Ace of Spades HQ

June 01, 2012

Matt Yglesias Confirms: The Economy Is Awful Under Obama
— Ace

Why do I say he confirms that?

Because he really wants to share, um, credit with Republicans.

Impressed by conservatives ability to pretend to believe that Obama is 100% responsible for events 1.5 years into divided government.

And 3.5 years into Obama's term, with 2 years of undivided, Democratic-unified government.

Remember when someone kept saying the previous Conservative Wisdom -- Obama's the favorite! gleep! -- was all effed up as usual? Tony Harden says so now.

Mitt Romney is now the front-runner to win the White House in 2012
If Mitt Romney turfs Barack Obama out of the Oval Office in November, then we might well look back on today and say that this was the day that the 44th President of the United States lost his bid for re-election.
The jobs numbers were appalling - just 69,000 jobs added last month, unemployment clmbing to 8.2 per cent and the ranks of the long-term unemployed swelling by 300,000. As Jim Pethokoukis of AEI notes, if the Obama administration hadn't slashed the numbers looking for jobs, unemployment would be 10.9 per cent.
...
The problems for Obama are stacking up. Not only is there the economy - and even if that gets better, this is the period when people's perceptions become set in aspic - but there's an inept campaign strategy and a tilt to the Left that is likely to alienate moderates and independents.
As John Podhoretz argues persuasively, Obama seems unable to make a case for why he should be re-elected, as Reagan, Clinton and Bush 43 did. Simply being Barack Obama, the personification of people's vague dreams, is no longer enough.
Obama's rambling, responsibility-dodging address in Minnesota showed that while his beautiful words may have been ideally fitted for the 2008 election, speechifying not do it this time around. Contrast it with Romney's relentless hammering of his jobs message on CBNC shortly beforehand and you can see why more thoughtful Democrats are getting very, very concerned.

Like Matt Yglesias. I really do not understand what kind of Fool's Paradise they'd been living in -- in 2008, I was reasonably confident McCain would lose.

While I did get excited about the chance that Palinmania would overcome McCain's huge problems, I was sort of baffled at how that could happen-- Palin was a thrilling personality, but our economic problems were real, and we were in two unpopular wars that didn't seem to be closing in on victory.

Those are facts on the ground. A talented politician can only do so much. (And when the financial crisis hit -- gee, then it was all over. McCain could have pinned that to Obama but insanely chose not to, reasoning "if we're talking about the economy, we're losing." Um, if you don't explain why your opponent is to be doubted on the only issue on people's minds, you're definitely losing, dude.)

At any rate: I knew this in 2008.

What the hell kind of Weapons-Grade Cocoon have liberals been living in?

How disconnected from the actual facts of the world do you have to be to imagine that a deepening depression is not going to count as a rather major mark against Obama?

What do these people think the majority of voters actually vote on? Half-baked, half-hearted gay marriage endorsements?

You should read Harden's piece, but here's a bit from the end:

Put all this together and what have we got? Romney must now be considered the narrow favourite in November. Of course, Obama could well be re-elected. But this feels like a moment similar to the one in mid-December 2007 when Obama began to eclipse Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries.

Although I'm holding off on saying it until after Wednesday, I've been privately saying what Fritzworth said today. Not only am I pretty confident Obama loses, but I do not think it will be close. I think it will be something like 56% for Romney.

By the way, let me explain the psychology of why people always say "it will be close." People like to say this because it seems safe, and also, because it demonstrates they are "serious" thinkers who are not just making "crazy predictions."

This is why, as I've pointed out, the New York Times supposed football predictions always show the games final scores pretty close -- 24-17, 31-27, and so forth.

Well, about half the games are pretty close. About half are not close at all. In many games, things simply break for one team. If things break for the team that was already stronger on paper, it's a blow-out.

People feel safe in making these "it will be close" predictions, but actually these predictions aren't very well-founded on logic or history. They're actually founded on emotion -- the desire to not look silly and not stand out from the crowd.

A realistic, logical view of these things would always bear in mind that sometimes it's simply not close at all; sometimes it's just a drubbing.

And by sometimes I mean "almost 50% of the time."

People who always say "it's going to be close" aren't really trying to predict anything. They're just babbling. If you're really going to make predictions, you have to take into account the not-at-all-uncommon situation where it's simply never really close at all.

Going by actual electoral history -- actually, you know, presidential contests aren't usually all that close, are they? We always keep in mind Bush v. Gore and that 0.005% difference (or whatever).

But Obama won by seven or eight. Clinton beat Dole by more than 8 (with Perot taking 8.4 -- I'd forgotten that).

Yeah, you could say that's "close," in a way. But in a national presidential election, that's really a convincing win where the outcome was never seriously in doubt.

Given actual electoral history, why do people cling to the notion "it's going to be close"? It's going to be close -- if Obama's winning. If that happens, somehow, Obama's lead will be small, and he'll squeak by with a narrow 2 point win.

If Romney wins, however, it's much more likely to be closer to a 6 point victory, which isn't all that close, or possibly even the nine point drubbing Jimmy Carter received at the hands of Reagan.

Just remember that every time you hear about the "intangible powers of incumbency." Yeah, Jimmy Carter had those. So did the Elder Bush.

They still lost.

And they lost for the exact same reasons Obama is likely to lose.

I do not know how the hell these prognosticators have been so confident of Obama's chances given that the two incumbents who lost elections in the past 40 years have lost precisely because the economy was in the crapper and they seemed incapable of doing anything positive about it.

One positive word for Obama's chances: In many of the crucial swing states, the unemployment rate is below the national average.

Some key battlegrounds are doing better than the nation as a whole. And even if the presidentÂ’s policies didnÂ’t cause the improvement, it could help his case that the economic outlook has brightened under his stewardship.
Auto and steel workers in battleground Ohio are getting jobs again. The unemployment rate in the state on Election Day is expected to be close to 7 percent.

That is certainly a helpful fact on the ground for Obama, at least in Ohio... but we'll see about that predicted rate of "close to 7 percent."

Which is, by the way, pretty bad.

The media complained incessantly about Bush's 5.6% national average, but apparently they think that Ohioans will love Obama for a predicted "close to 7 percent" rate.

We'll see, we'll see.

By the way, that article noted:

And the national numbers do still matter. Headlines on weak jobs reports donÂ’t help Obama. And he has only a few of those left, starting with FridayÂ’s report, which is expected to show the economy added a mediocre 150,000 jobs in May. The stock market, which took a big hit in recent weeks as fears about Europe mounted, has a big impact on consumer confidence and voting behavior. A falling Dow often means a faltering incumbent.

Well. What a difference a day makes.

Posted by: Ace at 02:22 PM | Comments (180)
Post contains 1387 words, total size 8 kb.

1 What do these people think the majority of voters actually vote on? Half-baked, half-hearted gay marriage endorsements?

Don't forget half-cocked.

Posted by: Kal Penn at June 01, 2012 02:26 PM (vjyZP)

2 So did you like the movie or not.......

Posted by: Truck Monkey at June 01, 2012 02:29 PM (jucos)

3 Matt Yglesias is a lying leftist hack propagandist, a founding member of the Journ-O-List cabal that attempted to "manage" the reporting of news so people weren't given "unexplained" facts they might "misinterpret," so everything fits the leftist narrative.

Barack Obama is a Stuttering ClusterFluke of a Miserable Failure.

Posted by: Adjoran at June 01, 2012 02:29 PM (VfmLu)

4 Not yet, Ace.

Posted by: Winston Wolfe at June 01, 2012 02:29 PM (O6q63)

5 "... thoughtful Democrats" What are these?

Posted by: LASue at June 01, 2012 02:30 PM (wAhNv)

6 About two years into Obama's reign I temporarily silenced an Obamabot who was whining "Bush's fault!" by asking when the economy would become "Obama's fault", and, if never, didn't that mean Obama was pointless ans powerless?

Posted by: Lokki at June 01, 2012 02:31 PM (a5F9g)

7 Not yet, Ace. Posted by: Winston Wolfe at June 01, 2012 06:29 PM (O6q63)

Just say when. I'll be right over.

