First, the polls: The AP just released a poll purporting to show that Obama is ahead of Romney nationally by 1%. . . one little percentage point. But at least he’s ahead, right? Well, maybe not. This poll was biased toward the Democrats by +8%!!! How significant is this? In 2008, the electorate was +7% for the Democrats. So for this poll to be accurate, more Democrats and fewer Republicans would need to turn out than turned out in the Democratic-wave’s high-water mark. That ain’t happenin’.
It sounds to me like Romney is several percent ahead.
But we all know that national polls don’t matter. State by state polls are what matter. So get this, Rasmussen and Gallup both have Romney ahead now in Michigan and Wisconsin. In Michigan, Romney’s lead is surprisingly strong – 48% to 44%. In Wisconsin, Romney leads by 1%, though other polls have him higher. Romney also is even or ahead in these battleground states: Ohio, Colorado, Virginia, Florida and Iowa. The handwriting may not be on the wall yet, but somebody just whipped out an enormous crayon!
Finally, I leave you with this. The AP put out the photo below this week, causing all kinds of people to wonder what exactly the AP is thinking? Was this an intentional sleight of Obama or just sheer incompetence? You make the call (in the comments). Plus, give us your favorite caption(s)! Have at it!
121 comments:
"Obama is the face of the Democratic Party."
"TOTUS, speaking to his closest advisors on how to connect with people"
on a related topic, the DOJ filed a lawsuit against Gallup for some "unrelated" contract issue. They overestimate the cost of some work they were contracted to do. Just in time so they can make Gallup's numbers look suspect...
"Oh nice that TOTUS wears a suit and tie (well at least tie)! Does it have a tuxedo for more formal events?"
"Who is that guy standing behind the President?"
I just saw this at The Weekly Standard.
_______________________________________
Michelle Obama, speaking yesterday at a campaign event in Florida:
"So that one new voter that you register in your precinct -- think about it -- that one neighbor that you get to the polls on November the 2 I want you to understand, that could be the one that makes the difference. That one conversation, that one new volunteer you recruit, that could be the one that puts this over the top."
The presidential election this year is November 6.
______________________________________
Uh, and WE laugh at Biden. Maybe we are laughing at the wrong person?
Hey Joel, SSSSHHHHH, maybe no one will notice and they'll all show up on Nov 2. When the polls are closed they'll think the election is over...
I can't think of a caption. The photo says it all. Hilarious!
Oh, and did anybody hear about the NBC/WSJ poll that has blacks favoring Obama over Romney by 94% to 0%? None of the pundits reacting seems sure whether it's ridiculous or disturbing.
tryanmax,
Is there a link?
Bev, I saw that. Anyone wanna bet this is meant to intimidate them to make sure they're polling stays "fair"?
tryanmax, Honestly, that doesn't surprise me.
Given that the AP is frequently about as intelligent and competent as Obama, I'm going to say that photo was unintentional.
“I Barry…I mean Barack Hussein Obama.” The sycophant audience dutifully ads, “hmm-hmm-hmm.” Barry now with his Mussolini chin up continues to read his teleprompter, “ Promise. Oh no, someone else has fainted, do we have a “corpse”-man here. Can somebody in the press “corpse” get some help here!” Barry thinks to himself, “whoever wrote this speech really likes to use corps, weird?” Everybody in the audience, now somewhat confused, no one had fainted, and what in the Hell is a “corpse”-man. But being the loyal myrmidons that they are, began a fierce chant of, “four more years, four more years…” Barry now buoyed with himself continues his mesmerizing speech, “Hmm…umm…ah…um…”
"My Fellow Americans
You can't judge me on what has happened in the pass. I am a blank slate with a new agenda to get this country going....."
tryanmax, I call bullcrap on that one. The black vote is one-sided, but it's not that one-sided.
T-Rav, I can't imagine it's totally unintentional because someone loaded it into the system -- I would think most photographers would have dumped that one.
Still, it's pretty funny.
Lawhawk, TOTUS is the face of the Democratic party! LOL!
Patriot, But which one is TOTUS? Do you think TOTUS is arguing with POTUS?
I like Joel's:
"Who is that guy standing behind the President?"
Bev, I saw that. Excellent point. Gallup starts to show Obama in trouble and amazingly, here comes DOJ to accuse Gallup of fraud.
