B-Man Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 (edited) From that well-known "conservative rag" , the Politico................lol Romney winning with middle-class families The past several weeks have been filled with news stories, editorials and columns heaping criticism on the tactics and strategy of the Romney campaign. Many of these opinion pieces even suggested that Romney’s only hope for winning is to make substantial changes to his campaign. Much of this analysis is based on the premise that Romney is out of touch and has not been making an affirmative case to middle-class voters. His comments at a private fundraiser in May were pointed to as an illustration that he could never identify with and win the support of many middle-class voters. We took a special look at middle-class voters, and middle-class families in particular, in this latest POLITICO-George Washington University Battleground Poll and found that not to be the case. In fact, on every measure it is Romney who is winning the battle for the support of middle-class families. Overall, Obama leads Romney by just 3 points on the ballot (50 percent to 47 percent) – which before we rounded up, is actually a 2.6 point lead and only up a half-a-percentage point from the 2.1 point lead for Obama in our last Battleground poll in early August. In our latest POLITICO-George Washington University Battleground Poll with middle-class families, which comprise about 54 percent of the total American electorate and usually split in their vote behavior between Republicans and Democrats, Romney holds a 14-point advantage (55 percent to 41 percent). Middle-class families are more inclined to believe the country is on the wrong track (34 percent right direction, 62 percent wrong track), are more likely to hold an unfavorable view of Obama (48 percent favorable, 51 percent unfavorable), and hold a more favorable view of Romney (51 percent favorable, 44 percent unfavorable) and Paul Ryan (46 percent favorable, 35 percent unfavorable) than the overall electorate. These middle-class families also hold a majority disapproval rating on the job Obama is doing as president (45 percent approve, 54 percent disapprove), and turn even more negative toward Obama on specific areas; the economy 56 percent disapprove; spending 61 percent disapprove; taxes, 53 percent disapprove; Medicare 48 percent disapprove; and even foreign policy 50 percent disapprove. All of this data make clear that Romney has won the strong support of middle-class families and is leading the president on an overwhelming majority of key measurements beyond just the ballot. In fact, when respondents were asked who, Obama or Romney, would best handle a variety of issues, Romney led on all but one including the economy (+9 percent), foreign policy (+3 percent), spending (+15 percent), taxes (+7 percent), Medicare (+2 percent), and jobs (+10 percent). Ironically, the one measurement Obama led Romney on was “standing up for the middle class” (+8 Obama), reinforcing that often the Democrats win the message war with the middle class, but not their hearts and souls. http://www.politico....l#ixzz27PLGR2Aq Edited September 24, 2012 by B-Man
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 (edited) can someone show me where the records are of the Afghanistan and Iraq and were they were listed in the budget 5 years ago? Shhh don't tell anyone - Obama did it Romney has won the strong support of middle-class families Could you have him send me an anniversary gift ? $5K a month would be nice. I'll be sure to support him then To Myth Romney the Middle Class has an income of $200,000.00 How many of you make 1/4 of that? Edited September 24, 2012 by BillsFan-4-Ever
DC Tom Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 can someone show me where the records are of the Afghanistan and Iraq and were they were listed in the budget 5 years ago? I can tell you they were in the budget 5 years ago...up until 2007, they were funded with "supplemental appropriations", which is why budget deficits were officially low but the debt kept growing at an outsized pace. After the Democrats took control of Congress, the Bush administration rolled the war funding into the budget and dared Congress not to pass it. Which I thought was correct (the funding should have been in the budget to begin with), but simultaneously childishly petty.
B-Man Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 can someone show me where the records are of the Afghanistan and Iraq and were they were listed in the budget 5 years ago? Shhh don't tell anyone - Obama did it I have a minute before my meeting, so I'll break my "don't try and correct the feces-flinging monkey" rule. The thread is about media polling and the Romney/Obama standings, not the war budgets. and if someone here does answer your question, you have not exhibited any ability to understand that answer. .
Gary M Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Not sure 2010 is a good example. 3 months before that midterm, it wasn't a matter of "if," it was a matter of "when" the Dems lose 5+ seats in the Senate and 35+ seats in the House. How about this? http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/25/us/politics/challenged-by-old-allies-teachers-unions-court-gop.html?exprod=myyahoo
DC Tom Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 and if someone here does answer your question, you have not exhibited any ability to understand that answer. Pretty much the reason I answered it...am looking forward to the incoherent response.