Posted by: Reggie Love at June 01, 2012 02:31 PM (84pE9)

8 And 3.5 years into Obama's term, with 2 years of undivided, Democratic-unified government. And two years of Democrats running Congress and the Senate before Obama even joined the party, spending like there was no tomorrow and generally jacking everything up. Which is how sick serial liars like Ungar at Forbes can calim Obama's not so bad on the economy - because a lot of his fiscal program was enacted by Congress before he even got in office. Which doesn't make Obama blameless, it makes him redundant. But they're leftists, so they have to lie. It's in the contract. (Insert obligatory rant about how everyone focuses on the President and barely mentions the Congress when it comes to budget and debt, even though they're the 900-lb gorilla in our Horrible Spending Crisis room.)

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 01, 2012 02:32 PM (bxiXv)

9 SQUIRREL!

Posted by: MFM at June 01, 2012 02:32 PM (jucos)

10 Eh. Sorry, don't buy the optimism, here. I want Mitt to win, but I'm in the "it'll be close camp." Take a look at an electoral map. Obama can lose several of his 2008 states and he can still pull out a victory. Take a look at Obama's preference level among hispanics in comparison to Romney. Take a look at the fact that the RNC is still a clusterF*** and the Obama campaign/DNC has had an 12 month head start on putting together a General Election-caliber base-vote turnout operation. Take a look at the MSM's fist clutching down on the Obama-side of the scale. Take a look at the fact that our nominee is still bland, gaffe-prone Mitt Romney. Sorry, Ace, not drinking the 40-state blowout Kool-Aid just yet.

Posted by: JacoPastorius at June 01, 2012 02:32 PM (5BrI1)

11 nice words, Ace. I guess you were hep to the truth of the moment in 2008 while we die hards we like, but but but it's fannie mae's fault. the next attack on Romney is the Return of Bush and His Failed Policy of the Past. I blame Mackerel for acquiescence on this issue which I don't think is a good idea. Defending Bush is important because pre-Pelosi Speakership, he had good numbers, and post-Pelosi, well, what exactly was it he did that was his fault (i.e., did he write CRA?). Even worse, SCOAMAF adopted or continued W's policies like tax cuts and war. So, the GOP can't forever disown Bush the W. Pre-Pelosi, the deficit was like $250B and UE was 5%. Simply put, this is another area in which Mitt cannot act like Mackerel.

Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 02:32 PM (QxSug)

12 Did I mention you were racist, racist?

Posted by: blaster at June 01, 2012 02:33 PM (HR5x9)

13 crap. you mean he's only got another few months in office? I knew I'd never get my skittles-shitting unicorn.....

Posted by: the Butcher at June 01, 2012 02:33 PM (8g9qq)

14 For Romney, it really boils down to Virginia, Ohio, and then some other little state, right? Obama will supposedly lock down Colorado with the gay marriage issue, but gives up Florida (which he was probably going to lose anyway, so no big deal). And I never trust PA; it's always a cocktease, and Romney will only win PA if he is already running the table.

If Romney solidifies Ohio and Virginia by the time of the conventions, then those cornholers in Iowa are probably going to be the swingiest of states this year. Prepare to break out a flaming corn sombrero for Romney!

Posted by: wooga at June 01, 2012 02:34 PM (vjyZP)

15 Matt Yglesias is a lying leftist hack propagandist, a founding member of the Journ-O-List cabal Posted by: Adjoran at June 01, 2012 06:29 PM (VfmLu) In other words, he was engaged in a secret conspiracy to control news outlets for political purposes. The whole lot of them should have been fired IMMEDIATELY when that news came out, but AFAIK they're all still in place, the fifth column intact. Because their bosses knew and were complicit, and the behavior continues with their blessing.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 01, 2012 02:34 PM (bxiXv)

16 FYI Ace, predicting Romney at 56% puts Obama at best 44% making it a 12% blowout.

I think you mean Romney 53% to Obama's 47% for a 6% difference. I'm feeling a bit more of Romney at about 52.4% personally.

Posted by: justaguy at June 01, 2012 02:34 PM (Ffqmi)

17 @11, all we need is a slight preference shift among the DNC's preferred replacement American classes to make this a big F'n deal. Also, if we can cut down on voter fraud, then that's gravy. That gets us purple states back.

Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 02:34 PM (QxSug)

18 8 Not yet, Ace.

Posted by: Winston Wolfe at June 01, 2012 06:29 PM (O6q63)

Just say when. I'll be right over.

Posted by: Reggie Love at June 01, 2012 06:31 PM (84pE9)

Me too.

Posted by: Kal Penn at June 01, 2012 02:34 PM (vjyZP)

19 Once any given individual flips the "douchenozzle" switch on a sitting president, they NEVER EVER reverse that impression.

The low buzzing sound you hear in the background is a chorus of thousands of switches being flipped every day.

Posted by: Purp (@PurpAv) at June 01, 2012 02:36 PM (cwPzQ)

About two years into Obama's reign I temporarily silenced an Obamabot who was whining "Bush's fault!" by asking when the economy would become "Obama's fault", and, if never, didn't that mean Obama was pointless ans powerless?

Romney needs to get the message out "The buck stops here"

Posted by: fluffy S Truman at June 01, 2012 02:36 PM (O6q63)

21 Which is how sick serial liars like Ungar at Forbes can calim Obama's not so bad on the economy - because a lot of his fiscal program was enacted by Congress before he even got in office.

Which doesn't make Obama blameless, it makes him redundant.

Remember. Obumbles was a senator during those two years. If Congress was one source of the economic problems, he was a part of that problem. And since he did nothing as a senator, he provided no solutions.

Posted by: CUS at June 01, 2012 02:36 PM (84pE9)

22 Here titty titty tiity, Hey anybody see my titties?

Posted by: Elizabeth Warren at June 01, 2012 02:37 PM (ufLRj)

23 "We're making progress, but we are not where we need to be!" That's Obama for the last 3 and a half years. Today he took a break from blaming Bush, the Japanese tsunami, the Arab Spring, ...........and focused squarely on the........"economic crisis in Europe". HEADWINDS. And that's why his sorry mulatto ass will be fired come November. An "excuse' is a written note from a parent to a teacher. It's usually good for one day. Obama has been writing them for 3 and a half years.

Posted by: Asst. To The Asst. Manager at June 01, 2012 02:37 PM (AzwZn)

24
tinyurl.com/7cchdb6

I sure do hope these guys come to a consensus that the JEF has to go, and that Romney is ok for this round.

Posted by: sTevo at June 01, 2012 02:37 PM (VMcEw)

Take a look at the fact that our nominee is still bland, gaffe-prone Mitt Romney.

Que? Gaffes? Example, please, and a relatively recent one if you don't mind.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy with talent on loan from SMOD at June 01, 2012 02:37 PM (d0Tfm)

26 Wait til Mittens wins Wisconsin. Then the pudding shall flow deeply

Posted by: Dick Nixon at June 01, 2012 02:38 PM (VrVBw)

27 I know the parallels have been beaten to death but this is Carter all over again. Romney's latest Positive ad needs to be the flavor of his campaign; positive optimism, while kitting Obama with attacks via speeches and the debates.

This is what Reagan did.

<snip inevitable "Romney aint Reagan, I don't like the guy, etc." commentary>

This is what Romney has to do.

In positive times, it's all about attacks; why the other guy is bad as president.

In bad times, the positive candidate wins. Reagan did it, Clinton did it, Obama did it...

It's the only way Romney wins.

Oh and McCain lost his presidential bid the moment he uttered "change is coming" in the opening lines of his nomination acceptance speech at the Republican Convention. I still remember doing a painful facepalm.

Posted by: Sgt. York at June 01, 2012 02:38 PM (hg81J)

28 **About two years into Obama's reign I temporarily silenced an Obamabot who was whining "Bush's fault!" by asking when the economy would become "Obama's fault", and, if never, didn't that mean Obama was pointless ans powerless?** worst recovery ever and he spent $5 trillion more than we had, not to mention QE1 and QE2, to do it. SCOAMAF did everything he could. He owns this shit. And we got the worst recovery since his intellectual predecesor (sp?). It's his fault.

Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 02:38 PM (QxSug)

29 I do not know how the hell these prognosticators have been so confident of Obama's chances

They're Liberal Democrats and they're wish-casting? They're so in the tank for him they can't see the top of the tank? They're idiots who want Obama to win so badly they can spin anything?