In the past, I wouldn't have seen this as political, but this administration has shown it has no qualms about using DOJ for political purposes, so I don't doubt this is meant as intimidation or to discredit Gallup.
Bev, LOL! I love the idea that TOTUS can wear a suit and tie! :)
Joel, LOL! Brilliant!
Joel, Rather than not laughing at Biden, let's just laugh at them all. They're all idiots. Seriously, this entire administration is low-brainpower. Apparently our Kenyan Overlord himself misspelled Ohio the other day! How is that even possible?
Bev, Good point! LOL! Let's hope they all turn out on the wrong day! :)
tryanmax, It is a pretty stunning photo isn't it?
It makes me think of wishful thinking by the Democrats who've turned against Obama:
"Insert Candidate Here."
Great news on the polls! I think things are looking up indeed!
Joel, If you just google "Poll Blacks 94%" you'll find lots of articles.
Andrew - Obama didn't even know how many states there were in 2008, so the fact the he think there is a OIHO should not surprise anyone. Maybe he thought he was in OAHU? Or maybe it was "Get Out The Dyxlexics Vote" day i Ohio? Who can tell since they will be voting on Nov 2 anyway...
tryanmax and Joel, That result doesn't surprise me actually. I would assume that finding blacks would be difficult in this country unless you specifically target black areas -- like inner cities. So it probably makes more sense to pollsters to call places like DC or known black neighborhoods in Chicago or Baltimore than it does to randomly call suburban Salt Lake City or Phoenix and hope to find blacks.
That means, you're calling liberal areas to begin with. In my experience, when people clump together, they tend to share the same ideology because it's expected. And those who don't share the ideology tend to leave. So I would bet that most conservative blacks have left those areas.
So it doesn't surprise me at all that they didn't find any conservative blacks because they called areas where there wouldn't be any.
tryanmax,
I didn't find the original raw numbers. I am starting to think they are figuring out that we aren't trusting their polls. We actually look at the raw numbers and come up with our own conclusions. ;-)
Bev, LOL! True. Maybe he thought he was in one of the forgotten seven states?
Good point about the dyslexic vote. Maybe they're a bigger voting block than we realized?
DUQ, I'd call it an attempt to intimidate or discredit.
Stan, They could well be singing the Barack Obama song!
Indi, This truly takes the blank slate idea too far! LOL!
T-Rav, It sounds like sampling error. Also, don't be surprised if Obama does get 94-96% of the black vote.
rlaWTX, Wouldn't it be great if they took away his TOTUS? Could you imagine the idiocy we could enjoy?
I can't come up with a caption! Ahhh!
Terry, It is excellent news. I'm starting to see Romney build a slow and steady lead in the polls in key areas. And when you factor out the poll bias, it gets even stronger. I think Obama is in serious trouble.
Joel, I've noticed that lately the raw data is disappearing more and more so you can't do your own analysis of the accuracy of the polls.
Terry, No need... the photo speaks for itself. :)
Andrew, That's an interesting observation about the WashPo poll. That could well be right.
On the other polls, I'm starting to agree that Romney appears to be pulling ahead. This is finally good news.
I don't put much stock in these things, but a group yesterday that uses "scientific models" or whatever to get their results announced that based on their predictions, Romney will win with about 53% of the vote and 320 electoral votes, give or take 20. I find this a bit hard to believe, as they were predicting not only Pennsylvania but Minnesota would go in the GOP column. On the other hand, they've been right every round since 1980, so maybe?
"See, I told you I was a blank slate. Now, whip out your crayon, and color me any way you want."
Ed, I see tons of evidence building for a blowout, except in the topline numbers on biased polls. I think we're looking at a blow out.
T-Rav, Do you have a link to that?
That is actually about what I expect actually -- 53% to 47% and around 302 votes, though I don't see Romney winning Minnesota.
Jen, That's what he ran as the first time for sure -- the see anything you want in my candidate.
Sadly for him, that won't work this time.
Andrew, here's the story. LINK
Yeah, I don't see Minnesota going our way either, but that would fit within the margin of error, with plenty to spare. And the latest poll has Romney down by only two in Nevada, which was supposedly reliably blue.
Thanks T-Rav! Interesting article and, frankly, I agree with their conclusions. I think the economy will decide this election and the economy tells me Obama is doomed.
