The Main Event: Barack Obama vs Mitt Romney for the Heavyweight Championship of the W

[onejayhawk]

The nomination is still unsettled, but Romney already dodged a major bullet in Iowa, and looks strong for South Carolina. I do not see anyone unseating him, short of a disaster.

In a head to head between Romney and President Obama, how does the scene play? Romney comes across as a smiling bureaucrat, but that is a familiar image, and one that also applies to the White House. I see real trouble getting the liberal base fired up against him. Compare, for example, how they would react to Newt as the opposition.

Romney has the same problem from his personal makeup. The flags are wll known: Mormon, New England, Wall Street, and above all, plastic. He has a flag for every wind, and a very good meteorologist.

Turn out could be historically low. In 2008 Obama turned blacks and young people out in historic numbers. That will not happen again. The evangelical right has been integral to the GOP TotV machine, which will not longer be true. Traditionally, low turnout favors Republicans.

To me, 10 months out, the campaign will be about competence. With both candidates distinctly unpopular, even with their base, the issue becomes whether they deserve a thinking vote rather than an emotional one. Here the onus is on Romney as the outsider. WE know what to expect from Obama. Even though we demonstratably dont like it, it is known. Romney can make a very good case for being substantially more competent, but will it be enough.

In an off year, this would be a no brainer. Romney would do to Obama what he has done to Bachmann, Cain, Gingrich and Santorum, ie look Presidenntial and allow them to look like something else. However, Barack Obama has the big seal on his desk already, so that will be more difficult.

J

PS The title runs out at an interesting place, but I think I will leave it.

[Mithrandir]

they're both puppets to the masters..

http://nwoobserver.wordpress.com/2011/12/16/who-really-controls-the-world/

[onejayhawk]

they're both puppets to the masters..

http://nwoobserver.wordpress.com/201...ols-the-world/

I thought ST was the conspiracy guy.

J

[Wonderboy]

Let's start with a look at the map. The "Kerry" states having 251 electoral votes have gone Dem in the last five elections. Is it fair to say that is a base for Obama and that he starts with 251 barring some catastrophe?

[Mithrandir]

I thought ST was the conspiracy guy.

J

He is..I'm juist making everyone aware of the possibilities....you know..like a famous quote many here may subscribe to, "The greatest thing the devil ever did was convincing people he didn't exist"...

[cardboardbox]

Let's start with a look at the map. The "Kerry" states having 251 electoral votes have gone Dem in the last five elections. Is it fair to say that is a base for Obama and that he starts with 251 barring some catastrophe?

I'm fairly sure those states have lost EV since 2004. Also, catastrophe for the dems would be an economy that doesnt get significantly better over the next 9 months. 150-200k new jobs per month is barely above break even. If thats what we average over the next 9 months it will make the election closer but what obama needs is a few months of 400k+ new jobs leading up to the election.

[onejayhawk]

He is..I'm juist making everyone aware of the possibilities....you know..like a famous quote many here may subscribe to, "The greatest thing the devil ever did was convincing people he didn't exist"...

Never ascribe to malice what can adequately be attributed to incompetence.

- Hanlon's Razor

Let's start with a look at the map. The "Kerry" states having 251 electoral votes have gone Dem in the last five elections. Is it fair to say that is a base for Obama and that he starts with 251 barring some catastrophe?

Less the census numbers. I think its -6. You can go to 270towin and work it out.

I would put NH in the GOP column with Romney running, and Michigan and Wisconsin are in play. For a solid base, I think 225 is a lot closer. 270towin starts from 196. None of their unclaimed states is a lay up, much less a slam dunk. The big difference is that they put Pennsylvania in play. Michigan and Pennsylvania are both elector losing states.

J

[chancellor]

Let's start with a look at the map. The "Kerry" states having 251 electoral votes have gone Dem in the last five elections. Is it fair to say that is a base for Obama and that he starts with 251 barring some catastrophe?

Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are the two biggest holes in that theory. Wisconsin flipped completely GOP in state races in '08 (Governor, House, Senate), and Pennsylvania's polling numbers seem to indicate a state in play.

