Political Forums - Obama Out nof Step

Political Forums (http://www.politicalchat.org/index.php)

- Politics (http://www.politicalchat.org/forumdisplay.php?f=25)

- - Obama Out nof Step (http://www.politicalchat.org/showthread.php?t=4301)

Obama Out nof Step

Quote:

Nationally, Obama’s challenge is that most Americans see him as a big government guy. Fully seven in 10 Americans believed Obama favors a “larger government with more services” in a Post-ABC poll last September, while just 18 percent said he prefers a “smaller government with fewer services.” That’s upside-down from the overall public, who choose a smaller over bigger government by a 56-to-38 percent margin.

Unlike Romney’s newly negative image on buying and restructuring companies (at least in swing states), the perception that Obama prefers bigger government is firm. In two other Post-ABC polls in 2010, at least seven in 10 saw Obama favoring big government. And the longstanding nature of this view could make it harder for Obama to shake than the depiction of Romney as a ruthless businessman.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...hlfW_blog.html

Interesting that he's doing as well as he is considering how his view is the opposite of the populace. In 2008 he had the advantage of being an unknown, someone different, but now that distinct advantage has been replaced by his errant policies. Whether he succeeds in cobbling together enough supporters given the pliable media and ensuing polarizing campaign rhetoric will not be determined for another 100 plus days.

Here's something on Obama's Fund Raising:

Quote:

The New York Times, hardly a mouthpiece for Republican causes or campaigns, had a front page story headlined: "Obama Trails Romney Again in Battle for Campaign Cash"

Reporter Nicholas Confessore wrote:

"Mitt Romney and the Republican National Committee easily outraised the formidable Obama money machine for the second month in a row."

Keep in mind, this is not "secret" donors funding SuperPACs. This is the on-the-record money, the limited money, the so-called "hard" money that is reported by the Republican National Committee and the Romney campaign.

The fundraising news for Obama got worse:

"In a worrisome development for the Obama campaign, Mr. Romney, who until now has been heavily dependent on donors giving the maximum federal contribution, also showed success in June drawing small donors, a traditional strength of the Obama campaign."

You might have noticed a lot of press attention to the mega-million fundraising Romney did in the Hamptons over last weekend, but not as much attention was paid to the growth in small donors.

Not only is Romney raising more, but his campaign is spending less. The Washington Post's Chris Cillizza pointed this out from the other side of the coin writing

"President Obama has spent more than $91 million on television ads in eight swing states as of July 6, a massive sum that dwarfs the $23 million former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney has disbursed on campaign commercials in those same places."

That statement is accurate, and would be telling if the Romney campaign hadn't been (a) raising more than Obama, and (b) has something on the order of $160 million cash-on-hand.

All that spending by Obama has kept him in the game. According to the RealClearPolitics average of polling in 12 swing states, Obama has leads outside the margin of error in only Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, and Nevada, Romney leads in two (North Carolina and Missouri) and the rest are essentially tied such as Obama's 0.8 percent lead in Florida.

And that with a $68 MILLION dollar spending edge in those states.

http://www.mullings.com

Won't dispute the campaign fundraising numbers. Open to question as to why.

What I'd be more interested in and perhaps I missed it, is what the pro-Romney SuperPacs are spending. Based on what I'm seeing they're pretty much saturating all of the swing states. The SuperPacs is where the real fundraisng edge goes to Romney.

I don't understand how you expect to raise money when you attack the people who make it (?).

Quote:

Originally Posted by beej (Post 112241)

Here you go:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...xsYW_blog.html

My thought is that the Superpacs will be about equal with perhaps a slight Romney advantage. What's surprising is how the spending differential hasn't helped Obama much as of yet in those swing states.

Hey, we'll see how it all goes come November. That's the American way. I didn't like the way George W. Bush was elected but once the Supreme Court made the decision he became the constitutionally elected POTUS and therefore my President. Didn't like what he did while in office either but that's our system and, above all else, I believe in our system. If Mitt is elected I will have serious concerns about the direction our country will take but that won't change the office he would hold.

I think the massive Obama-bashing that has been going on since the Republican Primaries coupled with the SuperPac attacks has something to do with how Obama is viewed. Doesn't help that the economy isn't where any of us want it to be either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by djv8ga (Post 112242)

I don't understand how you expect to raise money when you attack the people who steal it (?).

