It’s early yet, but this week is going really badly for Mitt Romney. Consider the following:
- Eric Fehrnstrom, Romney’s top advisor (and also Scott Brown’s BFF), may have outdone his “Etch A Sketch” comment by declaring on MSNBC that Romney agrees with President Obama that the health care law’s individual mandate is not a tax (there’s video here). This puts Romney directly at odds with the entire Republican establishment, which has been desperately trying to salvage a silver lining from their epic defeat at the Supreme Court by claiming that Chief Justice Roberts declared the mandate a tax. (That’s not exactly what he did, but put that aside for the moment.) This has led to what TPM’s Josh Marshall aptly called “GOP messaging pandemonium.” GOP stalwarts like the American Spectator are horrified at the messaging debacle.
- Fehrnstrom’s gaffe lends support to what right-wing moguls Rupert Murdoch and Jack Welch tweeted over the weekend: that the Romney campaign doesn’t stand a chance unless it dumps “old friends” and brings in some people who know what they’re doing.
- Also on health care, recent polling finds the public still split on Obamacare, but against whatever it is that Romney is selling by a wide margin.
- Meanwhile, a Hispanic Republican congressman in Florida – David Rivera, a well-known Miami-area power broker especially in the Cuban-American community – is calling out Romney’s total failure to articulate any sort of policy on immigration, and “warned that elements of the Miami party machinery won’t engage on election day without a more expansive Romney plan on immigration.”
- On the campaign trail, the Obama campaign’s relentless attacks on Romney’s history at Bain are working. And for good reason: the more Americans learn about how Bain actually made its piles and piles of money, the less they’re going to like it.
- Relatedly, Vanity Fair just published a detailed look at Romney’s offshore bank accounts. It’s an eye-opening look at why Mitt Romney is really, really nothing like you.
- Finally, thanks to danfromwaltham for reminding me to check recent polling: reports yesterday were that the latest Gallup tracking poll has Obama up 5 points over Romney (48-43), Obama’s largest lead since April.
Can’t wait to see what happens tomorrow! :-)
Discuss
21 Comments . Leave a comment below.Not that bad of a week. Also, Obama up 1pt in recent poll in Florida. I believe Romney is hauling in more contributions than Team Obama. Don’t pop the champagne bottles just yet.
What Democrats have praised Bain Capital. Deval Patrick, Ed Rendell, Bill Clinton to name a few. Expect a commercial of this trio to be hitting the airwaves to refute Obama, who really has never had a job in the private sector and Mitt will point this out.
Obama should run on his heath care legislation, pass XL pipeline, and be the open administration he said he would be, and throw Holder under the bus like he did Rev. Wright. Then he would win with ease.
To all my new peeps on BMG, have a great 4th of July. Remember, we cannot even legally light a sparkler in this state, yet I can purchase guns and other deadly firearms. Does this make sense? Let’s legalize fireworks and have some F-U-N!!!!!
are you talking about? Gallup’s latest tracking poll has Obama up 5 nationally, his biggest lead since April, and a recent swing state poll had Obama +9 in Ohio, +6 in Pennsylvania, and +4 in Florida.
this is what I could find that is close to what Dan references, read the last paragraph. Could Oklahoma one of the double secret battleground states? Truly bizarre.
in other words, polls look pretty good for Obama right now.
I like this website because it does state-by-state, which given how the electoral college works seems better than a national poll. The current “score” is 326-212 favoring the President.
are Justices Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Kennedy.
thanks
I like that site too but aggregating all the polls within a given state produces some weird results. AZ should be a swing state and MI and WI are consistently
Bluer. Nate Silvers Times site is better IMO.
One of the ways our opinion is being manipulated by the mainstream media is by conducting and then reporting polls that conflate very different opinions into one. We see an example in the above healhcare poll.
The quick takeaway is that 48% oppose the ACA (the text notes that just 30% support Mitt Romney’s approach to health care).