Plus, I think there is added intensity this time because of ObamaCare, which can't be factored into their model which makes this even more likely.
Andrew and T-Rav, I think he's right. I have no proof, but like Andrew says, everything seems to point in that direction.
The image reminds of when they put black bars over people's face to hide them.
"We're so good at...uh...rewriting history, even you can join in on the fun. If you see any of my poll numbers at 43%, just take that crayon of yours, and change the '3' to an '8'. It's just that easy, but, please don't try it with an ink pen, you might hurt yourself".
Ed, I see the evidence everywhere, so I'm pretty confident. It would be very strange for people to dislike everything about Obama's policies, the economy and their own well being, and then turn around and still vote for him.
Kelly, It does look that way doesn't it! LOL!
We should all him the Suspect of the United States -- SOTUS. Or the Suspect President -- SPOTUS.
Jen, Obama's supporters should never be allowed to handle sharp objects.
POTUS....TOTUS....FLOTUS.....CHOTUS....MILOTUS I just can't keep up any more!
When looking at polls, I always look at how the question is phrased. Ex: "Do you agree with the President's plan to lower tax rates on the working poor?" or "Do you favor the Romney plan on lowering tax rates on millionaires and billionaires?"
There is bias inherent in any poll.....and since we are in the silly season, people are starting to take a hard look at the polls again. With the internet, we are now seeing analysis that explains in much more detail than the mainstream media idiots used to do, and have a better grasp on how they can be manipulated to produce whatever result is expected (or paid for).
My cynicism and skepticism on this issue knows no bounds.
Actually.....Does anyone know what the "INTRADE" betting is on the race? They seem to be closer to reality than some of these mainstream pollsters.
Patriot, I agree. There is so much opportunity for bias in polling and the polling firms take full advantage of this because most them are looking to drive the narrative rather than report the state of things. One reason I trust Rasmussen is because he's seems to try to do it right, without bias. Compare that with someone like PPP who is openly shading results to get what they want.
And for the record, after PPP showed Akin ahead, today's polls show him 10% behind. That's more likely.
INTRADE - Obama 57.2% Romney 41.7%
Ughhhhhh
INTRADE has Obama with a 57% chance of being re-elected. I would take that bet. There is no way he wins.
Patriot, Yeah, I would ignore INTRADE. I don't think it's reliable this far out.
Andrew.....like any OTB shop, INTRADE fluctuates up until the bet is off. i agree that we are too far out to bet on this right now
At this point flipping a coin would provide a much more reliable result....!
I think this clown TOTUS has pissed off just about every demographic out there. I really don't see him strutting over the finish line. Slinking out of town would be more like it.
Patriot, I agree. Until the race firms up and the trend becomes clear, the bettors won't have any better idea than a coin flip.
I'm looking at all the other stuff that tells us indirectly what people are thinking and I think it's clear the voters will choose Romney. But who knows what the people placing bets are looking at? If they look at the polling data, they probably think Obama has a solid chance. And if they look at the electoral votes he has firmly in his pocket (like California) then it seems like he's sure to win -- until you realize that he isn't likely to win anything he doesn't already firmly control.
Patriot, I think even worse than having pissed people off, he's turned them off. Anger can subside, indifference doesn't recover. I think moderates are simply done with him. And unless Romney pulls an Akin, those people have already decided to vote for Romney and are now just going about their lives until election day.
Andrew......I think the biggest factor in this race will be base turnout. I haven't seen the Repub base this eager to vote since....ever!
I don't see the same enthusiasm and drive on the Dem base anywhere. The greatest example of this was a few months back when O just kicked off his campaign and MSNBC or CNN or one of the usual suspects had a spokesidiot on for him, and she sat there, mouthing the platitudes and slogans with absolutely zero emotion...."We are fired up.....ready to go....." in the most dull, monotone I've ever heard.
Now that I think about it, I don't think I've seen or heard from that person since!
Patriot, I agree. I see the enthusiasm on our side everywhere. I can't go to the grocery store without hearing people mention the number of days left until November. I see it in the Chick-Fil-A turn out. I see it in the signs businesses are putting up and the t-shirts people are starting to wear. I have never seen the conservative side this engaged.