Posted by: BeckoningChasm at June 01, 2012 02:39 PM (DuH+r)

30 <<Take a look at the fact that our nominee is still bland, gaffe-prone Mitt Romney. >>

Hey, I don't like the guy, and I aint voting for him, but I don't see bland or gaffe-prone. He's charismatic - in a calm way - behind a podium, and he really doesn't make gaffes...

...like, say, "Polish Death Camps".

Posted by: Sgt. York at June 01, 2012 02:40 PM (hg81J)

31 They're Liberal Democrats and they're ~~wish-casting~~ so far in their bubbles they cannot see what is happening?

Posted by: CUS at June 01, 2012 02:40 PM (84pE9)

32 If I know elections like I know the Constitution, Obama will win in a walk.

Posted by: Nancy Pelosi, Genius at June 01, 2012 02:41 PM (QKKT0)

"As Jim Pethokoukis of AEI notes, if the Obama administration hadn't slashed the numbers looking for jobs, unemployment would be 10.9 per cent."

---------------------------------------->

After he slashed the numbers, Barky ate their faces, and noted, "It's good, but it's no dog. But, I like this new thingamagig; it really makes the meat more tender."

Posted by: Beefy Meatball at June 01, 2012 02:42 PM (mxnUd)

34 Their bubble is made of neutronium, its impenetrable.

Posted by: Purp (@PurpAv) at June 01, 2012 02:42 PM (cwPzQ)

The voters looking for someone who acts like they have some sense, business accumen, intelligence, and is steady at the helm. Thats Mittens to a tee.

Everyone has had enough of hope and change.

Posted by: Dick Nixon at June 01, 2012 02:42 PM (VrVBw)

36 Winston, take note. At HotAir now:

Oh my: Obama now below 50% against Romney Â— in California

Posted by: CUS at June 01, 2012 02:42 PM (84pE9)

37 And we got the worst recovery since his intellectual predecesor (sp?). It's his fault. Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 06:38 PM (QxSug) ---------------------------------------------------------- I must have missed the recovery. My life has been a slow motion train wreck over the last 2 1/2 years.

Posted by: Truck Monkey at June 01, 2012 02:43 PM (jucos)

38 But this feels like a moment similar to the one in mid-December 2007 when Obama began to eclipse Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries.

While it would be nice if what this fool is trying to say were true, the fact is that Shrillary the Idiot still won all the primary elections - even after "that" point. Some by outrageous margins. I believe the retard who is now the biggest joke of a SecState (which ain't no mean feat) only ever lost caucuses to the Indonesian Puppy Muncher. The Dog-Eater, itself, only won the dem primary thanks to the dem superdelegates ...and, last I looked, there aren't any superdelegates in the general election (though fake, dead, and ineligible dem voters are pretty close to the same).

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 01, 2012 02:43 PM (X3lox)

39 One thing I'm a little worried about: I think the economy will look very strong in October. Why? Because Romney will look like his win is so inevitable that people will be anticipating that he will do a number of nice things, including easing up on regulation.

BTW, I pointed out on Twitter that, by this time in his first term, Reagan had the economy booming. Funny that.

Posted by: AmishDude at June 01, 2012 02:43 PM (z6CE9)

40 don't let the door hit ya on the wat out. He must go.

Posted by: thunderb at June 01, 2012 02:43 PM (Dnbau)

41 People are starting to realize benign mediocrity is a big upgrade over malevolence.

Posted by: Purp (@PurpAv) at June 01, 2012 02:43 PM (cwPzQ)

42 Take a look at the fact that our nominee is still bland, gaffe-prone Mitt Romney. >------------------------------- HaHa! This douche thinks it's about Romney. Bwahahahahahahahahhhaahahaha! Nice try.

Posted by: Asst. To The Asst. Manager at June 01, 2012 02:44 PM (AzwZn)

43 35 Their bubble is made of neutronium, its impenetrable.

Unobtanium.

Posted by: AmishDude at June 01, 2012 02:44 PM (z6CE9)

44 Obama now below 50% against Romney Â— in California

Pigs are flying. Elephants are dancing.

Posted by: Purp (@PurpAv) at June 01, 2012 02:45 PM (cwPzQ)

45 i actually did mean 56% -- but then was shocked as I realized I was predicting 12 points. But... I kind of think that might happen. As for Romney being 'bland," 1, I disagree, and 2, if I need major surgery, I'm not looking for flash and sex appeal in my surgeon. I'm looking for competence and coolness.

Posted by: ace at June 01, 2012 02:45 PM (aw5Tx)

46 JacoPastorius. Straight up: you're a fucking idiot. Go get your shinebox.

Posted by: Beefy Meatball at June 01, 2012 02:45 PM (mxnUd)

47 Here titty titty tiity, Hey anybody see my titties?

Posted by: Elizabeth Warren at June 01, 2012 06:37 PM (ufLRj)

Massachusetts voters don't care about titties. Trust me on this.

Posted by: Gov. Deval Patrick at June 01, 2012 02:46 PM (QKKT0)

48 According to my SIL it is Bush's fault, all of it including the huge deficit under Obama.

Oh, and I am a racist for blaming Obama.

Posted by: Vic at June 01, 2012 02:46 PM (YdQQY)

49 #26 - Not really the Mitt's fault directly, but here's the latest: http://tinyurl.com/873e859 ...and here's a greatest hits list from the last 6 months: http://tinyurl.com/7zchg7y I'll admit that Mitt's been more-or-less solid for the last month or so, but let's not pretend he doesn't have a foot-in-mouth history.

Posted by: JacoPastorius at June 01, 2012 02:46 PM (5BrI1)

50 Oh hell yeah it was cool living in the white house, jetting around the world and shit. Interception pfffttt Yeah and I could just up and run off to the golf course. yep good times then black Friday !! Damn pfffttt

Posted by: Geezer Obama at June 01, 2012 02:47 PM (Qr9Rc)

51 If Romney has truly grasped the magnitude of our boneage, then I think he's probably capable of managing a turnaround. I'm still not convinced he really understands exactly how fucked we are though.

Posted by: Purp (@PurpAv) at June 01, 2012 02:47 PM (cwPzQ)

52 We are holding our own, but my husband is in an energy related business. Another four years for this douche to do permanent damage to business and the country and we won't make it. The EPA now using aircraft to spy on farmers about their livestock. What is his fucking problem! Where does he think food comes from? I am so tired of be ruled over by a bunch of high grad students. He must go. Can't wait.

Posted by: thunderb at June 01, 2012 02:48 PM (Dnbau)

53 **And we got the worst recovery since his intellectual predecesor (sp?). It's his fault. Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 06:38 PM (QxSug) ---------------------------------------------------------- I must have missed the recovery. My life has been a slow motion train wreck over the last 2 1/2 years.** That's why it's so bad. The "recovery" is still in progress which is to really say, we're still in the shitter. I've been out of the DC boomtown that the Chinese are paying for and America's a ghosttown. Anyway, the point is, we've had, what 10 recessions since WWII. No big deal, it's cyclic. Depressions, though, are not. They're policy driven and here we are in Great Depression 2.0 because business is being killed (literally, when you make being in business a crime).

Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 02:48 PM (QxSug)

54 Hey how are ya Hey how are ya Hey how are ya

Posted by: Elizabeth "Sweating Beaver" Warren at June 01, 2012 02:48 PM (jucos)

My prediction?

PAIN.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 01, 2012 02:48 PM (mhqA1)

56 Families are being hammered like I've never been hammered in my life.

Posted by: Elizabeth "Lactates Like Bellagio Water Show" Warren at June 01, 2012 02:48 PM (QKKT0)

57 <<Here titty titty tiity, Hey anybody see my titties?

Posted by: Elizabeth Warren>>

No, but I found your campaign theme song:

http://tinyurl.com/23w63zx

Posted by: Sgt. York at June 01, 2012 02:49 PM (hg81J)

58 Oh, and I am a racist for blaming Obama. Posted by: Vic at June 01, 2012 06:46 PM (YdQQY) Everyone, including me, wants to give you quips you can use on her, but it won't make any difference, because she's nuts. She literally doesn't live in the same world you do.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 01, 2012 02:49 PM (bxiXv)

One thing I'm a little worried about: I think the economy will look very strong in October. Why? Because Romney will look like his win is so inevitable that people will be anticipating that he will do a number of nice things, including easing up on regulation.

