iOwnTheWorld.com

I’m skeptical of polls so I’ll wait until Nov. 7 to see how accurate they are.

Somewhat O/T but I wonder why Romney hasn’t responded to all the hounding about Bain with two words, “executive privilege”. I mean, really, what’s little barry going to say to that? You think he wants to go there? It would be a good line of defense and counter-attack IMO.

+7

How the hell can this guy continuously maintain a 45+ approval rating????!!!!

Seriously, this represents the dramatic division in the country, and yes, it will be the cause of a future civil war, because that is precisely the left are trying to construct.

+7

I hate polls.
You can say anything you want with them. Depends on who you call, where they live and so many other factors.
These “whole country” polls mean nothing. You can over sample New York, California, Washington D.C. and other Democrat strongholds and get these “in a tie” polls.
The polls have to be done in each individual state to see how the Electoral College vote will turn out. You go to the bell weather states and see how obummer is doing. He is not doing well and these are the states that he “should” be at a tie (or close) to Romney. The Democrats have wrote off Missouri now – Claire Bear and obummer are in a hurt on the polling numbers across Missouri. Obanana is not doing well in Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina or Virgina (all states that a Democrat candidate should be close to Romney).

+4

I still can not understand who could be dumb enough to vote for Ostupid…

+4

With slogans like Hope and Change, Betting on America, whats next Obamas Magical Mystery Tour?

I don’t trust polls either, but I can see people slowly sidestepping away from the democratic crowd while whistling so as not to draw to much attention to themselves.

+5

” I wonder why Romney hasn’t responded to all the hounding about Bain with two words, “executive privilege””

Wicked good idea.;-)
(But you’d have to ‘splain it to the “Reporter”)

+3

Even though I don’t put much stock in polls, it’s pretty enheartening coming from ABC/WaPo.

Probably means Romney’s lead is more like 44%.

They lie about everything.

0

Remember the 2010 election results, and Obummer said the democrats took a shellacking:
“I’m not recommending for every future President that they take a shellacking like they – like I did last night. I’m sure there are easier ways to learn these lessons.”

What’s he gonna call it on Nov 7, 2012?

PS – notice how he said “…like I did last night”. He is such a narcissist!

+2

@hanoverfist – I like it because it plays as low and dirty as they do.

0

Here’s the thing: I could burn up iOTW’s server explaining why Obama is going to lose. This article is one reason why: he trails Romney by 14% among independent voters, who by the way, will decide this election, and that gap is growing. Romney has almost 20% support among black voters in North Carolina, which Obama won four years ago; McCain got only 5% of the black vote in North Carolina in ‘08. Obama won the national vote by 7% four years ago; Republicans won the national vote by 7% in 2010 – a 14% swing. I’ve challenged Obama voters all over the Internet to tell me where Obama has improved his support from four years ago. They can’t answer with anything but lame shots at Romney’s wealth. Unemployment remains stuck at over 8%. Worse for Obama is that the national debt is approaching $16 trillion dollars – an over 50% increase in just four years. That debt now represents an amount that is close to 100% of the Gross Domestic Product, and here’s the telling thing: that amount of debt has squeezed the life out of the economy, which is growing at less than 2% a year. George H.W. Bush lost to Bill Clinton in 1992 based on Clinton’s claim that the US economy was the worse economy is a hundred years, and yet the annualized growth rate of the economy was over 3.5% in the final quarter before the 1992 election. Despite the propensity of the average American to get wrapped up in who’s going to be the next “American Idol” rather than track events in the world, none of this is lost on likely voters this November.

The leftist pundits called the 2008 election a “realignment” election, with the Democrats holding the upper hand for elections to come. It wasn’t. Obama did not win-over any new voter demographic that Clinton didn’t win in 1996. Obama’s vote was deeper than Clinton’s with the groups Clinton won, but Obama can’t count on those groups voting for him by the same percentages this year. While Obama won among working class whites in 2008, their first choice in the primaries was Hillary. This group never warmed to Obama. It’s a forgotten or denied fact that after the conventions in 2008, in early September, McCain-Palin were ahead of Obama-Biden in the polls.

Then the bubble burst.

Sean Trende, chief numbers-cruncher for RealClearPolitics.com, wrote in THE LOST MAJORITY that “The financial collapse [in the fall of ‘08] and bank bailout did for Obama what almost two years of campaigning could not do: it swung white voters into his column in sufficient numbers to win the presidency.”

“In terms of the polls, the debates were largely washes,” Trende notes. “The financial market collapse…fired the populist engine among whites without postgraduate educations in a way that Barack Obama could not.” But Obama’s winning coalition, while deep (large percentages among certain groups of voters), was narrow, and left little room for error.

Through 2009, it became obvious that the economic recovery was anemic, and that federal spending was exploding at an almost exponential rate. In his closing campaign argument in 2008, Obama railed against accumulated debt and promised to cut taxes. He offered a nod to the notion that government could not fix every problem, and he pledged that his plans would result in a net spending cut. His stance and demeanor in ’08 led voters who wished to view Obama as a [perceived] Clinton-style centrist to believe their wish had been delivered. But once in office, this changed. It became clear that President Obama was not what candidate Obama had advertised. As his politics became more defined in the minds of the voters, his approval rating started to drop.

By June of ’09, the biggest concern that voters had with Obama was his runaway spending – following the passage of his near-one-trillion-dollar “stimulus” plan. It was spiraling debt, not so much the economy, not so much unemployment, that “stimulated” opposition to Obama in mid-2009. By mid-June, the number of Americans who identified themselves as conservative had up-ticked above 40%, and for the first time since the 1990s, a plurality of Americans viewed the Democrats as “too liberal.” By mid-July, Obama’s approval rating on his handling of the national debt slipped to 41%. More importantly, 66% of independents expressed concern that Obama was calling for too much spending, and 60% believed that he was calling for too much government expansion.