At the same time, I see NOTHING from the left. They aren't rallying, they don't seem enthusiastic, the people who normally spout off about how great the left is are silent. I went to Denver yesterday (about 50 minute drive) into the heart of liberal Colorado and I saw ONE Obama bumpersticker. In the past, I would have seen thousands. Yesterday I saw one.
That tells me a lot.
Andrew....I think these "moderates" of which you speak are really the Libertarian contingent out there.
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means" (Inigo Montoya)
And since they lean conservative.......O is toast
Reaplce Humperdink with Obama and Wesley with Romney and this is perfect:
Prince Humperdinck: First things first, to the death.
Westley: No. To the pain.
Prince Humperdinck: I don't think I'm quite familiar with that phrase.
Westley: I'll explain and I'll use small words so that you'll be sure to understand, you warthog faced buffoon.
Prince Humperdinck: That may be the first time in my life a man has dared insult me.
Westley: It won't be the last. To the pain means the first thing you will lose will be your feet below the ankles. Then your hands at the wrists. Next your nose.
Prince Humperdinck: And then my tongue I suppose, I killed you too quickly the last time. A mistake I don't mean to duplicate tonight.
Westley: I wasn't finished. The next thing you will lose will be your left eye followed by your right.
Prince Humperdinck: And then my ears, I understand let's get on with it.
Westley: WRONG. Your ears you keep and I'll tell you why. So that every shriek of every child at seeing your hideousness will be yours to cherish. Every babe that weeps at your approach, every woman who cries out, "Dear God! What is that thing," will echo in your perfect ears. That is what to the pain means. It means I leave you in anguish, wallowing in freakish misery forever.
Prince Humperdinck: I think you're bluffing.
Westley: It's possible, Pig, I might be bluffing. It's conceivable, you miserable, vomitous mass, that I'm only lying here because I lack the strength to stand. But, then again... perhaps I have the strength after all.
[slowly rises and points sword directly at the prince]
Westley: DROP... YOUR... SWORD!
Prince Humperdinck: [Humperdinck's mouth hangs open, drops sword to floor]
Perfect.......(One of the best insults ever)
Sorry Andrew......a little commercial break....
Patriot, One of the interesting things about "moderates" is that there are very few of them -- maybe 7-11% of the electorate. And they don't really swing back and forth like people think.
Instead, they tend to break down the middle, with half leaning right and half leaning left. And rather than flipping back and forth, they tend to go on/off. When the left is doing well, the right-leaners stay home. When the right is doing well, the left-leaners stay home.
This time, all the polls show moderates going for Romney about 6.5 to 3.5 (the exact reverse of what Obama needs to win). I don't think that will change because it means that the right-leaners are engaged and the left-leaners have dropped out and I see nothing that will change that dynamic before the election.
Patriot, LOL! That's a great scene. I'd love to see that at the debates.
Obama: This is a race to the death for liberalism!
Romney: Wrong, this is a race to the pain.
Obama: W'as that?
...
Andrew.....Your analysis of the moderate faction in this country is more logical than mine..... I concede.
Either way, Obama has nothing to run on, and I really don't think he understands this country and the people who make up the silent majority. He truly is, like Pierre Trudeau of ancient Canadian fame, a "citizen of the world."
Ain't that precious?
Patriot, I agree. I think Obama doesn't understand the American mindset. I think he's been surrounded by elitists who really don't meet the rest of us and now he has no idea how to win us over. The fact he won us over in 2008 was purely an accident -- 8 bad years of Bush, a horrible self-destructive candidate in McCain, and him representing a chance to kill the "America is racist" narrative.
That's what got him there the first time.
But none of that will help him this time.
Lesson learned.....I fell victim to one of the classic blunders...."never get into a political discussion with a well-read blogger, and never get involved in a land war in Asia."
And don't forget to look out for the ROUS's -- Republicans Of Unusual Skill!
Andrew......I always wanted to write a short novella where every line spoken came from a movie. See if a storyline could be put together using just movie lines.
Actually, I deed that idea to you as you are the published author here!
Patriot, That would be an interesting idea -- though I suspect it would be very, very difficult. But it would make for an interesting challenge!
"Hey, it's the first human flyswatter....OW!!!"
I was wondering when somebody was going to sockpuppet Obama!