-------------------------------------------------

The economy is just one aspect of all of this. When people get pissed, they become better informed. And one of the trueisms about the SCOAMT that a lot of the voting public has finally realized is that this president hates this country.

Posted by: Soona at June 01, 2012 02:50 PM (eG+Qx)

60 **As for Romney being 'bland," 1, I disagree, and 2, if I need major surgery, I'm not looking for flash and sex appeal in my surgeon. I'm looking for competence and coolness.** Gee, libs patting themselves on the back for being "with it," and "hep." Look, their ideas about cool are like Poochy from the Simpsons. Think of cool like what's permeated culture recently. Don Draper is handsome and kind of boring but cool. So, you have poochy cool or Draper cool. Mitt is cool, you're just too much of a fucking nerd to know it.

Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 02:50 PM (QxSug)

61 She literally doesn't live in the same world you do.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 01, 2012 06:49 PM (bxiXv)

We got into a huge shouting match over at my MIL's house. She is a grade "A" Demo-commie "B-word".

Posted by: Vic at June 01, 2012 02:51 PM (YdQQY)

62 Obama is Poochy cool. An overhyped, underperforming cultural icon.

Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 02:51 PM (QxSug)

63 meanwhile California is trying set up their very own Social Security system that they can loot and replace with bonds just like the feds have done.

Posted by: X at June 01, 2012 02:52 PM (KHo8t)

64 An over-hyped, underperforming cultural con.

Posted by: thunderb at June 01, 2012 02:52 PM (Dnbau)

65 Obama will start a war... just wait and see.

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 01, 2012 02:52 PM (nTgAI)

66 Throw out your hands
Stick out your tush
Hands on your hips
Give 'em a push
You'll be surprised
You're doing the French Mistake!
Voila!

Posted by: Matt Yglesias at June 01, 2012 02:53 PM (QKKT0)

67 A Stuttering Clusterfuck of a Miserable Failure

Posted by: thunderb at June 01, 2012 02:53 PM (Dnbau)

68 Obama is Poochy cool. An overhyped, underperforming cultural icon.

They just need to rasta-fy him another 4.5% or so.

Posted by: Lindsey Naegle at June 01, 2012 02:53 PM (NEeS2)

69 O/T: Why ESPN sucks, part 2,345,222. They are fellating Spike Lee and the NY Knicks. I see now why I stopped watching ESPN Sportscenter at home. I'm stuck at work, so its on.

Posted by: stillers at June 01, 2012 02:53 PM (gVUg0)

Look, their ideas about cool are like Poochy from the Simpsons. Think of cool like what's permeated culture recently. Don Draper is handsome and kind of boring but cool.

Don Draper only looks boring. Inside, he is a hot mess.

Who is Poochy?

Posted by: fluffy at June 01, 2012 02:54 PM (O6q63)

71 While it would be nice if what this fool is trying to say were true, the fact is that Shrillary the Idiot still won all the primary elections - even after "that" point. Some by outrageous margins. I believe the retard who is now the biggest joke of a SecState (which ain't no mean feat) only ever lost caucuses to the Indonesian Puppy Muncher. The Dog-Eater, itself, only won the dem primary thanks to the dem superdelegates ...and, last I looked, there aren't any superdelegates in the general election (though fake, dead, and ineligible dem voters are pretty close to the same).

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at June 01, 2012 06:43 PM (X3lox)

Yes, I can't believe I'm saying this because that Stalinist harpy would send me to the fucking gulag if she knew what I thought of her and her POS grifter excuse for a husband, but Muffer actually impressed me with her ability to conduct a campaign in the Midwest even while impaired with her oafish "mate" acting every inch of the white trash cooter hound he is. She is awkward on the stump and says "ya know" more than any dark complected professional athlete but she managed to overcome that to win primaries against the Indonesian after being completely written off and the fix being in by the donk insiders and complicit turds in the MFM. The JEF's campaigning ability is every bit the massive load of shit that characterizes every fucking rotten lie in the makeup of the commiecrat party.

Posted by: Captain Hate at June 01, 2012 02:55 PM (ROTAA)

72 Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 06:51 PM (QxSug) --------------------------------------------------------- I am just outside of the DC boom town in MD. Those that are sucking at the gubmint tit are doing great. People that have to function in the real world are hurting. The dichotomy is pretty unreal.

Posted by: Elizabeth at June 01, 2012 02:55 PM (jucos)

73 I predict a few things, which we're seeing already.

Democrats will run away from Obama, but very few of them will be able to. The Blue Dogs are dead. Even that scum Manchin is pretending he's not a Democrat again.

The media will start "helping". This article is part of that. This will hasten the disaster because they'll be engaging in a strategy that would please Pauline Kael and nobody else.

Then they will start "helping" when they realize Obama will lose and they'll have to staunch the bleeding downballot.

I think eventually, they'll start going full-bore socialist and start admitting to it. They've never admitted to it before, but if you're going to go down, maybe you are just tired of having to lie.

Posted by: AmishDude at June 01, 2012 02:57 PM (z6CE9)

74 "I've stood by FOR DECADES and watched the middle class get hammered!".

Posted by: Liz "Why I'm A Shameless Opportunist"' Warren at June 01, 2012 02:57 PM (AzwZn)

75 There are going to be some interns with sore asses and jaws in the WH over the next 5 months. We know how the Unicorn Prince loves to relieve stress. I hope he's a miserable, neurotic mess like he's made me. Fucker.

Posted by: Ms Choksondik at June 01, 2012 02:57 PM (fYOZx)

76 Obama will start a war... just wait and see.

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 01, 2012 06:52 PM (nTgAI)

-----------------------------------------------

Look! A squirrel. A really big fucking squirrel!

Posted by: Soona at June 01, 2012 02:58 PM (eG+Qx)

77 Can anyone read polls? Here is the CNN poll that shows Romney/Obama tied... how many dem's did they use? http://tinyurl.com/6omlxar

Posted by: Jumbo Shrimp at June 01, 2012 02:58 PM (DGIjM)

78 I still think it's very unlikely that it'll be a blowout for Romney. If he does (and yeah- right now he's probably the slight favorite) I think it will be reasonably close.

For it to be a blowout, Romney would have to take a few less than favorable states like PA, WI, MI, NH and NM.

Personally, I'm banking on the GOP keeping the house and a 269-269 map that looks like this: http://bit.ly/KDtjnd

Not out of any detailed analysis or ability to predict the outcome, but simply because the shrieking of liberals would be extra super precious when the House elects Romney.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at June 01, 2012 02:59 PM (SY2Kh)

79 Are you serious, you don't know poochy? RTFM, but srsly, Poochy is an icon of cool developed by a boardroom of ad executives and marketing people. Like how every commercial in 1993 had spiky haired blonde kids named Zack or the Dell Dude!.

Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 02:59 PM (QxSug)

80 Hey Vic, your a sharp guy so you've probably tried this, but you might remind her of the kind of leaders you always end up with under leftist ideologies. Hitler, Stalin, Mao etc. and the 100M people that have been murdered so they could gain/hold onto power. Or hand her a copy of Levin's Liberty & Tyranny and ask her if she's got the guts to read it.

Posted by: teej at June 01, 2012 02:59 PM (sbimF)

81 i've got associates here in the People's Republic who are still saying the SCOAMF is going to be re-elected in a landslide...

of course, since they live in Left LA, they are under the belief that everywhere else is just like them.

i just giggle when they tell me that.

Posted by: redc1c4 at June 01, 2012 03:00 PM (8MasJ)

82 78 Can anyone read polls? Here is the CNN poll that shows Romney/Obama tied... how many dem's did they use?

All of them. All of them.

Posted by: AmishDude at June 01, 2012 03:00 PM (z6CE9)

83 Obama will start a war... just wait and see.

Over what?

Posted by: Waterhouse at June 01, 2012 03:00 PM (NEeS2)

84 **73 Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 06:51 PM (QxSug) --------------------------------------------------------- I am just outside of the DC boom town in MD. Those that are sucking at the gubmint tit are doing great. People that have to function in the real world are hurting. The dichotomy is pretty unreal.** It blows my mind. Gummint shitbags making 6 figures for surfing porn all day at work whereas people in the real world walk a razors edge, "work hard, be competent, or GTFO...and do it for less than a garbage man makes."

Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 03:01 PM (QxSug)

85 Even that scum Manchin is pretending he's not a Democrat again.

Manchin is about as trustworthy as Jerry Sandusky in an orphanage. I hope I live long enough to see his career get trucked.

Posted by: Captain Hate at June 01, 2012 03:01 PM (ROTAA)

86 I don't know ANYONE who is going to vote for that awful Romney person.

Posted by: Upper East Side New Yawker at June 01, 2012 03:01 PM (jucos)

87 "What the hell kind of Weapons-Grade Cocoon have liberals been living in? How disconnected from the actual facts of the world do you have to be to imagine that a deepening depression is not going to count as a rather major mark against Obama?" Liberals do not live in the real world. They really are all infected by a neo-Marxism that says there is a false ideology that does not reflect the real world and that certain people (or sometimes, no people, depending) have a better understanding of reality. But whoever those people are, it is not you, it is not any middle class or rich people, and it is not reporters and it is not whatever "narrative" comes down over the news (which, to them, is still biased to the right). Even science for them is a tool of false consciousness. So all they have to do is engineer a new narrative and POOF! the world will change. I'm feeling bleak today. I really just want a hug.

Posted by: elizabethe at June 01, 2012 03:02 PM (Jb7iM)

88 Posted by: teej at June 01, 2012 06:59 PM (sbimF)

She would only say that the Nazis were right wing. That is the standard lefty line.

Posted by: Vic at June 01, 2012 03:02 PM (YdQQY)

89 **87 I don't know ANYONE who is going to vote for that awful Romney person. Posted by: Upper East Side New Yawker at June 01, 2012 07:01 PM (jucos)*** more like, signed XXOO, tenured diversity studies and transgendered enforcement professor *or* Royally useless and redundant GS-15 *or* union thug who thinks teachers are "workers"

Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 03:03 PM (QxSug)

90 idiots who think nazi's were right wing are retarded and you should tell them so. even if it's your wife's best friend on her death bed.

Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 03:04 PM (QxSug)

91 btw: the reason the economy is so bad is because Congress won't let Obama raise taxes to balance the budget and create green j*bs...

(yes, the person who told me that was serious)

Posted by: redc1c4 at June 01, 2012 03:05 PM (8MasJ)

92 I know I've already gave Romney my super important indorcement and stuff but I think I mite CHANGE to Obama. He's like totally progressive and not lame like Mitt. Plus, Mitt's like being too mean, unlike my dad who was sooper nice and made it easy on the black guy cause you know they need help from us compassionate progressives.

Posted by: Meghan McCain's nipple hair at June 01, 2012 03:05 PM (fYOZx)

93 ... Like Fritzwoth was saying. Wait wasn't Fritz' post bumped?

Posted by: Journolist drinking a smoothie at June 01, 2012 03:05 PM (e2O5W)

94 Preference.
Cascade.

Faster please.

Posted by: Tonic Dog at June 01, 2012 03:06 PM (X/+QT)

95 Elizabethe, (((((( ))))))). Things will get better

Posted by: thunderb at June 01, 2012 03:06 PM (Dnbau)

96 Fuck little Matty Yglesias and the moose turd he rode in too.

Posted by: Comanche Voter at June 01, 2012 03:06 PM (6USwK)

97 The dichotomy is pretty unreal. Posted by: Elizabeth at June 01, 2012 06:55 PM (jucos) And not an accident.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 01, 2012 03:06 PM (bxiXv)

98 ++ 75 I've stood by FOR DECADES and watched the middle class get hammered!". Posted by: Liz "Why I'm A Shameless Opportunist"' Warren at June 01, 2012 06:57 PM (AzwZn)++ "And by "hammered" I mean by me- when I swoop in to take advantage of all the poor schmucks in forecclosure!! Bwahahahahahahaha."

Posted by: LASue at June 01, 2012 03:07 PM (wAhNv)

99 But, but, but, WAR ON WOMEN! THEY'RE GOING TO BE DRAGGING WOMEN INTO THE STREETS AND REFUSING TO GIVE THE BIRTH CONTROL! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!

Posted by: nerdygirl at June 01, 2012 03:08 PM (V/Aej)

100 Can anyone read polls? Here is the CNN poll that shows Romney/Obama tied... how many dem's did they use?

They didn't say. As far as I'm concerned, if they don't release the R/D polling sample, it's a bullshit poll.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at June 01, 2012 03:08 PM (SY2Kh)

101 I gues to thm the best birth control is to make sure that baby girl is never born

Posted by: thunderb at June 01, 2012 03:08 PM (Dnbau)

102 If the Ogasm loses in November (and I believe that he will) today will be looked at as his Waterloo...

Posted by: Duke of Beef Wellington Bomber at June 01, 2012 03:09 PM (Jls4P)

103
Yglesias...isn't he an ice skater or something?

Posted by: sTevo at June 01, 2012 03:10 PM (VMcEw)

104

even if it's your wife's best friend on her death bed.

Someone's in a fightin' mood.

Posted by: fluffy at June 01, 2012 03:10 PM (O6q63)

105 Manchin is about as trustworthy as Jerry Sandusky in an orphanage. I hope I live long enough to see his career get trucked.

This. But you are talking about West Virginians. Did you know the SAT is not required to matriculate at WVU?

Gooooo Mountaindeers!11!!11!

Posted by: Asscheeks of Saturn at June 01, 2012 03:10 PM (ufLRj)

106 Obama will start a war... just wait and see.

Over what?

Posted by: Waterhouse at June 01, 2012 07:00 PM (NEeS2)

Who knows... Iran, Syria, Pakistan ???

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 01, 2012 03:10 PM (nTgAI)

107 If you divide U3 into hope and change, why does pi r screwed keep showing up?

Posted by: Journolist drinking a smoothie at June 01, 2012 03:11 PM (e2O5W)

108 Obama will start a war... just wait and see.Over what?
Posted by: Waterhouse at June 01, 2012 07:00 PM (NEeS2)

Who knows... Iran, Syria, Pakistan ???

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 01, 2012 07:10 PM (nTgAI)

Hell, he wants to start a war with Arizona

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 01, 2012 03:11 PM (nTgAI)

109 66- "Obama will start a war... just wait and see." Well, yes, if he thought it would give him the win, he'd nuke Canada. But I think the war option is way too risky. In the first place, most of us are sick of war right now. Secondly, the notion that the electorate will automatically stay with an incumbent in time of war is hooey. They are historically just as likely to do the opposite. Third, it is not easy at this point in history for any Democrat to play the machismo card. Unless he can set up a staged, fake scenario with one of his friends (our enemies,) I don't think he'll risk foreign adventures.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at June 01, 2012 03:11 PM (C8mVl)

110 I'm feeling bleak today. I really just want a hug. Posted by: elizabethe at June 01, 2012 07:02 PM (Jb7iM) {{elizabethe}}

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 01, 2012 03:13 PM (bxiXv)

111 _____________________________________

Ace,

Amen on predicting a big Romney win in November.

Another amen on why fellow political junkies believe it will be a close race: psychological/emotional self-protection from being wrong.

I'd put Obama's chances at winning in November as that of making the open ended straight followed by then filling the inside straight in back to back hands.

It happens, but it's damned unlikely.

Posted by: _Dave_ at June 01, 2012 03:13 PM (gqoYf)

112 I'm sitting here working and have kudlow on in the background and Carli Fiorina came on. And it hit me, she would make a great VP for romney. I think people have had enough of professional politicians and having a washington outsider and a woman from cali might just be the best move for romney.

Posted by: contrarian... at June 01, 2012 03:13 PM (oZfic)

113 Impressed by conservatives ability to pretend to believe that Obama is 100% responsible for events 1.5 years into divided government. ------------------------------------------- Matty Y. not so cognizant of Obama's first 2 and a half years of majority rule. Amnesia: The Elixir Of Liberals Everywhere!

Posted by: Liz at June 01, 2012 03:15 PM (AzwZn)

114 Ace, I love you, but the author's name is TOBY HARNDEN

You made not one but TWO spelling fuckups. C'mon now, bro.

Posted by: Jeff B. at June 01, 2012 03:15 PM (ogWsV)

115 @89 - Good chance of that bud. And then of course you calmly remind her what party the nazi party was an outgrowth of (learned that one here I think), pull out one of your old 45's (get off my lawn) and play it for her.

