February 1, 2012

Gallup's state-by-state numbers look very grim for Obama.

Conn Carroll says:
If President Obama carries only those states where he had a net positive approval rating in 2011 (e.g. Michigan where he is up 48 percent to 44 percent), Obama would lose the 2012 election to the Republican nominee 323 electoral votes to 215.
Here are the details at Gallup.

166 comments:

Andy R. said...

Elections are about choices between two people, or two parties. It's not Obama vs. not-Obama (as much as the Republicans might like to pretend that's the case).

It's Obama vs. Romney or the Democratic Party vs. the Republican Party. Conveniently for Obama, as people get to know Romney they like him less and less.

Jay said...

The Indiana state senate passed right to work legislation today.

Obama winning that state was a total fluke.

Jay said...

Andy R. said...
Elections are about choices between two people, or two parties. It's not Obama vs. not-Obama


Um, that is what you're trying to delude yourself into, but the election is going to boil down to: 2,313,000 jobs lost on Obama's watch so far.


Conveniently for Obama, as people get to know Romney they like him less and less.


Comical.

Obama's poll #'s have declined faster that any modern President, even Jimmy Carter.

Rusty said...

I want some of what Andy's on. Just not as much as he's had.

Revenant said...

Conveniently for Obama, as people get to know Romney they like him less and less.

Inconveniently for Obama, the same is true of him. :)

Scott M said...

Andy. Seriously. Spuriously-based rationalization is unbecoming. Or are you still aching slightly after realizing that the Democrats voted between Black and Not-Black in '08?

Tragic.

Coketown said...

I have to agree with Andy and his stupid hat. What matters is whether people approve of Obama more or less than his opponent, not whether he's under that magical 50% approval. I really can't imagine Oregon going Republican as the map suggests it would.

damikesc said...

Which is why one has to wonder why nobody seems to asking about the electability of Obama.

It's not like he's lighting the world on fire with the most compliant press corps I've ever seen.

traditionalguy said...

So hold the election today.

Our patrician nominee who doesn't much worry about the poor who enjoy a safety net anyway, let his mask slip again today.

Somebody get him back into hiding quick.

damikesc said...

It's Obama vs. Romney or the Democratic Party vs. the Republican Party. Conveniently for Obama, as people get to know Romney they like him less and less.

Ironically, polls show that the more people see Obama, the less they like him. That will work well for him in a campaign.

damikesc said...

Our patrician nominee who doesn't much worry about the poor who enjoy a safety net anyway, let his mask slip again today.

Talking points work well with you.

Obama has put more people on food stamps than any President ever. He has presided over massive increases in costs for basic food staples.

Nobody has raped the poor like Obama.

rcommal said...

OK, but I have one word for you:

turnout.

Christopher in MA said...

"OK, but I have one word for you: turnout."

And I have one word for you:

Fraud.

damikesc said...

OK, but I have one word for you:

turnout.


Obama didn't pay their mortgages off. He didn't do a thing to help with student loan debt.

...why would his most fervent acolytes 4 yrs ago waste their time voting for him again now?

John Stodder said...

Non-RINO reaction to this news:

"Damn, is it too late to resuscitate Michelle Bachmann?"

(Actually, non-RINOs don't curse, so this is inaccurate.)

As for Andy's point, you're overlooking a significant problem for Obama, that his low approval ratings have been where they are for a long time, indicating his unpopularity has become a settled view among more than half the voters. Romney is unpopular right now because, unsurprisingly, he has been in a fierce campaign in which he is being attacked as a liberal and evil capitalist, AND he has been firing back with statements and ads that undoubtedly are pissing off lots of Gingrich-lovers and LWV types alike. Once he has the nomination sewn up, his negatives will fade back somewhat. Obama's won't.

The "I don't care about poor people remark" was stupid, but all you non-RINOs are aware that it is a partial quote, right? In the past, non-RINOs had a problem with partial quotes, a la Maureen Dowd. But in this year of the right expressing its feeeeelings, I guess there's a different standard.

Revenant said...

Our patrician nominee who doesn't much worry about the poor who enjoy a safety net anyway, let his mask slip again today.

We're going to have to listen to you whine for the next nine years, aren't we.