Here's the opening scene:
Barack and David Axelrod are standing on the steps of a great Greek-looking building in Chicago in late January 2013. Barack turns to David and says.."Well David, what do we do now?" David says, "We can always try the private sector!" Barack says, "Nah, I tried that. They expect results!"
Whaddya think Andrew? :-)
Rim shot in the background....
Nicely done Patriot! And let's hope that whatever Obama decides to do (probably get rich on a speaking tour) that he ends up being hassled by the EPA. :)
Hey......that's my line!!
You?! You seem to regard science as some kind of dodge... or hustle. Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable! You are a poor scientist, Dr. Venkman!
It's like the movie site around here!
I think the polling data is good news. The lengths to which they need to go to make Obama look competitive is amazing. There is no way they will turn out more Democrats this time than last time.
I feel like I should add something to the Ghostbusters comments, but I have nothing to say except that maybe, Ray, the reason we've been so busy around here lately is that the voters are rising?
Doc, It's funny how they keep going further and further to the +D side with each poll, even as they keep getting exposed. I think that's why it's getting hard to find the underlying data.
"POTUS, now with more TOTUS!"
Andrew, I wonder if they think they can provide a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts; that is, create the meme that the public continues to be significantly pro-Obama, and then maybe some moderates/independents/low-information voters will fall victim to groupthink, decide they should be for Obama as well, and thereby create a real majority for him. The electorate can be pretty dumb at times, but I don't know if that's a winning strategy. It sounds like something the MSM would do, though.
Good one Doc!
T-Rav, That's exactly what this is. It's the same thought behind marketing -- get people thinking that "everybody" (read: the herd) wants something, and the herd instinct kicks in and people will convince themselves that they want the same thing.
By putting out polls showing Obama with a lead, they are keeping the vast-unthinking middle on Obama's side. Because they know that the moment that things break for Romney, those people will switch sides and they won't come back because the snowball effect will make the numbers worse and worse for Obama.
Andrew and Tyranmax
Should the question not be "Why are the MSM reporitng on the voting tendneecies of blacks?"
In the past I do not remember anyone mentioning a Poll on either side. Any suggestion as to why "blacks" where not polled would be met with derision and mockery since there would obviously be no need.
The only reason I can see that they are "reporting" how blacks are polled now is that there are a number of blacks making themselves heard that are not bowing to Dear Leader in hopes of docing him service. Thus we need a poll to remind everyone "All blacks vote for Obama". Don't get off the Farm we have harvested that Narrative already.
Indi, They've always tracked voting patterns by race, gender, religion, income, etc. It's part of what demographers and pollsters do.
By the way, and not to be a downer or anything, but since it's been in the news this week, more news on the Akin situation here in Missouri. Rasmussen has a new poll out, showing that the race has shifted from Akin leading by three to McCaskill leading by ten, 48-38. Akin's "very unfavorable" rating (not just unfavorable, very unfavorable) is 47%.
The Akin campaign put out a press release today commenting on these numbers--this is verbatim, and I am not making any of it up:
"The fact that Claire McCaskill is only polling at 48% after 72 hours of constant negative attacks on Todd Akin shows just how weak she is. If she can't break fifty percent after a week like this, Democrats should ask Claire to step down. Todd is in this race to win; we will close this gap and win in November with the support of the grassroots in Missouri and across America."
This is where I resist the urge to start chewing on my textbooks.
T-Rav, That's how delusional people think. Sorry, but this guy is a nut.
What do you think about the idea of a write-in campaign by Kit Bond?
Andrew
They have tracked it but I never heard them report it on the daily news cycle. Yet this campaign cycle I have heard several democratic pundits bringing the numbers up. Seems strange as to why?
Normally they just tell you all blacks vote democrat and don't bother with citing a poll. When you see things like the New Broke Party in Chicago making demands as to where Emmanuel has spent earmarked money, seems to me there is a little bit of unrest there....
Andrew can a write in campaign actually work in a populous state?
Seems to me vetting the libertarian might be more successful IF he is on the ballot in all voting precincts. If Romney would support the libertarian and the GOP give him Akins money.... maybe that could undo MsCaskill - not sure ... they'd have to vet this guy first .. he could be worse than Akin
Indi, I've heard it my whole life, ever since Reagan really.
