.
Jimmy Carter was winning in lots of polls, Reagan took 49 states. Romney will destroy Obama in the debates and win by a significant margin. I can't wait to see Obama without his teleprompter.
Your history is wrong. While Reagan crushed Carter in 1980, he ONLY won 44 states. He did actually lose 6 whole states and DC to Jimmy.
Reagan let Mondale win MN and took the other 49 in 1984.
I question the evaluation you have done to show the election is close when you have given Romney Florida against the advice of your Floridian friend or any other quantitative metric just on the basis that Romney needs to win Florida for him to have a chance.
You question the election is close? Nationally the RCP average has it at 1.6%
He has given Romney Florida "against the advice of his friend"? RCP average has Florida at 0.8%. Isn't that close enough?
Also, Obama hit a 4 month low in job approval yesterday@ 46.7% and his Gallup JA @ 44%:
You've hit on something I've wondered about myself.
If you listen to Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, and most of the rest of the right-wing talkers, they constantly harp that Obama's "class warfare" rhetoric isn't working. Well, if that's true, why does Obama keep doing it - and why do Limbaugh, Hannity, et al. keep insisting that it's not working - and why do the polls in the swing states keep running so close?
This is a legitimate question? They're goal isn't to provide accurate commentary, it's to give the right something to fap to.
Jimmy Carter was winning in lots of polls, Reagan took 49 states. Romney will destroy Obama in the debates and win by a significant margin. I can't wait to see Obama without his teleprompter.
It's an established fact that Obama was mute before age 11 when he received a teleprompter at his hut in Kenya. He has been relying on it ever since.
Also, I'm surprised wookie hasn't locked this thread as everyone knows this election won't be close!
The fact that there's always something for you to cherrypick doesn't mean that this race is all that close. I guess you just dismiss either Nate's or this forum's own election modeling out of hand?
Two Plus Two
![[Phill]'s Avatar](http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/customavatars/avatar10430_39.gif){kind=avatar}
Linear Mode