The Tea Party movement was formed. The elections of 2009 saw wins for the GOP in Virginia and New Jersey. In early 2010, as Obama and the Dems cranked up the healthcare debate. Ted Kennedy died, Scott Brown was elected to fulfill his term. Massachusetts is about as blue a state as there is in the nation, as Republicans make up only 12% of the state’s registered voters. But independents make up 51% of the voters, and independents were souring quickly to, first, Obama’s spending, and, second, to his health care proposal. Brown won.

Then came the landslide from under Obama’s feet that were the mid-terms in 2010. While the 2006 and 2008 elections were built upon Clinton’s old coalition, that coalition had unraveled during 2009. Clinton’s coalition, as was Obama’s in 2008, included voters that were worried about the federal deficit, didn’t want tax increases, and wanted incremental improvements in the health care system. This part of the Democrats’ coalition from Clinton-to-2008 felt betrayed. When the dust settled, Democrats had lost their advantage among working class whites. (In 2010, Republicans won almost 4 million more votes from white evangelicals than Democrats won from African Americans and Latinos combined.) Democrats also lost major support in the suburbs. (As a side note, it was interesting that where Romney won in critical primary states such as Ohio and Michigan was in the suburbs. Suburbs went for Clinton, then Obama, but swung Republican in 2010, and Romney showed strength there in the primaries. This bodes well.) In the south, the final holdout of “Humphrey Democrats” swung to the GOP. Sean Trende, again, concluded that “in 2010, Democrats had perhaps their worst showing since the early 1900s in working class districts.” Hillary Democrats who weren’t enamored with Obama to begin with in 2008, but who voted for him largely because of the financial meltdown that fall, had defected.

In many districts, even ones where they lost in 2010, Republicans showed more than a double-digit improvement for the GOP than what McCain received in 2008.

What has changed since 2010 to improve Obama’s chances? The 7% advantage he won by in ’08 was more than wiped out in 2010. It’s not a stretch to consider that what was a 7% advantage for Obama in 2008 could end up being a 7% win by Romney this year. Every indication is that the Democrats are headed for not simply a loss, but a huge loss this year. Voters are still mad about the Obamacare law. The deficit continues to grow by more than $1-trillion a year. Unemployment is stubbornly stuck above 8%. The number of fulltime jobs in the US – the actual number, not the percentage – has shrunk every year since 2007. The economy is growing, but at an anemic pace below 2%, which isn’t enough to create enough jobs for new people entering the workforce. All the things that turned voters against Obama and the Democrats in 2009 and 2010 remain in place, and in fact have gotten worse.

Finally, look at Obama’s behavior – his parade of radical executive orders, his campaign attacks over stupid things like when Romney left Bain. He gives off the stench of a desperate person. Flop sweat. Despite what the media polls say, I believe that Obama, looking at his own internal polls, knows he’s toast and is pushing his radical agenda through extra-constitutional means because he knows time is short. He lost this election in 2009. He’s over-exposed, and a billion dollar campaign budget will actually work against him. Voters are tired of his whining. The mainstream media is trying to prop him up, saying the election is a toss-up. It’s the MSM – they’re lying.

We won’t know until November. I don’t have a crystal ball. A lot can change, but the things that caused the erosion of Obama’s support in ’09 and ’10 have been locked-in. I think he’s going to lose, and lose big. Ignore the polls. Look at the trends. Look at polls such as that of independents that show a 14% and growing lead for Romney. Obama’s toast, and he knows it.

+9

obama’s lead with Jews has to be diminished bc of whatever minutia still sides with Israel over their liberal ideology. His lead with Catholics has to be diminished bc of the healthcare, abortifacient, contraception issue. Younger voters will not turn out in the same numbers as in ’08 (been there, done that). Blacks will not turn out in the same numbers (the thrill is gone and no one bought me a new wash machine and I still live in this filthy dangerous Democrat Housing Project). Gays will turn out in the same numbers to support the first gay president. I hold out hope for Latinos. They are becoming almost indistinguishable from blacks, eschewing religious values, family and work ethic for a welfare check.

If Romney is up 14% with independents (confused, easily persuaded), he wins in a landslide. Then look for the most dangerous regime in our history to kick into high gear between November and January.

+3

Would appreciate psychiatrists’ views of what happens when a narcissist with severe personality disorder and humongous hubris actually reaches a state of ‘DESPAIR’.

It’s gonna get ugly.

+3

soliliqui, we much!

0

Obama, “Betting on America” by making yet another whirlwind campaign tour, this time in Europe…
Isn’t it illegal to accept contributions from Foreign Nationals?

+1

I would think his loss would be liberating for him. He can stop the charade and move back to Indonesia.

+1

Cruisin’, my guess is that he’ll be collecting for Americans who live full time in Europe. But I may be wrong. There are no limits, legal or ethical, to what Obama will do to get reelected.

+5

The country’s still fucked:

44% approve of his economic policies
41% approve of ObamaCare, and
38% approve of what amounts to open borders.

+2

@Maudie

You’re darn right he’s lost the jewish votes. Bob Turner, a Catholic and a Republican, won Anthony Weiner’s seat in a 2010 special election in a NEW YORK CITY JEWISH DISTRICT.

That was a message to Obama from the Jewish voters.

+1

Anthony Wiener is gonna make a run for electoral office again in New York. If elected, you folks deserve exactly what you get. He’s proven he has no morals. He’s like Obama, just with a longer nose or something.

+2