Fixed it for ya.:D

It's all about the economy. If the right had a stronger candidate he would be a shoo in in my opinion.

Pete

Quote:

Originally Posted by piece-itpete (Post 112275)

It's all about the economy. If the right had a stronger candidate he would be a shoo in in my opinion.

Pete

Their primary process effectively precluded them from choosing a good candidate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by piece-itpete (Post 112275)

It's all about the economy. If the right had a stronger candidate he would be a shoo in in my opinion.

Pete

Just goes to show you. Who could that be?:plol

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobabode (Post 112294)

Just goes to show you. Who could that be?:plol

Bugs Bunny?:p

Quote:

Originally Posted by merrylander (Post 112295)

Bugs Bunny?:p

Daffy Duck?:rolleyes: Mine, mine, mine!;)

If he continues to run on raising taxes, blaming the right and trying to make
everyone dependent on government programs I doubt he could beat Tweety Bird come November.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HatchetJack (Post 112331)

If he continues to run on raising taxes, blaming the right and trying to make
everyone dependent on government programs I doubt he could beat Tweety Bird come November.

Geez, I thought he was running on a healthcare plan that is very popular (except for the mandate), salvaging a major industry, preventing a depression, restoring some respect to the US in international relations, and - oh yeah - eliminating that terrorist who happened to elude the previous president.

Regards,

D-Ray

Quote:

Originally Posted by djv8ga (Post 112242)

I don't understand how you expect to raise money when you attack the people who make it (?).

Since when is paying your fair share of taxes an attack?:confused:

In a libertine, tea drinking, off kilter universe.

(My apologies to any libertines who drink coffee.:rolleyes:)

Quote:

Originally Posted by d-ray657 (Post 112332)

No, no, no, he doesn't kiss the Kolk Brothers' a$$es.

I do not think Americans have a clue to what small government is...they might want it but at the same time whine if their SS or Medicare is threatened in any manner. Obama being painted as a big government guy? Who cares and so what. Not nearly as bad as Romney being defined by Obama right now as a sort of 21st century robber baron, and it is mostly Romney's fault since he is so secretive and politically inept. It is over tea baggers ....start looking at 2016.

I mean it is July already....and I am just not seeing Romney bumper stickers. It is hard to imagine him as President. I could easily imagine Obama or Clinton by this time in 2008.

Quote:

Originally Posted by d-ray657 (Post 112332)

If his policies have been so successful and popular then he ought run on them, however, they aren't and he won't. Respect in international relations? Surely you're joking. The one thing that is a given is that he must campaign not on his record, but rather by polarization of the electorate. IIRC, this is standard Chicago politics, or better, the means deployed by a community organizer. The great unifier of 2008 has shed his cloak.

Quote:

Originally Posted by icenine (Post 112356)

I mean it is July already....and I am just not seeing Romney bumper stickers. It is hard to imagine him as President. I could easily imagine Obama or Clinton by this time in 2008.

I'm not seeing very many Obama bumper stickers either. I have never had a political bumber sticker on my vehicle because I fear vandalism by the opposition's supporters. I'd also suspect that in the case of opposing Obama that that possibility is even greater.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhunter (Post 112360)

I know what you are saying I am afraid of the same thing. But I work in San Diego County and on a Marine Corps base. I just don't feel any excitement for him(Romney)
It seems as we get closer to November my fear level is decreasing. But perhaps I am a Pollyannah....

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhunter (Post 112360)

C'mon up to Orange county BH, we'll only egg you from an overpass on the 405. I promise! No cinderblocks or dead fish.:rolleyes:

It'll wash off just like Mitts dogpoop-mobile!;)

Lotsa bumper stickers around here, but just who or what is McCain/Palin?

A strrrraaaaange creetcha, 1/2 centrist and 1/2 naive. A nentrist.

Most stickers around here celebrate the owners attachment to Darwin.

Pete

Here in Orange Co. they have this NOTW candidate. Could that be some sort of code for WMR?;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by djv8ga (Post 112242)

I don't understand how you expect to raise money when you attack the people who make it (?).

The people that make it? No it is the people that control it. A much different thing.