Widmerpool said...

Obama's partisans can delude themselves all they want, but the fact remains that O's "disapproves" have exceeded his "approves" for going on two years now. That is not changing between now and November. Under those circumstances any reasonably nonthreatening Republican nominee (and Mitt certainly qualifies) stands an excellent chance of winning.

Tank said...

These polls are meaningless at this juncture. So much will or could happen before Nov 2012.

Who knows what will happen with unemployment [other than more bogus numbers], Europe's various countries' debts, housing, etc. What effect a major terrorist attack, or stock market drop?

A long way to go.

traditionalguy said...

Obama intends to use the sympathy vote to counter the angry vote.

He now shows off Michelle and the kids who are good people. She, and loving, smiling Barack, only desire better incomes for everyone, better diets to eat, and better peacetime consolation for the wounded warriors he personally brought home alive from those useless GOP wars.


N.B.: President Obama is pleading for mercy, not justice.

And mercy is shown by Americans to those who show mercy...like our own Obama family shows us everyday.

And he will contrast that meme with the heartless, abstract business man portraying himself as the Great Executive Romney coming to destroy our Obamas like he and Bain fire and destroys the weak who get in their way.

David said...

Long time to November. And as Andy points out, it's between Obama and the Republican nominee, not just a generic choice. That's Andy's insight for the year, however. If you can't see that a lot of people might actually like Mitt Romney, you can't see much.

Amexpat said...

A better indicator than polls is Intrade and the odds there on Obama have been ticking up the last few weeks. After hovering around 50% for a few months he's now at 56%.

Hagar said...

It is true that much might happen between now and November.
The trouble is that there is hardly anything that can happen that will cause people to unite behind Obama, while just about everything that can happen is likely to be blamed on him and his Democrats.

Scott M said...

We're going to have to listen to you whine for the next nine years, aren't we.

Seven. The zombie apocalypse will happen in Romney's second term.

shiloh said...

Seven mos. out from when the actual presidential campaign starts notwithstanding and mittens putting his foot in his mouth daily aside, again Althouse has already projected Barack Hussein Obama the winner.

Which is very wise of "our" smitten w/mittens hostess. :-P

As always conservatives ~ keep hope alive! that mittens will lead you to the promised land.

So let's recap, shall we:

mittens has been a loser in every political race except MA governor, when he ran as a moderate (((Dem))), w/a big $$$ advantage against a very disadvantaged opponent and still couldn't crack the 50% barrier.

Indeed, another RINO McCain, ran against Obama and lost badly to the 1st African-American president and mittens will be running against incumbent president Obama.

Stay tuned ...

james conrad said...

It's long past time for the country to get its mojo back. I suspect that if the country decides Romney is a sane, reasonable guy, this could be a blow out of 1980 proportions.

Lauderdale Vet said...

I think the Administration's Mortgage Refi plan will have an impact on states such as Florida.

He's not gone yet, and he has no plans to go quietly.

ricpic said...

This is why Barry's going to try to buy the election. Case in point: rolling out the Obama Administration plan to force the big bad bankers to let millions of homeowners refinance their mortgages, or even to forgive their mortgages, no questions asked.

Chip S. said...

He now shows off Michelle and the kids who are good people.

Oh, the stupid RINOs for foisting Romney & family on us, when we could have had Newt & Callista to offset those Obama visuals.

Harsh Pencil said...

I'm not sure the "not concerned about the very poor" comment will hurt Romney at all. The very poor weren't going to vote for him anyway. As for the rest of population, for a lot of them, their concern is that the very poor are getting too much of their money. They see them as takers. If this is true, how is a candidate that says he isn't going to worry too much about them going to lose their votes?

Amartel said...

I was surprised about Oregon numbers too. They just had an election yesterday to replace Democrat Congressman Wu (woo! The furry tiger suit wearing weirdo). The democrat won over a very middle-of-the-road Republican, 54-40%. It is a pretty liberal district, Wu was the representative for years and it got redistricted in order to include a chunk of Portland west hills progressives. That being said, the Willamette Valley, where this district is located, is the populated area of OR and it's always been pretty liberal.

chickenlittle said...