In-A-Gadda-Levitre Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 From that well-known "conservative rag" , the Politico................lol Romney winning with middle-class families ok, that's the spin from GOP strategists Goeas and Nienaber, here's the left side take on the same poll Not only is the President leading Mitt Romney with the support of half of all likely voters (50% to 47%), but fully six-in-ten voters now believe Obama will ultimately win, compared to just 30% who express similar confidence about Romney. This is no small point; at this point in the election cycle, voters’ expectations help fuel turnout and influence the last of the undecided voters. Underpinning these expectations is a set of judgments that voters are forming about the two candidates, their visions, and plans for the country. The moment of intervention and clarity that the Democratic convention provided the national consciousness has been sustained by Americans’ increasing recognition of the hostility and disrespect inherent in the GOP’s agenda, and voiced so unapologetically by the GOP’s standard-bearers, Romney and Ryan. As a result, Americans’ preference for Obama over Romney continues to grow, both in personal terms and on a range of issues central to their lives and the future of the country, including the economy, foreign policy, taxes, and the middle class. both are spinning like crazy
Juror#8 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 I'm still waiting for all of Romney's skeletons to come out of the closet. You know, the ones you claimed some time ago? What's next, Harry Reid claiming that Romney was once married to 7 woman at the same time. I can hear it now, "I call on Mitt Romney to prove that he wasn't married to 7 underage girls while he was on his mission to France. If he can't show proof then it is obvious he isn't fit to be president. Furthermore if he can't show all of the divorce papers it is obvious that his marriage to Ann is illegal and he has committed a felony" What "skeletons"? Oh...you mean opposition research? I guess you've been in a cave the last 3 months. And then there is that thing called strategy, and judicious management of material facts, and 6 week projections, and.... But those things probably don't matter to you. You're too busy trying to blithely discredit me for something that I stated a year ago (that is as true today as it was then), that you actually didn't contest in any material way, and that has yet to be unproven going into this election season's final act. According to folks who I trust, the WH had "voluminous" amounts of opposition research and strategy directions with respect to Romney that they had with no other candidate. I don't see how that has proven untrue, friend.
In-A-Gadda-Levitre Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 How about this? http://www.nytimes.c...?exprod=myyahoo umm, what does some teacher's unions contributing to some republicans have to do with Obama/Romney polling or majorities in Congress?
Juror#8 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 People watch Hardball? About 700,000 viewers a day for the 7:00 show so at least a few. It's nothing compared to the Fox lineup, but it's not insignificant.
Gary M Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 umm, what does some teacher's unions contributing to some republicans have to do with Obama/Romney polling or majorities in Congress? The winds of change are blowing.
DC Tom Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 According to folks who I trust, the WH had "voluminous" amounts of opposition research and strategy directions with respect to Romney that they had with no other candidate. Too bad the White House didn't put that much effort into DOING THEIR !@#$ING JOBS...
Juror#8 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Too bad the White House didn't put that much effort into DOING THEIR !@#$ING JOBS... I can't disagree with you here.
Doc Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 What "skeletons"? Oh...you mean opposition research? I guess you've been in a cave the last 3 months. And then there is that thing called strategy, and judicious management of material facts, and 6 week projections, and.... But those things probably don't matter to you. You're too busy trying to blithely discredit me for something that I stated a year ago (that is as true today as it was then), that you actually didn't contest in any material way, and that has yet to be unproven going into this election season's final act. According to folks who I trust, the WH had "voluminous" amounts of opposition research and strategy directions with respect to Romney that they had with no other candidate. I don't see how that has proven untrue, friend. Again, it shows how the delusional the WH is (as does the belief that Jeb BUSH or the incredibly insipid Rob Portman would have been like catching "lightning in a bottle"). Many of these strategies they thought would work have become non-issues or have backfired, while the others that have stuck will get fleshed-out to a great degree in the debates. And try as they might, the economy is a thorn in their sides, while their foreign policy is now becoming one.
3rdnlng Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 What "skeletons"? Oh...you mean opposition research? I guess you've been in a cave the last 3 months. And then there is that thing called strategy, and judicious management of material facts, and 6 week projections, and.... But those things probably don't matter to you. You're too busy trying to blithely discredit me for something that I stated a year ago (that is as true today as it was then), that you actually didn't contest in any material way, and that has yet to be unproven going into this election season's final act. According to folks who I trust, the WH had "voluminous" amounts of opposition research and strategy directions with respect to Romney that they had with no other candidate. I don't see how that has proven untrue, friend. Well, gee, golly, gosh. I thought that the voluminous amounts of research was supposed to amount to deep dark secrets, or at least something that might discredit Romney other than "Bain bad", doggie on the roof and 47%. That's the impression I got from your post so many months ago. If all you meant to say was that they had researched Romney and not others because they always believed he would be the nominee, then so be it.
