But if they were, that's not happening anymore.

If Romney pulls a similar number off, he's going to win the election.

said if Kerry was elected there would be another 9/11.

they don't have that anymore.

like the economy

I still recall going to bed with Kerry winning and waking up with Bush winning. I never believed it was an accurate and honest count.

Or in this case 2 elections prior. I think that's a pretty poor assumption.

Shrub also did much better among the Latino vote than Rmoney can ever hope for, and Obama did quite well among men in 2008 which was much better than Kerry did in 2004. So there's a lot more demographics which will come into play, not to mention key state races which will make national demographics less relevant.

he's going to win 55 - 56% of the men's vote. And that means he wins, period, just as Bush did. I used 2004 to show that it is possible for Republicans to be competitive with women. I don't think it's going to happen, mind you, but it is possible, particularly if Obama reverts to his listless form and fails to draw a clear contrast between himself and Romney, really, between himself and the Republican Party as it currently exists. People have a hard time really believing how noxious the Republican Party is unless someone like Obama takes the trouble to remind them, and it does seem to be a bother for Obama to do it.

As for the state breakdown, thanks for the lesson, but it's extremely unusual for someone to win the national vote and lose the election -- it's only happened three times in history, I believe. Again, it CAN happen, as Al Gore can attest, but it's really unlikely. But ultimately, trying to clever a way into a win, or to convince yourself you can't lose, that you've got things sewn up even if you lose the popular vote, is exactly the sort of thing that leads to a loss, and is the sort of thing Obama is prone to. You gain nothing by it, so why do it? The Republican position on women IS noxious, and it's not only politically smart to point it out, over and over, it's the right thing to do, election be damned. That approach has been, sadly, missing from not just Obama's campaign, but his presidency itself.

A poor economic outlook is bad news for any incumbent president. It tanked Carter and Bush I, and while both of those presidents lost for other reasons as well, there's no doubt the economy played a huge role in their defeat. Incumbent presidents with a hot economy generally have no problem getting elected. Given that handicap, the Obama campaign has done a spectacular job, including Obama himself.

And no, presidential candidates absolutely do not run their campaigns on national polls to any large degree. It makes absolutely no sense for Obama to campaign for the women's vote in Georgia. Rmoney could care less how women vote in California. Candidates base their strategy on the electoral college because that's what determines elections. They also test out their strategies on focus groups before they implement and constantly modify their methods to go with what works and shitcan what doesn't. There's also soft money efforts that come into play as well and some efforts work much better on that front.

OK, its not a great economy, I agree. And yes, the view of the American Street is that its been a sluggish recovery. But I just want to be sure that people understand that the last 31 months has not exactly been Apocalypse Now. I wrote the "EF series" to have facts on hand when the Reich Wing greed-bangers talk about how Obama has not created a single job or some-such.

Hell, if you start in June 2009 -- 5 months after he took office, and when the recession officially ended (thank you Mr. President, I think that was pretty quick work, I'd like that on my resume), 3.0 million jobs have been created.

See especially EF 1. at http://www.democraticunderground.com/111622439

He's done as well as you could expect anyone to do given the circumstances, which include being sandbagged by obstructionist Republicans in congress. However, the economy is still down overall and that's the perception that works against him. Carter was burdened by stagflation which was the result of fucked up monetary policies from the presidents and fed chairmen that came before him. It wasn't his fault and his fed chairman appointee, Paul Volcker ultimately fixed it, but he still got the blame for not fixing it overnight as people expected.

Trolls, too, yes, but when we get the good ones, they're really good.

Welcome to DU, progree.

And I hoped that people would see that when they read the rest of my post, but on a second reading, I can understand how somebody could wonder seeing my title line in #14.

I think Obama has done a very impressive job, especially considering the hole with the economy Bush handed him.

I mentioned EF 1. at http://www.democraticunderground.com/111622439

Does that look like "Troll work" to you? Or any of the other "EF" posts -- EF 0, EF 1, EF 2, ... , EF 6 at http://www.democraticunderground.com/111622439

If so, how so? I've gotten a lot of good comments about it.

My comment was NOT sarcastic. I was, in fact, complimenting you.

Listen: I'm glad you're here. I don't think you're a troll. We need more people like you here on DU. You seem to be absolutely great. Welcome to DU.

Is that more clear?

Unemployment collapsing, according to Gallup, housing market is hot, consumer spending is up, corporate profits, UP, stock market doubled.

Can we just put that bad economy meme to bed? And if I here "in this economy" one more time, I'll throw up.

So while you are correct in that all those things are up, for which Obama deserves considerable credit, the reality is that all of those things are still down considerably from recent highs.

Unemployment is almost double compared to what it was when Clinton left office.

Housing prices are nowhere near what they were in 2006 at the height of the bubble.

The stock market is just barely past the historical high levels in the 90's, which means 401K plans have been largely stagnant for the past 15 years, which is what matters to most voters.

Average middle class wages have been stagnant for decades.

