Posted on 09/09/2012 9:44:24 PM PDT by Steelfish
Mitt Romney's Ohio Problem By Z. Byron Wolf
ABC OTUS News - Mitt Romney's Ohio Problem (ABC News) Forget post-convention bounces - the numbers that really matter are in the battleground states, where President Obama's polling advantage is more concerning to Mitt Romney's team than any national numbers. No Republican has ever won the presidency without winning Ohio, and Romney isn't in a strong position to become the first.
According to ABC News' latest race ratings, President Obama is in strong position for 237 electoral votes, when leaning and solid Democratic states and combined. Mitt Romney has only 206 votes he can expect in his column, as of now.
Add in Ohio's 18 electoral votes, though, and Obama stands at 255 - within striking distance of the magic number of 270. Romney would need to win nearly every other battleground state - a list that includes Paul Ryan's Wisconsin, once thought to be safely Democratic - to pull out the presidency without Ohio.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I am not going to back up the previous claim. The report came from Politico and aynonomos sources within Romney campaign so take it with a grain of salt. The bigger news is Obama released fundraising in Aug. of 114 million. Yes it was close Romney raised 111. Super pacs will outspend Dems but it is not like the primary where Romney had a significant advantage. This was before conventions.
All those threads about burn rate and Obama spending too much early are now obsolete.
You can’t polish a turd. There is very little that Romney’s campaign operatives have done that isn’t perfectly consistent with what Romney himself says and does. There’s no one to replace, because the people running the show, in charge and at the top of the Republican party are running exactly the kind of campaign they always wanted to, the kind where they cower in fear at the liberal media and try carefully not to offend them or their politically correct sensibilities.
The only replacement options we have are bottom-up from the grass roots, but it’s too late to affect the current election with that. If Romney wins it will be because ANYONE could’ve beaten Obama, not because of anything Romney said or did.
Ah yes those mysterious Republican internal polls. Been hearing alot about them today.....with no back up
Re: FLASHBACK: DUKAKIS +17 OVER BUSH AFTER DNC 1988
_________________
The scariest part is that every example given so far have been of challengers from Massachusetts who ultimately lost the election.
The second scariest part is that to debunk current polling data of a particular poll, 25 year old examples are used instead of other current polling data actually showing Mitt Romney ahead.
You can tell the left is all over the internet tonight planting seeds of a Romeny collapse. Their mistake is that many of them are not creative enough to be careful with their message hence you get this: “Romney should be up 10 points in this election”. I’ve seen this “talking point” in many posts here tonight, but also on several other sites too.....this is a set-up folks. Don’t buy into it.
Yeah well, everybody who has disagreed with this polling data in the above article have yet to prove it incorrect and DEMAND that others who believe it to back it up.
In the meantime instead of proving the data wrong with current polling data from somewhere else they6 are posting polling data from 1988 and 2004 elections.
Very telling
Huge difference between Dukakis & Romney. One never ran a business or worked for a profit making private sector outfit. The other spent 25 years in real world main street economy with successful results.
The only thing helping Obama is the 48 million food stamps people, teachers unions, trial lawyers, government workers unions, millions of Medicaid recipients, 25 million collecting disability, 99’ers (99 weeks of unemployment checks), free breakfast & lunches in school, rent subsidies, heat subsidies, aid to dependent children aka welfare, and 95% of blacks who are always yelling racial prejudice.
When you consider all of above, Romney is doing remarkably well.
Another piece of evidence that Obama is in trouble is the MSM and liberals going bat$hit crazy. Look at Chris Matthews. Not that he wasn't insane before, but if Obama had this thing locked up Chrissy and his fellow travelers wouldn't be so off in straight jacket land.
Romney SHOULD be up 10% in this election at this point.
I’m no leftist. Thank God FreeRepublic has a tool which allows users to read back into the history of other “leftist” Freepers. I suggest you learn how to use it.