It sure looks tight in Wisconsin. Expect a steady drumbeat through the summer, thanks to the political outsider types.

Michael Haz said...

Barack Obama will lose.

Tammy Baldwin will lose.

Kathleen Falk will lose.

Huzzah!

garage mahal said...

We're going to have to listen to you whine for the next nine years, aren't we.

Nah, less than a year. Can't see a gaffe prone Thurston Howell taking states like Ohio, where he has a 28% approval rating, down by 8 to Obama, according to PPP

The Drill SGT said...

Andy R. said...
Elections are about choices between two people, or two parties. It's not Obama vs. not-Obama (as much as the Republicans might like to pretend that's the case).


Andy would be correct if this were an election between 2 non-incumbents but it's not.

There is an incumbent and in reelections the calculus is different. it goes like this:

1. Does the incumbent deserve reelection? If yes, Done. If no, see step 2.

2. Does the challenger scare me too much? if yes, go to step 1 and reevaluate, if no, vote challenger, done

The point is, voters dont use the same criteria on both candidates, and given O'bama poll numbers it looks like he fails step 1. And if Rommney, (who isn't my fav) is the candidate, Rommney won't scare folks, so Rommney will win.

shiloh said...

"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?' He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least among you, you did not do for me.'"

-Matthew 25:41-45

ok, ok, mittens latest Oops! faux pas moment was just trying to win over the conservative evangelicals who already don't like him lol.

As always, mittens is a work in progress ...

chickenlittle said...

Nine more months of Shiloh's indigestional labors. Nine more months of Garage "L'amazing" Mahal's breathe coaching us on how to deliver a perfect turd in the fall (has anyone volunteered for Walker's thankless job yet?)

DADvocate said...

It's not Obama vs. not-Obama

Maybe for such a simple mind as yours. The rest of us know better. There is no one in the Republican race I won't vote for and nothing Obama can do to get me to vote for him. Yes, it's Obama vs not-Obama this time.

chickenlittle said...

(has anyone volunteered for Walker's thankless job yet?)

I mean someone electable?

chickenlittle said...

ok, ok, mittens latest Oops! faux pas moment was just trying to win over the conservative evangelicals who already don't like him lol.

A simple comparison of the candidate's charitable contributions will clear up that one, Shilho.

Don't you guys just hate hypocrisy?

shiloh said...

"Nine more months of Shiloh's indigestional labors."

Probably another incorrect assumption from Althouse lemmings as I would wager heavily against it.

Again Althouse's flock cheers! :)

Having already took a 3/4 mo. break from Althouse and her lemmings incessant whining last year, it may be time to fly away again.

But please, continue to whine regardless. :-P

chickenlittle said...

@Shilho: Look who comes off looking like the man on moon?

Michael said...

AndyR: Wrong again. Incumbents are always the subject of elections. You can look it up. Conveniently for Romney people have gotten to know Obama pretty well over the last three years. And fyi, Romney hasn't been running against Obama. Yet.

chickenlittle said...

Having already took a 3/4 mo. break from Althouse and her lemmings incessant whining last year, it may be time to fly away again.

See ya' around for The Fall.

take care

Original Mike said...

Grim for Obama = Cheerful for the country

Amartel said...

Job approval probably down in Oregon because he's NOT LIBERAL ENOUGH.

wv: foopro. Professional fools.

Revenant said...

ok, ok, mittens latest Oops! faux pas moment was just trying to win over the conservative evangelicals who already don't like him lol.

Romney gives his own money to the poor. Obama gives other people's money to the poor.

I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to the reader to guess which behavior appeals to Christians more. :)

garage mahal said...

(has anyone volunteered for Walker's thankless job yet?)

I'm in possession of some pretty interesting inside info on that. Again, sorry, wish I could tell you about it.

shiloh said...

clittle, re: mittens' hypocrisy, all those foreign investments/off shore bank accounts will at least show mittens knows how to increase his personal fortune by outsourcing overseas lol.

Keep hope alive!

The great thing about mittens is Obama's campaign team doesn't have to lie to bury him as the truth is already well known about aloof, out of touch willard mittens.

Carol_Herman said...

But don't overlook how there are some in the GOP party who are looking for their next McCain.