Andrew, I was never a big fan of Kit Bond, an earmark-lovin' RINO if there ever was one. And I haven't heard if he's even interested in the idea. But if he (or John Ashcroft) is able and willing, I would back him all the way. Better him than McCaskill.
Someone suggested that at the convention, the GOP leadership needs to make a public, prime-time repudiation of Akin and his comments. He's probably too stupid to take the hint and withdraw even then, but it would at least mimimize attempts by Democrats to tie him to the rest of the party. I would get behind that, too.
Indi, I'm not sure a write-in candidate can work, but this is an unusual moment. And usually, these people fail for technical reasons. In this case, not only do I think it could be done, but it needs to be tried to separate the GOP from Akin or else every GOP candidate in the country will be challenged on Akin.
I don't think supporting the Libertarian makes sense because you'll end up losing a big chunk of conservatives that way who won't support a dope advocate -- and that's really all the Libertarian party has become, a pot party.
Plus, the Libertarian candidates are typically weirdos even outside the party platform, so I suspect it would be a huge mistake to back this guy, whoever he is.
T-Rav, That was my fear with Bond -- Ann Coulter suggested him. I could support Ashcroft.
The GOP really needs to do something to separate themselves because the Democrats will try to make him into the election issue. I recommend running another candidate, banning Akin from the convention, and making it clear that Senate GOP won't caucus with him.
The Princess Bride AND Ghostbusters!!!! Woohoo!
Andrew and Indi, I don't think a write-in campaign would work.
As mind-boggling as it might seem, there are a lot of people, especially in Akin's home district, who have responded to his refusal to get out by saying, "He's standing up to the whole party? Hey, that's courageous! I could get behind that!" Stupid, but there you go. I fear that to promote a write-in candidate would cause a significant portion of the party to say, "Screw you, we're voting for the true conservative/maverick," and then we'd lose the election that way. Missouri is trending red, but even so, there's not enough of a margin of error with two GOPers on the ballot.
I think the only way to defuse this is for the rest of the party to do a total blackout on Akin. Make it clear to him that if he somehow wins, he will get no favors from the leadership--no earmarks, no desired committee assignments, no public appearances, no nothing. Lock him out of the convention, ban anyone from appearing with him or giving money to him--just treat him like he doesn't exist. That's what I would do, because I have a rapidly growing grudge over this and that often overpowers any sense of political expediency.
rlaWTX, We do get around! LOL!
T-Rav, I think the race is lost either way, so the best thing to do is to go down trying our best to get rid of him. My concern is with all the other candidates who will now face "the Akin" question if the GOP doesn't make as strong a stance as possible to distance themselves from him. Because while we may try to black him out, you know that the Democrats and the MSM will try to make him our poster boy.
Andrew, "will try"? They've been going at it for the past two days already.
One suggestion that's been raised is switching Akin out with the woman running in his old district. She's certainly qualified for it--former RNC co-chair and ambassador to Luxembourg--but I don't know if either one would actually go for it.
T-Rav, Yeah, I should probably amend "will try" to "is doing."
I can't imagine Akin will resign for anyone except God himself at this point, and even then he'd resist.
I think running a female candidate against him would be a smart move.
Andrew & T-Rav,
Remember the Alamo! Meaning there is nothing so noble as failure in a lost cause.
Yes, Akin is toast. Yes, he won't quit. The real question is what are the Conservatives going to do about it? Are they going to sit around and moan, or are they going to go the Tea Party Route? It might split the vote. So what? I would rather have McCaskill in their camp, than a bitter old man in ours.
This Missouri Race defines the Democrats as wanting "unbridled abortion" as opposed to reasonable restraint of abortion. It clearly shows that crossover votes during the primary are only to destroy your opposition. It demonstrates that Democrats don't have the will of the people, just some of them.
Also, don't be too surprised if we pick up another senator from a different state. People in other states are looking at this. The near universal rejection of Akin's ideas has stirred the pot. The Republican Party does have a few nuts, but they go out of their way to defeat their own nuts when they find them. The Democrats protect their nutcases.
Yeah, it sounds stupid. So does staying when the Mexican Army is howling outside a small church.
Joel, I'm not giving up. I think there is a tremendous opportunity here for the Republicans to make it clear to everyone that they are not a party of fringe-nuts who hate women. This is one of those moments where the party can take a huge step in the right direction by disowning Akin and possibly permanently wipe out the Democratic meme.