That's why Rmoney has been able to paint the economy as poor, even though most trends are quite positive. Even though most indicators are positive, it takes a while for the average person to realize those gains. If your house is worth shit, you are out of a job, your pension plan is going nowhere, and/or your wages are stuck in the 80's, it's hard to convince the average person on the street that all is rosy.

one cannot expect things to be as good. Deregulation led to the crisis.

The problem in the first debate was that Obama was dealing with difficult foreign policy issues at that time. He said so at the beginning of the first debate.

Romney's big hurdle is that he is not likable. He never was, not in his whole life, and he never will be. People just do not like him. Even some who will vote for him really don't like him. He can't do anything about that. He just isn't a likable guy.

Obama on the other hand is extremely likable. He is. And Obama's wife and family are extremely likable and very much like other middle class Americans of all races. In the end, that will make the biggest difference with the undecided voters who don't know the difference between Republicans and Democrats. I say they don't know the difference because I am out there talking to them. Some of them aren't sure which candidate is which. It's just Romney -- he's the one that's for the rich, isn't he? Not a very likable profile.

Romney did himself in with his 47% comment -- and of course that comment is Romney. Even if he hadn't said 47%, he would have said something similar.

Romney's comments about single moms were a really low blow. Women will not forgive that one. It was the biggest blunder that any politician has made in my life I think.

Sounds like you're being fooled by the Rove-backed polls that even the once-great Silver is factoring into his reports. There are several of them like, Gravis Marketing's questionable figures, that have fooled some people into thinking women are surging to Romney. Well, I say anyone who seriously believes that women have forgotten the "legitimate rape" and "forcible rape" spewings by Akin and LYIN' RYAN, Romney's running mate, must be smoking something. And after last night's debate with Romney and his women "binders" and the comment about letting his women staffers leave at 5:00 to "go home and make dinner" (Are you kidding me? God, what an out of touch idiot), there's no chance. The numbers for Romney, just like his tax plan, don't add up. He's not going to get the Latino vote, the black vote, the progressive white vote, the gay vote and womens' votes (and I think even some Republican women are having second thoughts). And he's lost even some of the elderly vote with him and Ryan's Social Security voucher plan. Demographically there are just not enough one percenters, teapartiers, angry white men and racists for him carry the election (God, I'd hate to look around and realize I'm part of that coalition).

and I also find it hard to believe. If women support
Romney at all, I'm surprised. I suppose he reminds
some women of their dad.

made up of a lot of women from around the world who sculpt OOAK dolls. You wouldn't believe the hate from many / most of the women on it from the U.S. for Obama's Govt (and I'm sorry to say, for Obama himself). Ladies from the UK, Australia, Canada ... we've all chimed in with our stories of health-care, gay marriage rights, etc. and are almost always completely shut down. There's such a huge disconnect with many of them, a few brave souls from the U.S. have posted proof of the lies and spin from Romney's campaign, have spelled out plainly how Bain has hurt American workers - they don't believe a word of it, and immediately reply with the most racist, bigoted garbage I've ever seen. I am absolutely convinced now that much of the opposition to Obama does have to do with race ... something I'd never really considered seriously before, and it's very, very sad to see such a good man treated this way.

But he did a good job.

The problem is - there's just so freakin' much material to work with, you can't possibly get it all in, within the prescribed timeframe.

Glad you're here - we need you to help us clinch this thing. It's not in the bag yet.







Now get to work.

Trying to blame Rmoney for something some other Republican said probably isn't going to find much traction or it might wind up losing him more votes than he'd ever expect to gain if he comes across as petty.

If Obama called out Romney on all his lies, he'd be there all night!

When it comes to attacking Rmoney, soft money ads can do that pretty effectively. Obama doesn't have to be the one doing it. That frees up Obama to tout his own record and plans.

And then I thought about how the President waited until just the right time to blast Romney with the 47% tape issue so I'm thinking now he's saving the legitimate/forcible rape issue for the last debate. I'm also thinking he's also going to bring up the Sensata plant (Bain) and Romney's tax returns as well in the last debate. Stay tuned.

bwahahahahahahahahaha

because employers have to give them more flexibility
to let them take care of their other womanly duties

is that the point Mitt was starting to make??

...except for white men of course.

because he got home from work earlier than my Mom. This was 50+ years ago. Of course sexist Romney could never imagine anything like that.

first and foremost, as incubators and Rmoney's 'devotion' to his chosen cult, it does not surprise me at all, his views are 19th century.

(That, of course, would include Obama's mother. How low could Romney go in a debate?)

No battered women's shelters for Romney. Oh, no. Women are never supposed to try to step away from their abusive husbands.

Romney really would take women back a number of generations.

have no chance at a bright future.

Look at these two examples:

very personal in a subtle way.

Didn't work. Obama has already worked through his conflicts about his family background. Obama has a basically very healthy psychological profile I suspect. Romney is the one with the problems.

Mitt. Pop sociology at its worst. I suspect the single moms out there did not appreciate that one bit.

His beliefs astound