Also, notice this. You can't brag about Dubya, who did win. Including in Florida, where Albert Gore tried to count "hanging chads" after he lost his own home state of Tennessee.

What I do know, is that there are 13 states "up for grabs." And, in one of them, Wisconsin, the democratic maneuvers to take out Governor Walker remain on display. (Oh. And, where David Prosser won a similar campaign.)

You want statistics to predict the future? Nobody's quite been able to do that, yet.

pauldar said...

Andy, I must be doing something wrong. As the more I get to know Romney, the better I like him. Oddly enough, wife feels the same way.

Tarzan said...

...why would his most fervent acolytes 4 yrs ago waste their time voting for him again now?

Because to not do so would threaten their most fervent self-delusions?

Mike said...

Shiloh are you trying to slyly remind readers how we just learned Mitt gave $7 Million to charity last year? I have a hard time figuring id you are ironic or just lacking in awareness.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

I was surprised about Oregon numbers too.

Don't be. They just illustrate that even in liberally leaning Oregon there is the urban/rural divide.

Once out of the moonbat territories of Eugene and other liberal enclaves, the people in Oregon are mostly conservative and libertarian.

In California, once you get out of the Bay Area and coastal areas the people are very VERY conservative. My district votes 60 to 75% Republican. Always. MAP

This is why I think that the electoral votes should be given on a pro rata basis instead of winner take all.

For instance if the vote goes 51% to the Dem and 49% to the Rep candidates all 55 electoral votes go to the Democrat. Effectively erasing the votes of 49% of the population.

It should be divided by how much each candidate got of the whole.

Revenant said...

But don't overlook how there are some in the GOP party who are looking for their next McCain.

Yes, but fortunately Gingrich lost last night. So they've suffered a setback.

Carol_Herman said...

Both parties are a mess.

Both parties have failed to convince the American public that they're capable of solving our decline.

I liked Newt's ideas. Today, at Drudge, there's a link to Dick Morris. Who shows how Newt reacted to Mitt's taunts. It's stupid in politics to react to taunts.

The contest we will see ahead, can even introduce a 3rd party player.

Where all the current "delegate collecting" won't count for a hill of beans.

And, who knows? Back in 1860, Abraham Lincoln wasn't afraid to walk into the GOP convention, in Chicago ... named the WIGWAM. Where he was in 4th place. He didn't even have the cards to place himself in the veep's slot.

24 hours later ... the 3 favorite sons ... had the delegates in such an uproar ... Lincoln walked into 1st place.

Our history has been wonderful to us.

chickenlittle said...

look[s] very grim for Obama

I guess that makes Romney the Grim Freeper? [stop giving them ammo--Ed.]

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... Conveniently for Obama, as people get to know Romney they like him less and less..."

Isn't Obama a Christian? I thought you hate Christians.

chickenlittle said...

already well known about aloof, out of touch willard mittens.

Isn't that bit too GHWB?

shiloh said...

Mike

I hesitate to show you the facts! 'cause I'm empathetic to your blind trust of conservative media.

take care, blessings

edutcher said...

Raised this yesterday.

Actually, it may be worse than Gallup says. A few months ago, there were polls that put GodZero's approval at

NJ 44
NY 35
CT 48 ,

3 of the only 10 states where Zero is above water.

Significantly worse than Gallup, which has been somewhat in the media tank, to the point that the Demos are, yes, a little concerned about the Empire State.

damikesc said...

Ironically, polls show that the more people see Obama, the less they like him. That will work well for him in a campaign.

Follow Rasmussen's approval index (or trace it back) a couple of months and that's exactly what you find.

People are tuning him out.

shiloh said...

So let's recap, shall we:

Zero won most of his elections running unopposed because his competition had to drop out.

For the first time he's running on a record, which stinks.

Indeed, another RINO McCain, ran against Obama and lost badly to the 1st African-American president and mittens will be running against incumbent president Obama.

Not badly, only by 6 points. And today, Zero runs in a much worse economy than '08, which he has created.

And nobody gives a damn about his race this time.

Or lack of it.

PS How often is Intrade wrong?