Posted by: teej at June 01, 2012 03:16 PM (sbimF)

116 Posted by: contrarian... at June 01, 2012 07:13 PM (oZfic)

Maybe one of your friends should call Romney and make that brilliant suggestion.

Posted by: Cicero at June 01, 2012 03:16 PM (QKKT0)

117
Half on my county was at wal-mart cashing in food stamps today. If it is this bad everywhere the JEF has a chance.

Just waitin' on the SMOD.

Posted by: sTevo at June 01, 2012 03:18 PM (VMcEw)

118

As Rush says: "If the media makes you, the media can break you".

Posted by: Soona at June 01, 2012 03:18 PM (eG+Qx)

119

That's right--- "speechifying not do it this time around. "

Posted by: fresh at June 01, 2012 03:19 PM (O7ksG)

120 I always think it's going to be close, no matter what, because: fraud. I don't put anything past the Obama administration and its minions, an administration that has Eric Holder as its AG.

Posted by: lael at June 01, 2012 03:19 PM (T6tvG)

121 I have to say, despite the fact that he wasn't my first choice, Mitt Romney looks like he's the right choice for the GOP.

Posted by: Unemployed since February at June 01, 2012 03:21 PM (ptP00)

122 <i>By the way, let me explain the psychology of why people always say "it will be close." People like to say this because it seems safe, and also, because it demonstrates they are "serious" thinkers who are not just making "crazy predictions."</I>

Agreed, but I think there's a good-faith argument to be made that the election will be close. Consider:

(1) Obama won big in 2008, so he'd have to lose a lot of voters who pulled the lever for him last time in order to lose.
(2) As terrible as the economy has been, and as much of a disappointment as Obama has been to the far left, the base has not defected to a third-party candidate or decided to sit this one out. Why? Well, a big part of the Democratic base is black voters, and anyone who isn't a black voter isn't going to primary Obama. So there's no challenge there. They're going to fall in line.

Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at June 01, 2012 03:21 PM (qyB3P)

123 As Rush says: "If the media makes you, the media can break you".

.

Posted by: Soona at June 01, 2012 07:18 PM (eG+Qx)

Emphatic YES

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 01, 2012 03:22 PM (nTgAI)

124 As Rush says: "If the media makes you, the media can break you". .
Posted by: Soona at June 01, 2012 07:18 PM (eG+Qx)

Emphatic YES

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 01, 2012 07:22 PM (nTgAI)

They need a story and Mitt just isn't much of one... That leaves the JEF

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 01, 2012 03:22 PM (nTgAI)

125 " people's perceptions become set in aspic"

According to Jim Lileks, aspic is a tool for adjusting thong underwear. Appropriate in this usage, I suppose.

Posted by: crosspatch at June 01, 2012 03:23 PM (ZbLJZ)

126 Oh, and for the record I think that Mitt wins by a healthy but not huge margin. Maybe 52% of the two-way vote.

Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at June 01, 2012 03:23 PM (qyB3P)

127 elizabethe, be veerrry careful who you let hug you around here. Just tryin' to look out for ya kid. Now me, I'm perfectly safe. So here, HUG!!

Posted by: teej at June 01, 2012 03:27 PM (sbimF)

128 Someone go gets Cousin Pookie... and your sister LaFonda... and Grandpa Rufus... and Fred Sanford...I'z needz there help!!!

Posted by: Choomer at June 01, 2012 03:27 PM (Jls4P)

129 I have to say, despite the fact that he wasn't my first choice, Mitt Romney looks like he's the right choice for the GOP.

Posted by: Unemployed since February at June 01, 2012 07:21 PM (ptP00)

Yup. I was sorely disappointed that he was doing so well early on, mainly because I was thrown off by how he seemed to be awkwardly responding to "hecklers and protestors" (to use the MFM preferred vernacular for those vermin); but starting with those dumbass attacks on his wife I don't think he's hit a wrong note. Maybe my expectations were destroyed by that asshole McCain's performance 4 years ago but I'm very pleased with how Romney's doing.

Posted by: Captain Hate at June 01, 2012 03:27 PM (ROTAA)

130 Ace you just summed up the entire outlook/rationale over at Hot Gas...they are wrong but scared to believe SCOAMF is goin' down without a POLL telling them so!!!

Posted by: ABO at June 01, 2012 03:29 PM (MbeEN)

131 I want Barry gone so bad that I am willing to let him hang alone for the bad economy. The truth is it's then entire Democratic party, of which he is an integral part, that is to blame. Look, it took Reid and Pelosi less than 2 years to drive the country into recession, electing a Democrat as president, with the exact same worldview, would predictable turn a recession into a depression. January 4th 2007: The day Pelosi became Speaker of the Democratically controlled 110th Congress DJIA end of session: 12,800.18 National unemployment rate for December 2006: 4.5% 2006 Federal Budget Deficit: $247.7 billion Average GDP growth for 2006: 3.4% Median Home Value in December 2006: $244,700 March 2011: $159,600 Average price for Regular Unleaded Gasoline December 2006: $2.30 Federal Debt as % of GDP 2006: 64.55 2008: 70.00 2009: 90.36 2010: 92.28 2011: 102.63 (estimated) Nonfarm employment in thousands Dec 2006: 137,000 In the 12 years of Republican Congress, average annual deficit: $104 billion

Posted by: toby928© at June 01, 2012 03:31 PM (NG097)

132 Take a look at the fact that our nominee is still bland, gaffe-prone Mitt Romney. Sorry, Ace, not drinking the 40-state blowout Kool-Aid just yet. Posted by: JacoPastorius

Gee, a new commenter who seems concerned. Are you Christian as well?

Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at June 01, 2012 03:31 PM (acamJ)

133 man, that Obama is one cool customer, like Poochy

Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 03:35 PM (QxSug)

134 Geez, ghost town all of a sudden. Better see if there's a new post up.

Posted by: teej at June 01, 2012 03:36 PM (sbimF)

135 @132, thank you. People need to blame Bush, then they need to blame bush post-Pelosi. And goddamn if pelosi isn't the most transparently stupid person on earth.

Posted by: joeindc44 says choom on fuckers at June 01, 2012 03:36 PM (QxSug)

136 Kudlow who last week began outwardly talking about the ignorant policies of the administration is now full out calling for a complete blowout in favor of romney.

Have heard a few talk radio shows and the tea party people are calling up in droves and talking about voter fraud, that is there one fear, the one variable they can't control.

Posted by: contrarian... at June 01, 2012 03:44 PM (oZfic)

137 Say what you want but Matt Yglesias is still one hell of a tenor.

Posted by: andycanuck at June 01, 2012 03:44 PM (nrW1y)

138 "the two incumbents who lost elections in the past 40 years have lost precisely because the economy was in the crapper and they seemed incapable of doing anything positive about it." re Elder Bush: Actually, the 3rd quarter economy was recovering prior to the Election, and Clinton lied about, then ex post facto took credit for the improvement, in anticipation of his electoral victory. Putz

Posted by: charliedoc at June 01, 2012 03:45 PM (q+XgV)

139 (1) Obama won big in 2008, so he'd have to lose a lot of voters who pulled the lever for him last time in order to lose.
(2) As terrible as the economy has been, and as much of a disappointment as Obama has been to the far left, the base has not defected to a third-party candidate or decided to sit this one out. Why? Well, a big part of the Democratic base is black voters, and anyone who isn't a black voter isn't going to primary Obama. So there's no challenge there. They're going to fall in line.

Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at June 01, 2012 07:21 PM (qyB3P)

1) And he already has lost independents. And women. And 40 percent of the Democrats in the primaries in KY, AR, WV.

Posted by: Oldcat at June 01, 2012 03:47 PM (z1N6a)

140 Ohio steel workers getting jobs back? The fourth largest steel company in the US file for Chapter 11 today.

Yeah, 7 percent might look good by November. :-)

Posted by: SOYLENT GREEN at June 01, 2012 03:47 PM (xNw53)

141 Have heard a few talk radio shows and the tea party people are calling up in droves and talking about voter fraud, that is there one fear, the one variable they can't control.

Posted by: contrarian... at June 01, 2012 07:44 PM (oZfic)

Dems will be too resigned to cheat as much as they usually do.