[nots]

Pennsylvania always seems to be 'in play' during election years. The GOP throws a lot of money at the state, but always seems to wind up losing, usually by more than the pre-election polls predict.
Past performance is not always a futures predictor, but I wonder if the GOP is once again setting themselves up for heartbreak.
FWIW--I'd think Wisconsin would be a more realistic option.

[Mithrandir]

Never ascribe to malice what can adequately be attributed to incompetence.

- Hanlon's Razor



Less the census numbers. I think its -6. You can go to 270towin and work it out.

I would put NH in the GOP column with Romney running, and Michigan and Wisconsin are in play. For a solid base, I think 225 is a lot closer. 270towin starts from 196. None of their unclaimed states is a lay up, much less a slam dunk. The big difference is that they put Pennsylvania in play. Michigan and Pennsylvania are both elector losing states.

J

So the information about Kennedy wanting to do away with the Fed reserve isn't true?

Not sure why so many of you here refuse to see the possibility that the USA is run by certain wealthy groups? And that no matter who is President makes no difference.

[Wonderboy]

Pennsylvania always seems to be 'in play' during election years. The GOP throws a lot of money at the state, but always seems to wind up losing, usually by more than the pre-election polls predict.
Past performance is not always a futures predictor, but I wonder if the GOP is once again setting themselves up for heartbreak.

I think that is correct, but agree NH could go GOP. So Obama probably starts with a semi-lock on around 240 electoral votes.

So now let's look at the other states Obama carried that were swing states or even traditionally GOP states: Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, NC, Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, part of Nebraska, Iowa and Florida. (Did I get them all?) Let's concede Indiana and Nebraska to the GOP candidate. My initial thought is that it's not realistic to assume Obama is going to lose all of those remaining states. In general, if he holds the Kerry states and loses NH, but then carries only two or three of those remaining eight, he probably wins.

[Wonderboy]

Then the final step is to look at any GOP states that may go to Obama this year. Arizona jumps out at me as a possibility, but that's about it. Missouri and Montana were relatively close last time if memory serves, but even getting that close was probably high-tide for the Dems.

[onejayhawk]

I think that is correct, but agree NH could go GOP. So Obama probably starts with a semi-lock on around 240 electoral votes.

So now let's look at the other states Obama carried that were swing states or even traditionally GOP states: Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, NC, Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, part of Nebraska, Iowa and Florida. (Did I get them all?) Let's concede Indiana and Nebraska to the GOP candidate. My initial thought is that it's not realistic to assume Obama is going to lose all of those remaining states. In general, if he holds the Kerry states and loses NH, but then carries only two or three of those remaining eight, he probably wins.

This assumes a close election, which is the only kind worth arguing about, so I will let it pass. In a large election, both OH and PA will go with the winner. Ohio is no more a traditional GOP state than Pennsylvania is a Democrat one. I am inclined to grant you Pennsylvania for Ohio, but not Michigan and Wisconsin. Those two are true battlegrounds. The other big states to watch are NC, VA and FLA. That is 83 EV from 5 states. I would start at Blue 216 - Red 220. The outstanding states are FL, MI, MO, NC, NH, NM, VA, WI. Note that several of these states will have contested Senate races as well. There is likely to be some interaction between the two races.

Arizona is the only SW state other than Texas that is not in play. Nevada and Colorado make more sense. However, in this part of the country, Romney's religion is an asset rather than a libility.

J

[Judge Jude]

insiders on Twitter now saying Huntsman will drop out an endorse Romney tomorrow.
interesting if true.

[onejayhawk]

insiders on Twitter now saying Huntsman will drop out an endorse Romney tomorrow.
interesting if true.

This does not surprise me. I have long thought Huntsman was running for a future year. In 2016 or 2020 he will not enter the race as just another candidate. Do not expect him to get a major appointment. Other than Hilary, since WW II there have been only a handful of Presidential candidates that went on to cabinet positions, and they were typically minor candidates or lesser cabinet positions, eg HUD. That being said, Huntsman would make an logical Sec State.

The polls have Romney surging in South Carolina. If Newt cannot win there, he has no chance. Santorum already lost NH by 30%. By the day after tomorrow, there should be only one candidate standing.

J