delusional thinking all around
“Based on what Ive been able to learn, this, from Mark Halperin, is as accurate a depiction of how the Obama team views the final stretch of the race as anything Ive seen...”
Everything that follows amounts to misinformation.
From the rear, I hope......
Greg Sarget is Nate Silver’s catcher - who cares what he has to say?
Let’s not celebrate Obama’s defeat quite yet. We need to win every close race down ticket and GOTV is critical.
Have you all been to your local Republican Victory Center to support candidates in close races? Make calls as they make the difference and many races will come down to small percentages (I wish I’d worked for Norm Coleman prior to the vote, don’t you?)
Do a quick search and call them. They need help in these swing states and not just for Romney. We need to elect the most conservative Congress we can.
The reality is quite the opposite, Obama is obliged to sweep the board or lose. Which position would you rather be in, needing to win one state or defend five? Recent polls show that Romney is moved ahead in New Hampshire and Iowa.
This from a post about a half an hour ago:
I think the significance of moving ahead in New Hampshire becomes clear when it is coupled with Romney moving ahead in Iowa. Those two states in Romney's camp means that Obama must run the table on all the rest: Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nevada.
Romney is by common consent at least tied in Ohio but Republican intensity and Romney's near two to one advantage among independents should carry Ohio. But if Ohio fails,
Wisconsin is a very plausible win for Romney. One week ago on 18 October Rasmussen had Obama +2 but was a 4.5 MOE, however, Obama had achieved 50%. Nevertheless, Scott Walker beat the recall by about 7% and I think we will see the same positive forces at work in Wisconsin for Romney and it will mirror Ohio intensity and independent strength for Romney.
Pennsylvania remains a possibility. Pollsters anchored in Pennsylvania are much more favorable to Romney but all the national pollsters including Rasmussen have Obama about the same +5. It is unlikely that Romney will take Pennsylvania without Ohio but it is conceivable that the saturation bombing by Obama in Ohio might freeze the electorate in his favor while Pennsylvania is free to move with Romney momentum felt elsewhere across the nation where the negative ads and not been so intense.
An oddsmaker looking at this picture would have to say as he counts seven states that Obama must sweep that the odds collectively mount against him. For example, the pollsters have Obama up by RCP average 2.7% with Rasmussen having Obama +2% in Nevada. That means that Nevada is easily within Romney's reach and it would take very little to tip this state. When mixed and with other states, such as Wisconsin, the cumulative odds look good for Romney.
We have considered Republican intensity and independent proclivity but we have not talked about momentum. If Romney retains any part of the momentum he has enjoyed since the first debate he could easily take Nevada, Ohio, and Wisconsin. The Democrats are talking up an Obama resurgence after the third debate but I think most of that is air while the movement towards Romney is "secular" and any reaction to the third debate favoring Obama will be a limited short-term bounce. There are chartists and there are fundamentalists among traders and investors. If we stop being chartists for a moment and look at the fundamentals, I think there is a momentum shift which economists would call "secular" in Romney's favor because the economy practically mandates a change in government. The whole nation, like the whole stock market, is shifting away from a losing proposition. It is a paradigm shift changing the whole dynamic of the race against which Obama's performance in the last debate, even viewed in its best light, is insufficient to counter.