Andrew Sullivan: Did Obama Just Throw The Entire Election Away?
Submitted by Allegory on Tue, 10/09/2012 - 08:25The Daily Beast: The Pew poll is devastating, just devastating. Before the debate, Obama had a 51 - 43 lead; now, Romney has a 49 - 45 lead. That's a simply unprecedented reversal for a candidate in October. Before Obama had leads on every policy issue and personal characteristic; now Romney leads in almost all of them. Obama's performance gave Romney a 12 point swing! I repeat: a 12 point swing.
Romney's favorables are above Obama's now. Yes, you read that right. Romney's favorables are higher than Obama's right now. That gender gap that was Obama's firewall? Over in one night:
Currently, women are evenly divided (47% Obama, 47% Romney). Last month, Obama led Romney by 18 points (56% to 38%) among women likely voters.
Seriously: has that kind of swing ever happened this late in a campaign? Has any candidate lost 18 points among women voters in one night ever? And we are told that when Obama left the stage that night, he was feeling good. That's terrifying. On every single issue, Obama has instantly plummeted into near-oblivion. He still has some personal advantages over Romney - even though they are all much diminished. Obama still has an edge on Medicare, scores much higher on relating to ordinary people, is ahead on foreign policy, and on being moderate, consistent and honest (only 14 percent of swing voters believe Romney is honest). But on the core issues of the economy and the deficit, Romney is now kicking the president's ass:
- Login to post comments
Agreed!
Obama will be directed to take another fall during the second debate. Got to get Romney’s numbers perfectly tied with Obama’s. That way, weak-minded voters will once again be lured away from voting third party. If folks detect a landslide in the making, they may be tempted to vote their conscience rather than voting for the lesser of two evils. We can’t have that! Therefore, we need to tighten up this race—get people sitting on the edge of their seats—get some of you Ron Paul supporters to get in line and vote Obomney. After all, your vote could be the one that pushes Robama over the top. This is “the most important election in American history”—certainly no time to “throw away” your vote on Gary Johnson or by writing in Ron Paul or by conscientiously deciding to refrain from voting at all. No, you will vote for a Demoplican or Republicrat whether you like it or not, and you will do it with enthusiasm. Obey!
What the bankers want, the bankers get.
The bankers want a new puppet to move their agenda forward. Obama has burned through all of his political capital, so it's time for him to go. A fresh face and "hope and change" of a different sort is needed as another distraction while continuing along this path of totalitarian rule. In addition, the MSM is tired of defending Obama. They would rather go on the offense against "President" Romney, just writing that makes me sick.
Wonderful News!!!
I knew it was only a matter of time before swing voters would see B.H.O. for the empty suit he really is. I'm looking forward to the next debates. The Obama campaign and all their foot soldiers have pulled every card in the book. Particularly the race card and the Bush card have already worked all the magic they had in them.
Bye, bye Obama!
Obama's
indifference to Bibi is enough for me to favor him.
I don't vote though. Only for Ron Paul.
I'm not an Israeliphobe.
So, whether or not our president is indifferent or not to Israel's president is of no interest to me.
I am not and Israeliphobe either.
It is in my interest when most of my tax money is going to fight wars that benefit mostly Israel and warmongers. Meanwhile I am less safe and most importantly have far less freedoms.
So you take joy in the idea
So you take joy in the idea of a President Romney? Wow.
Of course!
A President Romney means no more President Obama. And no, they are not the same on every issue. Romney will keep this country's head above water long enough for us to educate enough sheeple on free markets.
More political engineering
Given how good a public speaker Obama is, it seems clear to me the bankers sat down with both candidates and told Obama to do poorly and gave Romney the green light to be aggressive. People just don't get that the elite control all of this.
Yep!
Took those words right outta my mouth!
Polling and lying
Remember who gets polled - people sitting at home on a landline. If there were a youth revolt brewing amongst the newly registered and independents, antwar progs and previous non-voters, they would never tell you.
Obama may have gone off the neocon reservation by backing down the drooling warmonger nutcase running Israel and disowning an attack on Iran (at least before the election). Wheels within mobius donuts. Maybe this is how they bring him back into line. Actually he has a JFK moment at hand if he wanted it, but you recall how that turned out.
"To the morally inverted, war appears as a quick, clear path to the top." -- Preston Parker
genevictus@hushmail.com
Read the comments
That people make about the debates, it's very sad that they fall for it hook line and sinker. It's a battle of personalities and they're falling right in talking about how Romney was the winner because he was more aggressive as the other party says Obama's the winner because his policies worked.