Lol, did I mention you by name ? Fact is I’m seeing this “talking point” all over the net. Pretty much the same language. All at the same time. Not difficult to figure out what is going on here.
“Weak” candidates don’t raise over $100 million in a month.
Like it was said at Romney's convention...
"Real leaders do not follow polls. Real leaders change polls."
Well, it's time Romney make his and prove his worth as the nominee and change these polls.
He should be ahead by double digits by now. Voter fraud will eat up some of those numbers that appear to be on his side.
No, but you quoted me and tagged leftist to that quote.
"Romney should be ahead by at least 10% points by now"
That's not leftist thinking. That's reality.
As Chris Christie said: "Real leaders do not follow polls. Real leaders change polls."
It's time Romney start changing the polls.
Who other than Romney would have a real chance to win this year? Santorum? Newt? Please
Could you explain how Romney has a “charisma deficit?” Bob Dole, John McCain, Newt Gingrich=”charisma deficit.” I don’t see it with Mitt.
I refuse to believe all of the liberal pundits just because they say things over and over again. Especially when they say Obama is so “likable” and never mention why he is so “likable.” What is so “likable” about this guy?
No....I did not quote you in any direct manner....I observed that this “10 point” quote was showing up all over FR tonight as well as all over the internet. That’s not an accident. It shows the classic dis-information planting that is often done by political groups when they want to get a message out.
Let me teach you something.
It would not be to the benefit of the democrats or “leftists” to be publically stating that “Romney should be ahead by 10% by now”
What are they saying about their own candidate with such a statement?
Imagine back in 2004 if republicans would be posting “John Kerry should be ahead by 10 points by now” What would we be saying about our own candidate by such a statement?
I have no idea how you can tag anyone a leftist or an Obama supporter by claiming that their candidate should be down 10 points by now. It does not make sense.
Here’s my philosophy:
I question the motives of anyone who claims to be a Romney supporter yet implies Romney’s really ahead, not to worry. Heck, he’s so far ahead he does not even need your vote so just don’t believe those polls showing Obama ahead. He’s losing BIG TIME.
Okay, so I guess their message is “no need to work harder”.
Better to play it safe and believe all polls that have Obama ahead. The worst that could happen is Romney will win in a 49 state landslide.
I would hate to think of what the results would be for those claiming that all polls showing Romney behind are lies. Move on, nothing to see here. Maybe an Obama landslide?
Play it safe. Use the data to benefit our side. Does that make sense to you?
I’m not taking any vacations anytime soon from this election. But it’s time those telling us Romney’s got it in the bag go and take one. They disturb me.
We did not win in 2004 or 2010 using that “nothing to see here” philosophy. We took all bad news seriously.
I’ve been in the political game a long, long time at the state & federal level. I’ve worked with GOP governors & U.S. Senators. When I see a “talking point”used by several different posters on the same evening on a forum such as this & then see that same “talking point” being used on other forums all over the internet then it’s safe to say something is up. I’m not the only person on FR this evening who senses a dis-information effort in the works comcernng some of the postings we are seeing here in the last day or two.
So, basically we should flood Twitter by stating that “Romney should be down 10& points by now” and that will gain him votes.
I don’t buy it.
Please explain how that works
Did you sense the fact that every comment trying to debunk the above polling data in the article never posted a poll which debunks that article but instead all they posted was data from 1988 and 2004?
If this poll is wrong (and I have no idea that it is or is not) you would think the first thing posted in the comments would be polling data from somewhere else that proves the numbers to be wrong.
Did you sense that lack of rebuttal? I noticed it quickly. And you know what? These people are not stupid. I've been in Free Republic long enough to know that if there was a poll out there (even a cBS or MSNBC poll) proving this one above to be wrong, THEY WOULD HAVE POSTED IT before comment #3.
But no, instead they take us to a 1988 poll Dukakis vs Bush1
C'mon now! It may not be dis-information but sure is spin.
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.