It might be how you ask the question. Here is another story by WAPO that says the enthusiasm gap is narrowing but still favors the President.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...itaW_blog.html

here...this week

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll finds that 91 percent of Obama voters are enthusiastic, compared with 85 percent of Romney supporters.
That gap widens when you look at the “very enthusiastic.” Fifty-one percent of Obama backers are very enthusiastic, compared to 38 percent of Romney backers.

Using "more excited than in 2008" seems to be a flawed measurement on the face of it. It will tell you less than nothing given how easy it is to misinterpret it and it is, at best, a really small piece of a wider jigsaw.

mccain was boring (not that romney isnt, but that is the R's 08 baseline, boring ass mccain) and voting for the first black president, i can imagine that most people thought it was pretty historic to vote for barack in 08.

Well the biggest missing piece of the equation is "just as excited as 2008" but ultimately all you want is to work out which party's base is more excited compared to each other as a snapshot of today regardless of where they were 4 years ago.

Yeah and you had all the "Hope and Change" soaring speeches versus the much less inspiring reality of governing in a ****ty economy.

I it probably a relevant question if you are comparing turn out as expected in 2012 versus 2008. I mean if 2010 is the appropriate turn out model then the Pres gets smoked. If 2008 repeats Romney gets smoked.

oh herro

I assume you posted that clip because you agree with my post and wanted to validate it.

OH THE IRONING: KARL ROVE IS BUTTHURT ABOUT OBAMA CAMPAIGN TACTICS

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...mod=hp_opinion

Too perfect.

Rove complaining about campaign tactics is like Charles Manson complaining about a lack of peace.

you're going to damage your brain doing that. I think most freepers, if they posted here, everyone would accuse them of being trolls trying to parody the right.

NPR reported some poll today that says that about 5% of voters are undecided, which is really low for this time in the campaign season apparently.

Man. I haven't listened to Rush in a long time. How anyone can listen and not confused trying to figure out if he's intentionally being an idiot.

I keep waiting for him to dismiss the whole Batman thing as being intentional. If I understand this correctly, he's trying to tie this into to Obama. Let's look at the mental powers that Rush is giving to Obama/Democrats for this to be intentional.

The production of the movie started in May of 2011. Which means that the script was being written in 2010 (if not earlier.)

For this to be a conspiracy, in 2010 Obama/Democrats would have had to be certain that Romney was going to be the candidate and that Bain would have been something to hold against him. A tricky thing to do since Romney didn't even enter the race until June of 2011.

If he and/or his listeners actually buy this they should be terrified of Obama/Democrats due to their mental superiority/ESP since they so accurately predicted in 2010 that he'd be head to head with Romney today. What chance does anyone have about people who can predict who their opponent will be years in advance and have the foresight to manipulate Hollywood to make a blockbuster hit that serves as propaganda against the candidate?!

Transcript from Limbaugh's own site

"So, anyway, this evil villain in the new Batman movie is named Bane. And there's now a discussion out there as to whether or not this is purposeful and whether or not it will influence voters. It's gonna have a lot of people. This movie, the audience is gonna be huge. A lot of people are gonna see the movie, and it's a lot of brain-dead people, entertainment, the pop culture crowd, and they're gonna hear Bane in the movie and they're gonna associate Bain. The thought is that when they start paying attention to the campaign later in the year, and Obama and the Democrats keep talking about Bain, Romney and Bain, that these people will think back to the Batman movie, "Oh, yeah, I know who that is." (laughing) There are some people who think it'll work. Others think you're really underestimating the American people to think that will work...
...
Now, there's a story in the Washington Times Communities today: "Is Mitt Romney...Batman? -- Opponents of Mitt Romney have noticed that the name of Batman’s villain in the upcoming film The Dark Knight Rises is homonymous with the name of an investment firm that Romney founded in 1984. The childish 'aha' moment was not unpredictable. Americans have tolerated condescension remarkably well for the past four years, so we can presumably take an insult to our ability to spell -- or ability to follow a storyline, for that matter."

But, anyway, I didn't really know what the point of this story is. They're trying to point out that in Batman the good guy and the rich guy are one and the same, and that's Bruce Wayne. And so what this gal is saying here is: Hey, instead of falling in with the evil guy being Bane, let's just say Batman is Romney. Batman's Romney, he's the evil rich guy, he's the good rich guy, he's out to save New York. The rich guy's the good guy. Of course the evil guy is always rich too in these Batman movies. You may think it's ridiculous, I'm just telling you this is the kind of stuff the Obama team is lining up. The kind of people who would draw this comparison are the kind of people that they are campaigning to. These are the kind of people that they are attempting to appeal to. "

May I introduce you to the Chiefs Planet politics forum, where most Free Republic posters would probably be viewed as moderates: http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=30

(except for the half dozen or so token "liberals" - which means everything from moderate republican to leftie liberal)

Bottom line: Rush has a ****load of airtime to fill every day and Batman is topical.

lol Rush

libs gonna lib

Rush does this tongue-in-cheek stuff all the time and it goes right over their head. It says more about them than about Rush.

Simply listening to that whole show instead of a 2 minute out-of-context clip would clear it up, but they are never going to do that, and aren't interested. He loves it when his satire/sarcasm is taken seriously. Notoriety equals money in his business.

That's actually pretty comical since the Obama Administration runs both the Treasury and injustice department. They wouldn't have a source... they'd have an indictment.

Although when they find themselves down 5% in the polls a week before the election, I wouldn't doubt they try to concoct a similar "stink bomb"

The "Rush-isn't-an-asswhole-you-just-aren't-smart-enough-to-get-him" defense of Rush never gets old.

I currently only know one person who listens to Rush (granted a small sample) but he doesn't seem to think Rush is all that tongue in cheek.

Its largely true that most libs probably aren't going to listen to his whole show because he's horrible. In the same way that most libs probably didn't listen to Glen Beck because he sounded insane.

By the way, a lot of people have listened to more then 2 minutes of Fox. For instance, years ago I not only listened to a few hours of Rush but read half of one of his books. And, a lot of libs do listen to Rush (Beck, Coulter) because they're funny to laugh at.

I never said he wasn't an *******, but in this case it was absolutely satire/sarcasm. It was one of the few shows of his I listened to lately because I happened to be in the car.

I hadn't actually read the transcript until then, I don't necessarily think he was implying some big conspiracy with the creators of batman but perhaps that once batman hype started coming up big and people would recognize who Bane is that the Obama campaign would start attacking Bain capital more to take advantage of this? Obviously not really any less tardworthy but it makes a little bit more sense I guess. Of course it could easily be the other way since he was talking about the story of batman, but he could still be doing that claiming obama is taking advantage of that coincidence. Completely made up narrative either way but Rush gonna Rush


its not called satire/sarcasm its called trolling. He is the Skip Bayless of politics