Posted on 08/23/2012 12:05:04 PM PDT by QT3.14
When you squint your eyes and look only at the broad historical trends at play in this presidential election, all signs point to a victory for Mitt Romney in November.
Back in February, the Signal's first draft of its elections model, which relied only on historical data, predicted that Obama would win the election with 303 electoral votes. This model relies heavily on economic indicators and was published before the dismal second quarter economic figures. If you apply that same model through June, Romney wins with 290 electoral votes to Obama's 248.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
You sound like my brother, but he’s not in Texas!
I see nothing to like about an arrogant, narcissistic dictator. If someone wants to pretend that that statement is racist I don’t particularly care.
Sorry, but FDR isn’t a valid comparison.
In 1932 the unemployment rate was 23.6, in 1936 it was 16.9. and in 1940 it was 14.6 and in 1944 it was 1.4
NO PRESIDENT , NONE has presided over a term where FEWER AMERICANS, were working on the day their term ended than the day they took office, since HERBERT HOOVER, and he didn’t get 40% of the popular vote during his re-election bid.
Unemployment rates were slightly higher in 1956 re-election of Eisenhower, and the 1972 re-election of Nixon and the 2004 re-election of Bush. But the number of americans WORKING was HIGHER, due to population growth (and the unemployment rate deltas were about 2% max. NONE since HOOVER have faced re-election with fewer working the day they took office than the day their term ended since Hoover. And Obama’s facing a 4-5% increase in the uneployment rate numbers as well.
Obama will face the same fate Hoover... He cannot get over 42-43% of the popular vote on his best day, and reality is, he very well could not get 40%.
You can’t spit shine this turd. All he has are the kool aid drinking leftists. He can’t win.
This is the first I heard that Nixon was being pressured by Ike and wanted a recount. At any rate, especially if that’s so, he conceded with class and decency. Compare that with Al Gore in 2000 and since, and you can plainly see the difference. May he never hold another public office.
Sometimes, but it is rare, people outside Texas think like a Texan. Your brother must be one of those.
now if I could just find my law degree ...lost it with the guns in the boating mishap. ;)
More significantly, FDR won in 1940. Even with the power of tradition “only two terms”, working against him.
I don't think that conservatives should want Romney to win big. Ideally, you want Tea Party conservatives all up and down the ticket to win big and Romney to squeak through. Even Romney supporters would have to realize that Mitt got in only because he wasn't Obama but what the people want is the Tea Party agenda. If Romney wins big, he will declare a mandate, and he will govern as he wants which would be bad news for conservatism and the country.
It must be abundantly clear to Mitt Romney that he needs the conservatives in order to govern. If he doesn't feel that pressure, Romney will just form a left-of-center coalition with the RINOs and Democrats and govern from where he wants to be anyway. He'll then run his re-election campaign as the Great Reconciler who saved the nation from the "Radical Right".
It has been reported that Mitt Romney may have his own form of "Bradley Effect" - polling higher than final vote totals. Like the race issue with Bradley and Wilder, some people may be reluctant to tell pollsters that they won't vote for Romney because of his Mormonism.
Personally, I doubt that factor will come into play. As you may have noted, there is absolutely no reluctance to express an anti-Mormon bias among the anti-Romney forces on Free Republic.
This segment of the voting public wears their anti-Mormonism on their sleeve -- they wouldn't hide it from a pollster.
They probably fit in the "undecided" or "somebody else" segment of most polling samples.
Tri-State area?
If he wins Maine and CT he wins NH easily, period.
NJ but not PA is also fairly batty.
He could afford to miss either OH or Va if he wins enough smaller states but likley not both.
I think a likely result if all goes well is (note red for Obama) 302-236
I tossed in ME-02 though I'm not sure of that. This configuration would allow a bare victory without both OH AND VA but I don't think that is likely to occur. OH and VA are the ballgame.
First of all: there are very very few BO bumper stickers in my deep-blue area.
Second, two observations today on public transit:
First one was a guy on his cell phone openly discussing buying ammunition. A clean-cut regular guy, mid-twenties. He didn't look at all concerned about who was overhearing him.
Second one was a girl, also in her twenties, reading "The Land That Could Be: Environmentalism and Democracy in the Twenty-First Century".
How people will vote is going (in my neighborhood) to be between people like that, if they show up at the polls.
if we give Obabi OH and VA, which of the others states is GOP most likely to lose? IA CO NV?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.