Does it matter?...
They're both imposter's..
Participate in America's future- Research Ron Paul- Truth will Prevail! You too, will be proud one day, to be able to say: "I was a Ron Paul supporter."
Only thing that matters
is that if Romney win we could have two terms of Romney whereas if Obama win we can only have one term of Obama. Otherwise your right it doesn't matter.
It is better to look dumb and not be, than to look smart and not be.
If Obama wins, we'll get another
Keynesian Democratic president in 2016. If the economy doesn't crash between 2016 and 2020, that new Democrat will get elected in 2020.
Who are you? Do you not know
Who are you? Do you not know that Romney is Keynesian too? The economy is crashing, and it will be obvious within a couple of years. Mathematically, it is a certainty. Do you really want the liberty movement associated with a failed Romney candidacy? Mark my words, the Liberty movement will be associated with Romney, even if he is a phony conservative.
I've looked at the "proof" that Romney is somehow a
closet Keynesian. It even had the Krugman himself drooling earlier this year. From what I can tell, Romney is not ideological at all. He's a the prototypical, stereotypical politician-pragmatist. He doesn't think we should cut a trillion dollars year one not because of some ideological belief, but, because he's not that economically literate. He accepts a lot of Conventional Conservative Economics and CCE still has a bad hangover with supply-siders and "conservative" Nixonian Keynesians. Thus, Romney's belief that cutting government spending, which would immediately cut about 5% GDP would cause us to go into a recession. He's probably right. Initially, we would face an economic setback, but, it would be over within a number of months as those assets and workers shifted into the private sector.
As to your "the economy is crashing," the Liberty movement can benefit from its crash BC, please read this article.
http://www.bastiatinstitute.org/2012/10/10/collapsaholics-so...
scripted debates
--fake polls
--fake elections
--black is white
--war is peace.
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
My website: http://www.libertypoet.com/
STAND WITH RAND 2016
Simple truth...
...in just a few words.
I posted it on Twitter in this way
@LibertyPoet
Scripted debates, fake polls, fake elections, black is white, war is peace #Obamney #RomneyFail #GoldmanSachsCandidates vs. @GovGaryJohnson
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
My website: http://www.libertypoet.com/
STAND WITH RAND 2016
10 minutes of the debate was all we could take
TV hadn't been on for a while and it didn't get much of a work out during the debate either.
We watched GJ online laughing a lot though.
DENY CONSENT
I believe that poll.
I have a niece who voted for Romney in the primaries because of his looks. She admitted it. I know someone else who said she voted for JFK back in '60 only because he was much better looking than Nixon. She was very young then and didn't follow politics but she voted nevertheless.
I don't think this is such a tiny minority. I'll bet there's a lot of uninformed swing voters who treat the election like it's American Idol.
Looks?
Maybe it's because I'm a guy, but I don't see Romney as being handsome. If you ask me, he resembles Herman Munster.
doesn't make any difference.
doesn't make any difference. BOTH douchebags are owned by the same corporate/banking elite.
Oh how I wonder, oh how I worry
And I would dearly like to know
How all this squander of earthly plunder
will leave us anything to show
Rollercoaster Ride
It will be an exciting roller-coaster ride from now until November 6th, when we get to find out which candidate has been selected by the elites to lead us further into oblivion.
Obama's performance was just too terrible to have been by accident.
That attitude is a real problem.
"The elites" don't choose the presidents. The ignorant American people choose the presidents. The media, controlled by the elites help the ignorant American people make the "right decision," but, other than that and political donations the elites can only rely that the American masses won't let them down with their ignorance.
Wrong!!!
The media and elites choose who the candidates will be in both parties. It doesn't matter then who wins the election since they are both owned by the elite.
Minnesota Mary
Vote fraud
Have you forgotten about vote fraud? Yes, I think that the elites will tweak the numbers, however necessary, to make the chosen candidate win, and always inject enough drama to bring the reflexive R and D voters back to the trough next election.
"The elites" choose both
"The elites" choose both candidates and destroy any third party support. Then we have votes flipping every which way or not even counted. That way they don't really have to worry about the people making the wrong choice, its all just a sham.
Apparently the lies worked on you....
because Obama's performance really wasn't that terrible, all things considered. Willard was a ranting, raving liar up there. But of course, Willard could have gone up on stage, taken a hot steaming dump, and walked off, and the media STILL would insist that he won that debate. They need people to keep watching and giving them ratings.
I don't play, I commission the league.