Here’s the problem I have with questions like this. I suggest that there are many Americans who oppose the ACA because it doesn’t go far enough. That segment is very unlikely to support the GOP approach — and that segment is NEVER reported by the media. In my view, polls like this make the electorate seem more evenly divided between Blue and Red than it really is.
Similarly, several polls ask whether “America/Congress/Obama is headed in the right direction”. The unspoken implication is that those who don’t like the current direction will support the GOP ticket. These polls obscure the portion of the electorate who are frustrated because they feel that America/Congress/Obama is too conservative.
I accept that America is more conservative today than it was during the Clinton era or during the 60s. Nevertheless, I think America is far more liberal today than the mainstream media report. I think polls like this distort the reality of how today’s American’s really feel.
What portion of Americans today want the government to have LARGER role in health care? What portion of Americans today want to change our direction towards being MORE LIBERAL?
I’d like our opinion polling to do a better job of revealing information like this.
A year and a half ago, I was certain that a big proportion of Obama disapprovers were people just like me who thought he didn’t go far enough.
Unfortunately, the data never confirmed my hopes.
There are also like twice as many self-identified conservatives as liberals. We’ve our work cut out for us.
making it sound like the race was over and you could start celebrating. I said you should all relax since EW had it int he bag (according to you all). Somehow I got the feeling reading it that you guys read too much into your tea leaves. That race is much tighter than you ant to admit even though i read almost weekly posts here saying EW goes 5 points higher in recent polling…
Now I here the same thing about Obama and Romney. Sounds like you guys are already high giving each other. All your indicators are looking good and you’re even including smily faces
With all this celebrating… do I get any special privileges to do some band standing in November if Obama loses? I mean, you guys are so confident and have so many retched stories about Romney’s Swiss bank accounts, dog stories, his wife’s horses, cutting people’s hair when he was in high school, farting in public when he was in 5th grade… that you gotta give me some time to do some dancing here if the Bain Mormon beats Obama.
Of course, just maybe those polls are wrong. Just maybe the economy is going to drop further. Maybe the Tea Party will wake up and energize the base. Maybe the huge onslaught of campaign ads (both positive and negative) will have an impact. Maybe Mitt’s VP selection will make a difference. Or maybe all the current indicators are right and Mitt will get his butt kicked. Somehow I think the Obama campaign does not share the overly optimistic views I read in this thread.
Every poll I’ve seen has been within the margin and I believe the most recent post was by David indicating an exact 46-46 tie. I’m sure many of us wish she were mopping the floor with him, but alas, we are a reality based community.
http://bluemassgroup.com/2012/07/weekly-scott-brown-d-up-week-of-62912/#comment-294952
So with all the issues mentioned in that post, we all agree that EW has not swayed a majority of MA voters her way?
…lists a lot of reasons (some more persuasive than others) that the diarist feels SHOULD drive down Brown’s numbers, but nowhere does the diary claim that those numbers have moved. One the one hand Brown as the incumbent has an inherent advantage; on the other hand when an incumbent polls under 50% that often spells trouble for said incumbent.
when an incumbent polls under 50% that often spells trouble for said incumbent.
does not tend to apply to Presidential races. Lots of Presidents who have won second terms have polled under 50% in the the run-up to the election. I’m pretty sure that was the case for Clinton and G W Bush, maybe Reagan too. It’s different for incumbent Senators.
National polls for a presidential race are less meaningful because of the electoral college. Obama leads 326-212 or 299-239 depending on the method of data analysis.
…that Obama is a sure bet nor did I guarantee that Brown would lose. However, politics and the analysis thereof is my area of expertise (BA in political science, MA in political management) so it’s not like I’m pulling this out of my sleeve.
based on your educational background… are you just hoping that Brown and Romney are going to lose or are you predicting it?
If I had to choose in the presidential I’d say Obama, but the Senate race I won’t even touch at this point.
It would be interesting to dredge up Brown’s record and quotes from back in the day when he helped Mitt craft the model for ACA.
« Blue Mass Group Front Page
Sun 19 May 4:20 AM