I wouldn't worry so much officially about pointing out that the Democrats don't get rid of their own because that confuses the clear signal it would send if the GOP disowned him and ran a female write-in candidate instead. So if I were a GOP official, I would get everyone on message to run against Akin.
Then the bloggers and talking heads can do the dirty work of pointing out all the perverts and criminals the Democrats harbor.
All crises brings opportunity, it's just a matter of seizing it.
Andrew,
I whole heartedly agree. Especially about the Democrats not getting rid of their own nuts. That is properly for the pundits to point out.
Also, it makes the Democrats waste money in a state that their Alinsky-ite maneuvers are bearing fruit.
Joel, This is a fascinating election because the Democrats are wasting money in safe places all over the place. And I'd love to see them sink millions to take out Akin, only to have some other Republican swoop in and claim the seat. That would be great.
One thing I've really liked about Romney is that he understand that it's best to let the underlings do most of the dirty work. That way you can come out looking very positive but you still get all the negative attacks made.
Well, since Little Face Mitt has become a little Internet meme, it's only fair that Obama gets his own Dick Tracy name: "The Blank." :-)
Scott, That's a pretty weak internet meme for Romney. Oh well.
I like "The Blank." LOL! Although, that fit him better in 2008 than it does today!
"This is one of those moments where the party can take a huge step in the right direction by disowning Akin and possibly permanently wipe out the Democratic meme."
Andrew, the psychology usually doesn´t work this way. By disowning "one of your own" (as he is perceived) you get tied to him in the public mind. And couldn´t it create some backlash for being perceived as out-of-state interference?
If Akin could be replaced, say, with a conservative woman who has local name recognition, yes, that would send a very different message. But as far as I understand, there is next to no chance of it happening.
Much as I resent Akin´s remarks, I wonder if it wouldn´t have been better to simply make small of them. Hard to pull off though when the media isn´t on your side.
All I know is this thing has me losing my sleep, literally.
El Gordo,
There is a problem with your analysis. The small but perceivable bump in polls following a week of near 100% conservative, Tea Party, Elite Republican, Rank and File Republican and Conservative Punditry turning around and attacking "One of Their Own" for the totally asinine comment by Akin. That bump for Romney and most Republicans along with a minimum 10% decrease on Akin shows that the psychology is working this way.
The Missouri Senate seat is written off by most of the Republican Side. Unless you can get Akin to drop his attempt, or organize a write-in candidate, forget about him. Other Senate seats that weren't in play are now in play because of the principled stand taken by every one who wants Akin gone.
El Gordo,
Here is another thought, the Democrats have to keep Akin believing his chances of winning are good. They aren't. That means they have to spend money on keeping him alive long enough to prevent us from replacing him. Money they could use else where. In the meantime, we don't have to spend money on a loser.
El Gordo, I'm thinking more of outside Missouri. To me, the bigger concern is the national narrative where I think the Republicans have a real chance to finally drive a stake into this idea that they are opposed to women by turning on this guy and making it clear that this isn't acceptable for the Republican Party -- the same way they pushed out racists like David Duke in the 1980s.
The idea would be to let moderate women see that the party no longer welcomes this kind of thinking.
Would it upset the people of Missouri? Probably. But I think Missouri is lost this time no matter what. And if the Republicans can find the right woman for a write-in candidate, I think things will be forgotten and forgiven very quickly by the public out there.
Would it upset the people who actually think like Akin? Absolutely. But those people need to be told that their views are no longer part of the party, and I think we would gain a lot more by winning some percentage of rational women in place of this tiny fringe that is still clinging to the 14th Century.
Sorry to hear you've lost sleep. This is highly frustrating to me as well. But I'm hopeful something good will come of this. I am encouraged by the reaction already and I think this will ultimately go a long way to breaking the image of the party as woman-hating -- an image which has been slowly dying until guys like this periodically rear their heads.
Joel, I think the positive bounce in the polls is a good indication that people are responding well to the party's near-unanimous condemnation of Akin and what he said. I think that response has helped the party a good deal in softening their image. I also think this has gone a long way to helping immunize other people from being attacked with Akin's words.
I guess we'll see how it all plays out. I wish Akin would have realized just how he's being seen by everyone and how unacceptable his views are, but he clearly hasn't.
Post a Comment