Romney may have lost the presidential race today

[Anonymous]

When a drone strike wipes out those Libyans responsible I can't wait to hear Romney complain about our invading a sovereign country's airspace.
You can bet there is no expense barred search on for the culprits

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Romney leads with independents. Since the country is divided I thought the independents chose the president

Go back to civics class. Retake the class about the Electoral College.

Right now Obama is leading 312-212 in the Electoral College, based on state-by-state polls.

This is interesting...so you think that Obama has already won the race with 312 votes. That's interesting. You'd think that if Obama had already passed 270 votes, we'd have heard about it since that's what he needs to win. In reality, it's more like 237-191 with about 110 votes remaining of which the biggest of those (FL 29, OH 18, NC 15, VA 13) are all very much in play and definitely swayable.

Rasmussen has the race 247-196 with 95 tossups and he's the conservative pollster. By his count, Obama needs to pick up only 1 out of 4.

[Anonymous]

Press reports today said that Mitt asked VP hopefuls for 10 years of tax returns. But Mitt will only release his last one, and refuses to release the others. Rank hypocracy.

[Anonymous]

I guess Romney is trying to prove "it's the economy, stupid" by testing whether it matters at all if you are a bonehead idiot in every other area.

[Anonymous]

I was down around Culpeper last weekend and was surprised how few Romney signs I saw.

If you go by signs, I'd say you'd be surprised by how many Romney signs there are in North Arlington/McLean area. That is really surprising to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't see this playing well in Northern Virginia. Most voters downstate that Romney's veneer of toughness appeals to were already voting for him, but Northern VA has the Romney voters that can be peeled away from him between now and the election.

I was down around Culpeper last weekend and was surprised how few Romney signs I saw.

Culpeper will go for Romney, make no doubt. It's gotten a tad more liberal due to migration from the north/inner suburbs, but there's probably some erosion of support from Republicans who gave Obama a chance in 2008 but revert back to form in 2012.

McCain won Culpeper 54-45 in 2008, I think it will end up being about similar, maybe 56-44, since many folks who move further out than Loudoun/PWC are doing so to get away from the libruls, whereas many of the newcomers to PWC and Loudoun are libertarian-leaning but not big on reality denying.

Goode might siphon off 1-2% of votes in Southside VA almost all from Romney, Johnson might get 0.5-1% of votes, many in Northern VA/suburban Richmond/Tidewater.

OTOH, the biggest enchilada will go 60-40 for Obama. Romney's going off the rails as I said before will not play well among the Obama in 08/McDonnell in 09 voters. Plus many casual voters will be back -- not as many as in 08, mind, but enough. Plus I can't see the 19-22 year old contingent being a fertile base for Romney.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:foreign service employees vote liberal anyways

And they tend to be very well educated, very thoughtful people who like to be considerate of their fellow humans whether home or abroad. Do you see a connection?

+1 million billion gazillion. BINGO!

[Anonymous]

Romney doesn't think people are paying attention to substance, so he just criticizes every action of the administration, whether such criticism is consistent with his past positions or not.

It's a private equity, take-no-prisoners sort of attitude, and it's why businessmen are so ill-suited to running government. If you are used to only the goal of maximizing profit, dealing with competing goals, like allocating funds across budget priorities or creating conditions where many types of businesses can succeed, is just too nuanced/complicated for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Romney doesn't think people are paying attention to substance, so he just criticizes every action of the administration, whether such criticism is consistent with his past positions or not.

It's a private equity, take-no-prisoners sort of attitude, and it's why businessmen are so ill-suited to running government. If you are used to only the goal of maximizing profit, dealing with competing goals, like allocating funds across budget priorities or creating conditions where many types of businesses can succeed, is just too nuanced/complicated for you.

Agreed. The thing I can't understand is why the Democrats aren't blasting him as a flip-flopper at every opportunity. Surely he is MUCH worse in this regard than Kerry could have ever dreamed of being. At least when Kerry ran he was an expert on both domestic politics AND foreign affairs, and didn't sound like an ignorant ass every time he opened his mouth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agreed. The thing I can't understand is why the Democrats aren't blasting him as a flip-flopper at every opportunity. Surely he is MUCH worse in this regard than Kerry could have ever dreamed of being. At least when Kerry ran he was an expert on both domestic politics AND foreign affairs, and didn't sound like an ignorant ass every time he opened his mouth.

You're right about Romney vs Kerry. They had to use a wind-surfing video as a metaphor to illustrate the Kerry charge, but in Romney's case, juxtaposed videos of Romney on all sides of an issue will be devastating. I am pretty sure we'll see them, but I imagine the debate in the Obama campaign is when would be the most effective time to start.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If you go by signs, I'd say you'd be surprised by how many Romney signs there are in North Arlington/McLean area. That is really surprising to me.

There are a bunch of Romney signs in my neighborhood, but I kind of think that Romney folks are just simply more likely to put up signs. They feel like they have more to prove.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Romney doesn't think people are paying attention to substance, so he just criticizes every action of the administration, whether such criticism is consistent with his past positions or not.

It's a private equity, take-no-prisoners sort of attitude, and it's why businessmen are so ill-suited to running government. If you are used to only the goal of maximizing profit, dealing with competing goals, like allocating funds across budget priorities or creating conditions where many types of businesses can succeed, is just too nuanced/complicated for you.

Agreed. The thing I can't understand is why the Democrats aren't blasting him as a flip-flopper at every opportunity. Surely he is MUCH worse in this regard than Kerry could have ever dreamed of being. At least when Kerry ran he was an expert on both domestic politics AND foreign affairs, and didn't sound like an ignorant ass every time he opened his mouth.

The time to pin Romney down on his policy flops is the debate.

[Anonymous]

Romney did so much better defending the shores of Massachusetts. Also it was good when Romney killed Osama. And helped topple Quadaffi. And the death of the Al Queda #2. And the new START treaty with Russia.

And then there's Condi Rice's searing criticism of Obama.

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/08/29/765771/rice-obama-foreign-policy/

But then I love Condi's credentials.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIpEwGmSsmM

[Anonymous]

Had to revive this one since the thread title is so germane. As if he didn't fuck up enough last week on foreign affairs, he just has to keep it up this week on the domestic side. What a maroon - the candidate of doubling down on stupidity.