In-A-Gadda-Levitre Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 The winds of change are blowing. And try as they might, the economy is a thorn in their sides, while their foreign policy is now becoming one. not sure either of these is true. Check out the latest Fox Poll that shows not only Romney losing OH, FL and VA, but also has the President leading (albeit slim margins) on the economy and foreign policy. If Romney doesn't win in FL and probably OH and VA too, there's almost no way he gets to 270 Obama tops Romney by seven percentage points among likely voters in both Ohio (49-42 percent) and Virginia (50-43 percent). In Florida, the president holds a five-point edge (49-44 percent). Obama’s lead is just outside the poll’s margin of sampling error in Ohio and Virginia, and within the margin of sampling error in Florida. The good news for Romney is that among voters who are “extremely” interested in this year’s election, the races are much tighter. Obama is up by just two points with this group in Virginia (49-47 percent), Florida is tied (48-48 percent), and Romney is up by one point in Ohio (48-47 percent). Independents are nearly evenly divided in each of the states, as well. Majorities of voters are unhappy with how things are going in the country, yet in all three states more say they trust Obama than Romney to improve the economy. Likewise, in each state more voters believe the Obama administration’s policies have helped rather than hurt the economy -- albeit by slim margins: By two points in Florida, three points in Ohio and five points in Virginia. Amid the turbulent situation in the Middle East, each of the polls shows the president is more trusted than Romney on foreign policy.
Juror#8 Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 Again, it shows how the delusional the WH is (as does the belief that Jeb BUSH or the incredibly insipid Rob Portman would have been like catching "lightning in a bottle"). Many of these strategies they thought would work have become non-issues or have backfired, while the others that have stuck will get fleshed-out to a great degree in the debates. And try as they might, the economy is a thorn in their sides, while their foreign policy is now becoming one. You are right. Much of what they thought would stick, hasn't. They've tried taxes, Romney bullying, Stericycle (which concerns me actually but not body politic at large), Bain, off-shore accounts, etc. They have a lot of things that they banked on to disconnect Romney from the electorate. But he is only barely outside the margin of error in most polls and even or leading in others. I don't think the WH is done. They've managed the news cycle well and it's going into the debate season where the debates will dominate the punditry. That's all they wanted to do because no one will be talking economy going into November - they'll be talking gaffes and mis-statements.
Gary M Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 (edited) Well, gee, golly, gosh. I thought that the voluminous amounts of research was supposed to amount to deep dark secrets, or at least something that might discredit Romney other than "Bain bad", doggie on the roof and 47%. That's the impression I got from your post so many months ago. If all you meant to say was that they had researched Romney and not others because they always believed he would be the nominee, then so be it. You forgot, "Ann has a Horse" You are right. Much of what they thought would stick, hasn't. They've tried taxes, Romney bullying, Stericycle (which concerns me actually but not body politic at large), Bain, off-shore accounts, etc. They have a lot of things that they banked on to disconnect Romney from the electorate. But he is only barely outside the margin of error in most polls and even or leading in others. I don't think the WH is done. They've managed the news cycle well and it's going into the debate season where the debates will dominate the punditry. That's all they wanted to do because no one will be talking economy going into November - they'll be talking gaffes and mis-statements. I know at least 24 million Americans that will be thinking economy. Edited September 24, 2012 by Gary M
DC Tom Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 You are right. Much of what they thought would stick, hasn't. They've tried taxes, Romney bullying, Stericycle (which concerns me actually but not body politic at large), Bain, off-shore accounts, etc. They have a lot of things that they banked on to disconnect Romney from the electorate. But he is only barely outside the margin of error in most polls and even or leading in others. I don't think the WH is done. They've managed the news cycle well and it's going into the debate season where the debates will dominate the punditry. That's all they wanted to do because no one will be talking economy going into November - they'll be talking gaffes and mis-statements. Not that that's been at all difficult, given the soft-shoe treatment the media gives them...
The Big Cat Posted September 24, 2012 Posted September 24, 2012 It really doesn't matter who's likely to vote for whom, how much money they make, or whether they're classified "undecided." All that matters is where they live. And unless Romney can win Ohio, Florida AND Pennsylvania, he quite literally does not have a prayer. Romney has pulled all his resources from Pennsylvania. So what does that tell you?
Recommended Posts