Posted by: Oldcat at June 01, 2012 03:48 PM (z1N6a)

142 @113 I agree that it would be good to have an outsider (and doubly good to have a female outsider), but I think that Carly has image problems. They will double down against Carly, laying the same things at her feet that they did against Mitt while at Bain. They'll point to the layoffs and private jets while ignoring the praise from her successor. Paraphrasing, he said he was able to turn HP around because of the groundwork and hard choices that Carly made.

Posted by: Topper Harley at June 01, 2012 03:49 PM (9mbNo)

143 "Impressed by conservatives ability to pretend to believe that Obama is 100% responsible for events 1.5 years into divided government." So unless the President's party also controls both houses of Congess, he cannot be held fully responsible for the economy? Well, I suggest you draft your sincere apology to GWB really quickly, and beat the rush! By your own standard, you and one hell of a lot of others certainly owe him one!

Posted by: Sherlock at June 01, 2012 03:49 PM (DWb1W)

144 Carly adds nothing to Mitt's team. Not a swing state, not from the base, nothing.

Someone to boost his foreign policy cred might be useful.

Posted by: Oldcat at June 01, 2012 03:51 PM (z1N6a)

145 So unless the President's party also controls both houses of Congess, he cannot be held fully responsible for the economy? Well, I suggest you draft your sincere apology to GWB really quickly, and beat the rush! By your own standard, you and one hell of a lot of others certainly owe him one!

Posted by: Sherlock at June 01, 2012 07:49 PM (DWb1W)

Ok, so he's only 60 percent responsible. Now sack his ass.

Posted by: Oldcat at June 01, 2012 03:53 PM (z1N6a)

146 I can't remember the last time a Republican President had a filibuster proof Senate. Barry did. The Democrats could do anything they wanted, and they did. They have no excuses. None.

Posted by: toby928© at June 01, 2012 03:59 PM (NG097)

147

Nope, 4% tops. Here's why:

youths are hardest hit by this economy, but they don't have kids and mortgages and can get by, live with Mommy, etc.. They aren't as attracted by the vision of a booming economy with jobs because they've never known one.

Many of the employed are government workers, who fear spending cuts more than they do a continued great recession.

Posted by: Emperor of Icecream at June 01, 2012 04:05 PM (epBek)

148

145 Carly adds nothing to Mitt's team. Not a swing state, not from the base, nothing.

Someone to boost his foreign policy cred might be useful.

Posted by: Oldcat at June 01, 2012 07:51 PM (z1N6a)

It was a thought coming from a gay porn linking trig truther loving lying skank. Its barely worth laughing at for its idiocy.

Posted by: buzzion at June 01, 2012 04:09 PM (GULKT)

149 145 Carly adds nothing to Mitt's team. Not a swing state, not from the base, nothing.

Someone to boost his foreign policy cred might be useful.

Posted by: Oldcat at June 01, 2012 07:51 PM (z1N6a)

I suggested her because she is a business woman, didn't go towards politics until John McCain recruited her to campaign for him and she is not a professional politician plus she is a woman. I think today it dawned on a lot of folks that this is serious stuff. Romney might be good, he might have the right pedigree, he might have the right contacts but people today realized that this is going to take a group of committed people working with the president to even make a dent. I don't think the American people want another politician. They don't want a political decision based on being able to take a state cause they made their native son/daughter the VP pick. Rather, they want Romney making his decision with them in mind. With bringing back the economy, getting them jobs, stopping the bleeding on housing. I know you think people are going to worry about foreign policy but at this point a lot of people are focused on the here and now and home and their own lives and how they've lost equity, their retirement, their jobs, their homes, their ability to take a stupid vacation. If he took on someone with foreign policy cred it would have to be someone who is very anti war. The American people are sick of wars and conflicts and whatever the heck else you want to call them.

Posted by: contrarian... at June 01, 2012 04:12 PM (oZfic)

150

A fairly decent blog post, but in parts amazingly naive; the sort of thing you only can find on the Internet. There's not a chance in hell that this will be a 56-44 election. Obama will receive at least 95% of the black vote on heavy turnout and a distinct majority of the Latino vote. Overwhelming majorities of public sector union members, college and grad school kids and wealthy liberals. We don't know how many conservatives and putative conservatives will sit out the election, but it will be in the millions.

Romney has a fighting chance, of course. Obviously if the job market between now and November further craters then Romney's chances marginally will increase. But he's not going to win 56% of the national vote. Not even close. He might not even exceed Bush's total from 2004. It will take a herculean effort to unseat Obama from office.

That said, however, if non-voting conservatives manage not to reelect Obama then Romney will have a major opportunity on his hands. Romney if elected will be presiding over a GOP House. It's likely if not probable that he'll at least commence his term with a GOP Senate (incidentally, how important now is it that wingnuts on the right threw away DE, CO and NV last time around?). Upwards of 33-34 state governorships as of next January will be held by Republicans. Ginsburg and Breyer could go at any moment. There potentially will be a chance substantially to rein in leftism as national public policy.

But first Romney has to win. That's far from guaranteed. For once in their lives the political right needs to get out of its collective cocoon, to not be naive or irrational, and instead of wasting themeselves away bitching and yelling at the radio to get to the polls and vote. There only are so many Reagan Democrats remaining. Without lockstep turnout by conservatives Obama still could pull this off. We'll see what happens. I've learned enough over the years about the right not to be too optimistic. Hopefull this time around will be different.

Posted by: Tsar Nicholas II at June 01, 2012 04:13 PM (f8XyF)

151 "Kudlow who last week began outwardly talking about the ignorant policies of the administration is now full out calling for a complete blowout in favor of romney."

Yes, I heard him on the John Batchelor show (absolutely worth listening to or downloading the shows from the website) using the term "ignoramuses" to describe the Obama administration's economic team. Another guest on the shame show used the word "idiotic".

Posted by: crosspatch at June 01, 2012 04:19 PM (ZbLJZ)

152 Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

Posted by: Steevy at June 01, 2012 04:22 PM (Ts9tU)

153

GHWB actually had a robust economy in '92. the MBM had just convinced everybody it was the worst since, like, forever. economy was growing much stronger than our puny 1-2% currently. and the debt and deficits weren't nearly the issue as now.

If memory serves, 3rd qtr 1992 GDP growth was around 4%. didn't help Bush pere one bit though.

Reagan's margin over Carter was impressive, it's staggering when you throw John Andersen's 3rd party and 6% popular vote into the mix.

Even if the battleground states are improving economically on election day, I think enough people realize that it's in spite of, not due to, any input from Obama. lots of Republican gov's in those swing states also.

Mitt by 5% or so, 52%-47%. well that's what it looks like at the moment. and yes, that is close to a blow out by modern standards. will certainly be a mandate to roll back the stupid.

Posted by: Chris at June 01, 2012 04:24 PM (ULA0k)

154 "Impressed by conservatives ability to pretend to believe that Obama is 100% responsible for events 1.5 years into divided government."

Well Bush was 100% responsible for 2006-2008 and a congress in full opposition... I'm sorry if assuming Obama is at least half as good a leader as Bush is offensive.

Posted by: gekkobear at June 01, 2012 04:32 PM (lMTKo)

155 "One positive word for Obama's chances: In many of the crucial swing states, the unemployment rate is below the national average"

The economy is doing better in red states and sucks in blue states.
This is going to minimize the effect of the economy on the election.

Posted by: RayJ at June 01, 2012 04:37 PM (pI/IV)

156 Ace: "Given actual electoral history, why do people cling to the notion 'it's going to be close'?"

Because it's an electoral vote count, not a popular vote one.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at June 01, 2012 04:52 PM (eHIJJ)

157 Obama now below 50% against Romney Â— in California

*************

I'll be in my bunk

Posted by: Boomer Redneque at June 01, 2012 04:53 PM (eQnzo)

158 I'm assuming that romney has a team of college interns going over the jobless rates for each state. To analyze where to best concentrate his resources. And I'm sure they've gone over the rules of the electoral college with a fine toothed comb like the BO camp did and that they find a way to exploit those rules along with the rules of the GOP convention, in the same way BO beat hillary by going over those rules and exploiting them.

