Skip to comments.Dick Morris: Romney Should Win in a Landslide
Posted on 05/11/2012 8:12:06 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
If the election were held today, Mitt Romney would win by a landslide.
The published polls reflect a close race for two reasons:
1. They poll only registered voters, not likely voters. Rasmussen is the only pollster who tests likely voters, and his latest tracking poll has Romney ahead by 48-43.
2. As discussed in previous columns, a study of the undecided voters in the past eight elections in which incumbents sought a second term as president reveals that only Bush-43 gained any of the undecided vote. Johnson in 64, Nixon in 72, Ford in 76, Carter in 80, Reagan in 84, Bush in 92 and Clinton in 96 all failed to pick up a single undecided vote.
So when polls show President Obama at 45 percent of the vote, they are really reflecting a likely 55-45 Romney victory, at the very least.
Gallup has amassed over 150,000 interviews over all of 2011 and compared them with a like number in 2010. It finds that Obama has a better than 50 percent job approval in only 10 states and the District of Columbia. And his approval has dropped in almost every single state. Even in California, it has fallen from 55 percent in 2010 to 50.5 percent in 2011.
Over the period of May 4-6, I completed a poll of 400 likely voters in Michigan and found Romney leading by 45-43! And Michigan is one of the most pro-Democrat of the swing states.
I also found that Obamas personal favorability, which has usually run about 10 to 20 points higher than his job approval, is now equal to his job rating. In Michigan, his personal favorability among likely voters is 47-47, while his job rating is 50-48. Romneys favorability is 49-42.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
America deserves a blowout, Willard doesn’t.
Morris must think a real conservative is running and not the jerk Romney who is.
I don’t like Willard.
But a cons friend of mine explained that he’s much closer to our side than the anti-American fraud currently occupying the WH. So I have to vote for him if he’s the R nom.
Anyone here that has followed Morris knows he's been notoriously wrong. And he HAS
Not terribly. He tends to exaggerate his points. I wouldn't dismiss what he says but I would want others confirming it.
He predicted a Senate takeover.
Look at the other replies on this thread. Similar to what I said
I thought it was Hillary and Giuliani, which actually was the pre-Iowa conventional wisdom from inside the Beltway in '08.
Morris knows how to read polls.
Where he goes wrong is when he extends himself to conjecture far afield from that. (E.g, Hillary vs. Condi in 2008)
He also predicted Trump would run...
Predicted Condi vs. Hillary for Pres in '08. I could go on an on.
My gosh, man - GET A GRIP!!
Don’t you know where you are? This is FreeRepublic: you cannot seriously suggest here that there might be any future ahead for Romney. We’re talking Romney - you know, ROMNEY! What, are you a troll, delusional, a cretin, or some sort of anti-American subversive?
Get with the program, fellow. If some pundit suggests Romney may have a chance, or - Heaven forbid - might have a good quality or two, that pundit must be smeared. MUST BE SMEARED! Get it?
Unfortunately, it was Hillary and Condi. He actually wrote a book about it: Condi Vs. Hillary: The Next Great Presidential Race
I wish Morris was right on this. I think Romney's gonna win but I don't see a landslide happening. It's going to be a nail-biter.
I think claiming he prediced 100 seats is a stretch.
What’s the difference? On Hannity, he actually said 100.
Everyone else was predicting 35 to 40. I think he was actually the most accurate.
Coulda, Shoulda, Woulda.
OK, fair point. Thanks. But he’s been way wrong on so many other predictions. Wish he was right.
He was VERY wrong about the Senate in the 2010 election, but anyway Dick, shut up—why fire up THEIR base with this idiocy?