DADvocate said...

all those foreign investments/off shore bank accounts will at least show mittens knows how to increase his personal fortune by outsourcing overseas lol.

Oh, yes, I want to vote for someone who's a failure, someone who's never earned any success in the real world but was a community organizer or half-assed government employee living off the public dole. Having a president who understands international economics, business and law. Having a president with a record of success in public and private endeavors would be horrific. Yes, being lead by living proof of the Peter Principle has been so great the past 3 years. But, preaching hate is the way of the Democrats.

Unknown said...

The Obama bottom line is how he turned a lot of $60,000 a year jobs into $25,000 jobs. Getting closer to equalizing us with the country he idolizes. China.

shiloh said...

btw, many folk might not consider mittens giving $$$ to the Mormon church ie a cult, charity.

carry on

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... The Indiana state senate passed right to work legislation today.

Obama winning that state was a total fluke..."

Of course it was. Obama carried Indiana 49.9% to McCain getting 49%.

My man Mitch won with 58%.

Don't think The Won will repeat that again.

Carol_Herman said...

Sure. The Golden Girls, if you're old enough, give you warm feelings about the gals who occupy apartments in Miami. But in Gay Men Don't Get Fat, Simon Doonan chimes in with his take on these old cows.

But he calls them fag hags. Don't ask. But bask in his description.

He starts off talking about the chubby gals he met back in the 1970's. Regular office worker types during the day. But at night? STUDIO 54!

(It wasn't just Bette Middler who attracted these men.) Simon Doonan was right there.

"PS: What you are doubtless wondering, happened to happened to all my old fag hags?"

He mentions a few names. And, he trucks on: "Lots of them got married, or shacked up, and yes, they stopped taking the pill and turned on the plumbing and had kids." (Blah, blah, blah.)

Then, he continues, "For some strange reason, many of my old fag hags moved to Florida."

You mean you weren't curious about all those "middle class" Floridians?

Seems Romney specifically was targeting a middle class audience trapped in a world where everything they owned, went down hill.

Of course, you can still buy real estate there. Go ahead. Improve their economy.

You think Nevada is gonna turn out to be any different?

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... Andy. Seriously..."

Minus 50 points for putting those two words next to each other.

chickenlittle said...

shiloh said...
btw, many folk might not consider mittens giving $$$ to the Mormon church ie a cult, charity.

et tu, Shilho?

edutcher said...

shiloh said...

btw, many folk might not consider mittens giving $$$ to the Mormon church ie a cult, charity.

carry on


As opposed to Hopenchange?

If shiloh keeps carrying on, they'll have to find him a rubber room.

PS And if he wants to impress anyone, he'll have to find a more credible source than Dr Evil's hired shills.

Rose said...

Oregon won't be "going Republican" as much as they will be fixing a mistake.

People aren't going to care about party when it comes to Obama - not this time. People don't like Chicago thugs, and he is reminding them of what they forgot when they blew it and voted for one.

And the lower his polls go, the nastier he is going to be- and the more it is going to show.

wv: moblame LOL

chickenlittle said...

@shilho: You had to add that little ad hom to get the math to come out right, didn't you?

Revenant said...

btw, many folk might not consider mittens giving $$$ to the Mormon church ie a cult, charity.

Yes, I'm sure Christians won't count "giving money to your church" as charity. Good call, shiloh. :)

Carol_Herman said...

You know the statistic I'd like to see? If Obama rids himself of Biden. Does he then select Hillary? Why not Barney Frank, he's free?

Oh, and didn't Christopher Dodd just bring honors to the democrapic party? Where he landed a job worth a million bucks a year? Didn't he just deliver, for Hollywood, a real whopper?

I have no idea why Newt didn't pick up on SOPA, and just box all the insiders in DC into unconsciousness.

shiloh said...

edutcher

Why would I want to impress any of Althouse's lemmings? Rhetorical.

Again, I'm here mainly for my own amusement.

The truth is out there ...

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... Again, I'm here mainly for my own amusement..."

Masturbation should be a private matter.

DADvocate said...

No wonder he's up in Michigan. Lot's of greedy auto union members there.

traditionalguy said...

The obvious is in front of our faces.

Obama wants everybody dependent upon his government of the cronies, by the cronies and for the cronies.