Most of all though, he can't get over exuberant and drop his guard and somehow give away any of the secrets of how he plans to fix things. Maybe he can say "you have to elect me to know what I've got in me"....shouldn't be too difficult, they've done it before.

Posted by: contrarian... at June 01, 2012 04:54 PM (oZfic)

159 63 Obama is P~~ooch~~ussy cool. Pu-u-u-u-s-s-s-s-y.

***********

FIFY

Posted by: Boomer Redneque at June 01, 2012 05:00 PM (eQnzo)

160 How disconnected from the actual facts of the world do you have to be to imagine that a deepening depression is not going to count as a rather major mark against Obama?

=======================
Um, let's not start pretending the party of "Bush lied" and Valerie Plame was "covert" is real big on actual facts.

Posted by: Jay at June 01, 2012 05:04 PM (TzrpT)

161 77 Obama will start a war... just wait and see.
Posted by: The Jackhole at June 01, 2012 06:52 PM (nTgAI)

-----------------------------------------------

Look! A squirrel. A really big fucking squirrel!

Posted by: Soona at June 01, 2012 06:58 PM (eG+Qx)

***********************

With armored divisions and nukes! _(oops!)

Posted by: Barky Ofuckstick at June 01, 2012 05:05 PM (eQnzo)

162 79 I still think it's very unlikely that it'll be a blowout for Romney. If he does (and yeah- right now he's probably the slight favorite) I think it will be reasonably close.

For it to be a blowout, Romney would have to take a few less than favorable states like PA, WI, MI, NH and NM.

Personally, I'm banking on the GOP keeping the house and a 269-269 map that looks like this: http://bit.ly/KDtjnd

Not out of any detailed analysis or ability to predict the outcome, but simply because the shrieking of liberals would be extra super precious when the House elects Romney.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at June 01, 2012 06:59 PM (SY2Kh)

****************

Heh! That would be sweet...

Posted by: Boomer Redneque at June 01, 2012 05:07 PM (eQnzo)

163 Well, considering RG Steel just declared bankruptcy and will be selling off mills at Sparrows Point, MD; Wheeling, WV; and Warren, OH; that might give Romney a boost in a pretty swing part of the middle of the US.

Posted by: crosspatch at June 01, 2012 05:10 PM (ZbLJZ)

164 Steel jobs everywhere!!!

RG Steel filed for Chapter 11 protection Thursday, a week after announcing it would idle factories in three states and lay off thousands of employees.

Posted by: Jay at June 01, 2012 05:17 PM (TzrpT)

165 I can't post anything here anymore. Says long strings of text thingie...

Posted by: Baldy at June 01, 2012 05:23 PM (PMbUZ)

166 I was trying to say I live in Pittsburgh PA. UE is 6.1%. People comment on the bad econ all the time, and this is with 2% pts LESS than the nat ave...

Posted by: Baldy at June 01, 2012 05:24 PM (PMbUZ)

167 "What the hell kind of Weapons-Grade Cocoon have liberals been living in?"

They have a quasi-religious belief that their side is destined to win in the end with only minor setbacks along the way. Since it would be hard to characterize an Obama loss as a minor setback, they conclude it can't happen.

Posted by: schizoid at June 01, 2012 05:29 PM (KcLbo)

168 Impressed by conservatives ability to pretend to believe that Obama is 100% responsible for events 1.5 years into divided government. Funny how Democrats had no problem believing that Bush was 100% responsible for his last 2 years with Democrats running Congress.

Posted by: Islamic Rage Boy at June 01, 2012 05:37 PM (e8kgV)

169 >> People feel safe in making these "it will be close" predictions, but actually these predictions aren't very well-founded on logic or history. They're actually founded on emotion -- the desire to not look silly and not stand out from the crowd.

I don't think I do this because I didn't think Obama-McCain would be close. Like you, the only time I had hope was right after the Palin selection, but from the start I thought HRC would get the nomination and drub the Republican. When the nominee turned out to be Obama, I still thought we'd get demolished.

This go around I'm still pessimistic because of a different psychology, which is, be most skeptical of what you want to believe. I would like to think Romney will win easily, but I really doubt that. For that matter, I thought John Kerry had a decent chance of knocking off Bush in 2004, and when the exit polls came out predicting that to be the case, I believed them.

Moreover, Romney is not a fantastic candidate. For heaven's sake, he was beaten by John McCain in 2008, when McCain was polling 6 percent and had no money in January. I agree that Romney has some very real strengths, and Obama's position continues to weaken. Our nominee, however, hasn't come anywhere near showing he's a closer. Think about how many times during the primaries we had surges and resurges by various challengers. Yes, Romney outlasted Michelle Bachmann (!), Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum (!), but is there any doubt that Rick Perry merely self-destructed?

In 1988 Michael Dukakis was up by 17 after the Democratic convention, and Democrats were wildly enthused about him. The first George Bush had the rep of being a wimpy laughing-stock. And we all know how that turned out.

We're not wearing gold-plated diapers yet.

Posted by: Nicholas Kronos at June 01, 2012 05:58 PM (UCR1O)

170

"Look, their ideas about cool are like Poochy from the Simpsons. Think of cool like what's permeated culture recently. Don Draper is handsome and kind of boring but cool.

So, you have poochy cool or Draper cool. Mitt is cool, you're just too much of a fucking nerd to know it."

You know what's cool? Having a fucking elevator just for your cars.

Posted by: Barack at June 01, 2012 06:01 PM (BEUA4)

171 No, this feels like the Jimmy Carter loss. The disastrous economy, the stark incompetency, the weirdness of Jimmy, and the comforting contrast of a candidate (amazingly ... Mittens) who gives every indication of knowing what he is doing.

Posted by: Tonawanda at June 01, 2012 06:16 PM (iuHbc)

172 I hope you're right, Tonawanda, but the country has changed since 1980. A lot (especially in terms of the number of those who look to the government to solve their problems).

Posted by: Nicholas Kronos at June 01, 2012 06:25 PM (UCR1O)

173 My Romney bumper sticker came in the mail today and it's already on the car!

Posted by: cheetah at June 01, 2012 07:13 PM (zXhtZ)

174 If Obama was running against a hypothetical opponent, you might be right. But, he's running against a real-life Republican. So, it's not a matter of choosing between Obama and someone who'll fix everything. It's a matter of choosing between Obama and someone with the same policies as the guy that got us into here.

When people listen to Romney, all they hear is attacks and the same tired, old plans. People hate Congress more than they hate Obama, and Romney sounds just like Congress.

Romney needs to present a fix to the US electorate. We're not going to vote him in because we hate Obama. Because we think Romney will be worse. Romney has to prove that he's more than Congress.

One way he could do this is to convince the House GOP to accept significant tax increases during the debt debate.

Posted by: Denver Dave at June 01, 2012 08:48 PM (Yi9lX)

175 Denver Dave, you obviously can't count past ten with your shoes on.

Honey, we have a Marxist ideologue who's never done a day's real work in his life, versus a very successful entrepreneurial businessman, and you SRSLY think [sic] that Romney will be worse?

Excuse me while I turn off my bullshit detector: it rang so hard it fell off my desk and punched a hole in the floor.

Posted by: Beverly at June 01, 2012 10:28 PM (IKmFk)

176 LOL at Denver Dave's "we." What you mean, "we," Kemo Sabe?

Posted by: lael at June 01, 2012 11:13 PM (T6tvG)

177 BO is slowly coming to the realization he is going to have to wag the dog before he barbecues it.

Posted by: Gary Rosen at June 02, 2012 12:22 AM (Kz60W)

178 "One way he could do this is to convince the House GOP to accept significant tax increases during the debt debate."

That will cement the base!

Posted by: Gary Rosen at June 02, 2012 12:23 AM (Kz60W)

179 Why I won't believe it until I see it: Did you know that AFTER Hank Johnson made a fool of himself with the whole Guam-might-tip-over crap, and the video of it got over 3 million hits at You Tube, he was re-elected with over 70% of the vote. Yup. Too many stupid people vote, so Obama will probably win unless every single one of us gets out there and votes for Romney.

Posted by: Jaynie59 at June 02, 2012 05:10 AM (4zKCA)

180 test

Posted by: at June 04, 2012 07:08 PM (NG097)

Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.

182kb generated in CPU 0.6611, elapsed 0.8236 seconds.
64 queries taking 0.7302 seconds, 308 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.