Romney heading for a Landslide Win

The Washington Times ^ | Friday, October 12, 2012 | Wayne Allen Root

[Senator Goldwater]

The news media are ignoring signs of mass disgust with Mr. Obama. In the West Virginia Democratic primary, a felon got 40 percent of the vote against Mr. Obama. In deep-blue Massachusetts and Connecticut, GOP Senate candidates are even or leading in recent polls. In pro-union Wisconsin, Scott Walker won by a country mile.

In 2008, Democrats controlled a majority of governorships. Today, Republicans control the majority of governorships. Presidential elections are always steered in each state by the party of the governor, the most powerful force in state politics.

After the 2010 census, electoral votes were added to states that usually lean Republican in elections: Texas, Florida, Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, South Carolina and Utah. Deep-blue states such as New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota and Massachusetts lost electoral votes.

Christians will turn out in record numbers this year. Mr. Obama has offended Christians repeatedly. Last election, 20 million evangelical Christians did not vote. They will turn out in record numbers in 2012 to defeat the most anti-Christian president in U.S. history. Just recall the long lines at Chick-fil-A in August.

Voter rolls have been purged in 2012 of felons and illegals in many states — particularly Florida and Ohio. Turnout of Democrats will be nothing like in 2008.

The “enthusiasm factor” for Mr. Romney is huge. Conservatives are focused, intense, motivated and enthusiastic. Democrats who turned out for Mr. Obama in record numbers in 2008 are demoralized. I know several people who voted for him in 2008 but won’t do so again.

Finally, history proves that a majority of undecided voters break for the challenger. Mr. Romney will take most of the undecided voters on Election Day — just as Ronald Reagan did against Jimmy Carter in 1980.

[The Fop]

No, it doesn’t dilute enthusiasm, it demoralizes the opposition. If one side is talking about landslides, and the other side is praying that they still have a shot at winning, the more cocky the confident side acts, the more Undecided voters will perceive their candidate as a winner, and the more dispirited the other side will be.

This is especially true since Obama’s whole re-election campaign is based on a media driven attempt to portray his victory as “inevitable”. Remember when Hillary was perceived as inevitable, and how quickly she fell once that perception
was no longer there?

I’m not saying that we should just sit back and not hustle. I’m saying that the combination of boots on the ground and a sincere belief that our side will win is a lethal combination.

[Jet Jaguar]

Poll ping.

[cgbg]

In this lefty corner of the world we can safely tell anyone we wish—none of them would believe us anyway!

[nathanbedford]

Let me see if I got this straight.

We should not predict a win for Romney by the evidence of our eyes such as the polls and the evidence cited by the author in this article because it will make potential Romney voters complacent and they will fail to go to the polls.

I suppose at the time when it appeared that Romney was behind we should have refrained from posting articles or making comments about those polls because it might discourage Romney voters who would refrain from voting.

It must be quite a trick knowing whether to encourage or discourage so we just do not say anything? We certainly cannot say anything intelligent if we do not know what is in the polls or what the arguments are. So are we just to shut up?

The problem with that is much of the discussion about those polls that had Romney behind was whether they were legitimate. It is very difficult to discuss the legitimacy of polls which are conditioning the mind of the electorate, not just conservatives or Republicans but liberals and Democrats and independents, without actually bringing up the polls. If we had not debunked the polls we would not know what we were talking about, we would not know if and when we are dealing with a relatively legitimate poll like Rasmussen.

If we do not know when a poll is legitimate we will not know whether in fact the electorate needs to be discouraged or if the electorate needs to be encouraged or what part of the electorate you think is in need of stimulus or sedative. We would not know where the hell we are.

The idea of this forum is that the give-and-take among thinking conservatives sooner or later gets us pretty close to the truth and to the truth of the facts. We cannot get there without give-and-take and we cannot get give-and-take unless we have the articles.

I trust conservatives as a group to get to the truth ultimately. I certainly do not trust conservatives or anybody else who form opinions without access to the facts.

I emphatically disagree with your admonition to Senator Goldwater and even more emphatically to your rebuke of him. I am thankful that he has posted this article and hope that he continues to post many more. I would prefer to be the judge of my own intellectual universe and not pass the red pencil of censorship to you.

Ultimately, we will never get the conservative victories the country indisputably needs if we fear the truth.

[bigoil]

‘So history is on Obama’s side sad to say.’

WRONGO.

In the past 124 years, every President, save one, who was elected to their first term as President in a year ending in an ‘8’ has lost re-election. The lone exception was Richard Nixon who was forced to resign two years after re-election.

In 1888, Benjamin Harrison was elected to his first term as President. He was defeated by Grover Cleveland in 1892.

In 1908, William Howard Taft was elected to his first term as President. He was defeated by Woodrow Wilson in 1912.

In 1928, Herbert Hoover was elected to his first term as President. He was defeated by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1932.

Harry S. Truman was already the sitting President in 1948 so his election as President was not his first term.

In 1968, Richard Nixon was elected to his first term as President. He was re-elected in 1972 only to resign in 1974.

In 1988, George HW Bush was elected to his first term as President. He was defeated by Bill Clinton in 1992.

In 2008, Barak Obama was elected to his first term as President. He WILL be defeated by Mitt Romney in 2012.

[1010RD]

Be ready for new and harsher attacks on the EC as these socialist states continue to lose population and EC votes. Every government school teacher grooms their wards to hate the EC as an unnecessary relic and roadblock to real democracy.

[Fresh Wind]

Wow, you should have warned us to have a bucket ready!

[LS]

I would add that unlike both Obama and Palin in 08 , Romney's campaign is NOT "Personality driven," and really it's not even "issue driven" ---though many of us would prefer that it was. Rather, it is ORGANIZATION driven and that (and $) has always been Romney's strength as a businessman. Emotion and adoring crowds are nice, but I got news for everyone. Romney's organization was in place LAST SUMMER, already had the precincts organized, and the walker scalers enlisted. They were determined to kick Obama out no matter what Romney did or didn't do. It has been a thing of beauty.

Point is, they weren't depressed a month ago when polls were bad, and they haven't changed their operations now that Mitt is up.

[mo]

Ya can’t screw up BOTH foreign and domestic policy and win re-election.

Until Benghazi....it was a close race. Now....a blow-out.

[nathanbedford]

Good point.

Romney is the ultimate button-down organization man and he is systematically dismantling the Obama apparatus. What we did not expect was such a bravura performance in the first debate. That was simply off the scale in terms of style and substance.

As the debate occurs tonight it will be interesting to see if Romney can maintain anything like that high level of performance irrespective of Obama's performance. If Obama is abusing drugs, a possibility which is purely speculative on my part but which goes a long way towards explaining much of his method of governing and his appalling lapses in the first debate, his handlers and enablers will be under terrible pressure to get the dosage just right so that he is functioning for precisely the 90 min when he is on stage. Too much too late and he makes an ass of himself, too little too soon and he goes underwater again. They must get his dosage exactly right at exactly the right time.

I am now taking off my tinfoil hat.

[TADSLOS]

I am now taking off my tinfoil hat.

Given the depth and expansiveness of Obama's shady past, combined with his abysmal record in office and treating the White House experience like his own private Versailles, you have no need to pin yourself as a conspirancy nut.

[LS]

Not tinfoil at all. This guy misses meetings, plays golf, his wife is almost never around him, it wouldn’t surprise me at all.

[Senator Goldwater]

Well said, Lt. Gen. Forrest.

[Senator Goldwater]

See post 1.