But people's need for emotional caring from a Presidential father figure still sells.

Obama continually pits on the fighter game for desperate people. He talks up doing them good with his visible right hand while his invisible left hand slits their throats with energy embargoes and environmental regs.

But who will tell this story? Not the Government media.

Who will be the story teller that we need? I pray that Mitt sees fit to learn how to tell this story.

To date Mitt's nature has been to keep his thoughts on money issues as secret as possible.

Will people trust him that way because he seems confident? I sure hope so.

edutcher said...

shiloh said...

edutcher

Why would I want to impress any of Althouse's lemmings? Rhetorical.

Again, I'm here mainly for my own amusement.

The truth is out there ...


But he wouldn't know it if it hit him in the space cadet helmet.

PS Most of us (even Alpha and garage) document our sources to show we're not just making it up.

Clearly, shiloh isn't going down that path.

Bender said...

Hey, lay off the Hat. He makes a valid point.

(Oh, no! What's this? One of the hateful Catholics coming to the defense of the gay gay. Horrors.)

It is patently true that the more people get to know Romney, the less they like him. He's been running for president for over five years now and after all that work, even his supporters are mostly "meh" about him. The biggest thing he has going for him, his own bots tell us, is that he is not Obama. As for Romney personally, meh. Just a few days ago, his most ardent supporters were peeing in the pants wishing that Daniels or some other squish would get in the race.

Meanwhile, he is doing his best to alienate the base of the Republican party, while at the same time arrogantly taking them for granted.

Romney has not grown on people in the last five years, and he won't grow on them in the next nine months, except in a bad way. Instead, people will start getting a sick feeling in their stomach contemplating the thought of having to force themselves to go "hold their nose" to vote for him without a fit of projectile vomiting. And all this combined with getting pissed off at being expected to defend Romney's indefensibles, such as RomneyCare.

At the same time, all those folks in the middle who claim that if only the Republicans were to nominate a moderate like Romney, they would vote for him (the delusion that leads people to think he is "most electable"), these very people will, in the end, abandon him as they did John Most Electable McCain and find some justification for voting for Obama instead.

shiloh said...

Re: amusement, edutcher, one of my many little buddies, never fails to disappoint! :)

sonicfrog said...

This conjecture is meaningless. Unless something drastic happens, this election will be a referendum on the economic condition at the time of the election. If things continue to improve, even at the slow pace we are currently monitoring, Obama is likely to win. If we go into another downturn... He's done.

Henry said...

It's pretty silly to argue polls at this point.

But it could be helpful to accurately understand Romney's taxes, once and for all.

I found this post to be very informative.

Lots of inside baseball here:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/24/inside-the-romney-tax-returns/?hp

This TalkLeft report is remarkably sane:

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2012/1/24/1658/89477

Finally, a note about Romney's charitable giving. Sure, he donated about $1.5M to the Mormon Church in 2010. He also donated around another $1.5M to other charities.

Cedarford said...

Shiloh - "mittens has been a loser in every political race except MA governor, when he ran as a moderate (((Dem))), w/a big $$$ advantage against a very disadvantaged opponent and still couldn't crack the 50% barrier.

Indeed, another RINO McCain, ran against Obama and lost badly to the 1st African-American president and mittens will be running against incumbent president Obama."

==============
Funny how Shiloh, a Democrat and Obamite, finds the Rush Limbaugh "party line" of RINO vs. heroic pure conservative..quite convenient for arguing against a lousy traitorous RINO running against Obama when they could have a pure red-blooded conservative personally saved by Jesus..

You know, interesting the Obamites are agreeing with the fat drug addict that Bachmann, Newt, Perry, or Santorum would be IDEAL to run against Obama and Carry the Banner of pure, hard-right conservatism.

Interesting. Most interesting...

Scott M said...

While I still think POTUS is going to loose, the outcome of that race is far less important than how the House and Senate shake out.

Kirk Parker said...

DBQ,

Oh, no no no! You of all people shouldn't be wanting to destroy one of the last vestiges of actual federalism that we have.

Revenant said...

But people's need for emotional caring from a Presidential father figure still sells.

Good think Newt's star is fading then, since it is obvious the only person in the world he cares about is Newt Gingrich.

Amartel said...

DBQ, point taken. I'm very familiar with both states. These conservative areas you speak of are not populated like the coastal areas in CA and the valley in OR.

Carol_Herman said...

Shiloh, don't leave. It's stupid to feel taunted.

All we're all doing is arguing about the tea leaves at the bottom of the cup.

Nobody knows what's ahead.

Yes, Florida, for Newt, was political poison. Doesn't mean he can't rebound.

Doesn't mean we can fix DC, which is an American calamity right now!

My worst fears about Mitt? I don't see him attracting people into office that I'd care see run our Ship of State.

I haven't given up on what's ahead. If anything, I'm optimistic.

Can Obama win? YES. A tougher race than the one he had against McCain? YES!

Will I look forward to hearing from Newt Gingrich, again? You bet'cha.

Did I retrieve my "ticket" from the garbage after Florida's results were in? YES!

Does this mean I'm rooting for Donald Trump to pick up the mantel and run the distance as an Independent? YES!

What's nice about all the comments is the variety I see coming in; from people with see this race, so far, differently.

One vote at a time? Makes no difference at all.

edutcher said...

shiloh said...

Re: amusement, edutcher, one of my many little buddies, never fails to disappoint! :)

And shiloh never is able to rebut.

WV "subreno" Under the Biggest Little City in the World.

Chip S. said...

I'm here mainly for my own amusement.

Typical lefty--Happy to take, unwilling to give.

Scott M said...

Typical lefty--Happy to take, unwilling to give.

Just another version of a typical melanist.

chickenlittle said...

Nice comment, Carol

shiloh said...

Cedarford's wrong assumption aside ie I'm a liberal independent, your incoherent gobbledygook re: Limbaugh & Dems is duly noted.

btw, hasn't drug addict Limbaugh slimmed down a tad recently ...

Also, when mittens ever evolving stance on political issues is revealed, then "we" will know exactly what kind of political fool he really is. :D

take care

Michael said...

Shiloh: You find your own comments amusing? How funny. But you are not the dumbest person on the internet, not with Andy R and GM protecting your third place position. There is that. Cheers.

Amartel said...

DBQ-what's your district? I'm 12 which is almost like being 8 but with slightly less botox, pandering, and brazen lying.

shiloh said...

"It's stupid to feel taunted."

Carol, if I ever feel taunted by an Althouse foot soldier, I'll let you know. :)

Harmless/meaningless conservative passive/aggressiveness at a political blog aside ...

Chip S. said...

Just another version of a typical melanist.

Not our fault that gingers are pushovers.

Scott M said...

Not our fault that gingers are pushovers.

UV-challenged != pushover

Chip S. said...

Care to take this outside?

Scott M said...

Care to take this outside?

Sure. It's cloudy today. Why not?

shiloh said...

Let the record show Michael opined But you are not the dumbest person on the internet and childish personal attack aside, Michael must spend all his time on the net to have come to any conclusions re: aptitude lol.

>

And no Carol, I don't feel taunted by Michael. Although I do feel empathy for Michael's futile attempt at negativity. :-P

B-Rob said...

"If President Obama carries only those states where he had a net positive approval rating in 2011 . . . Obama would lose the 2012 election to the Republican nominee 323 electoral votes to 215."

This is laughably silly spin on the part of GOPers. Consider 2008 looked VERY different than 2007. Obama's approval ratings in 2011 (or 2010 or 2009, for that matter) may have very little to do with his approval ratings the Monday before the November 2012 election. Heck, consider the state of the economy in August 2008, when McCain WAS LEADING OBAMA, versus just a bit more than a month later when McCain suspended his campaign. This is the kind of weird conclusion you only get from pundits.

In addition, Andy is 199% correct -- Obama will be on the ballot against another person. That person will have a personality, proposals, and whatever vision he articulates for the future. For everyone but the strict partisans (meaning about 60% of the electorate), whether Obama wins or loses will depend on whether that opponent's "proposal" is superior to Obama's. You can scream all you want about how Obama is as sure as gone, but anyone who actually believes that is detached from reality.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

DBQ,

Oh, no no no! You of all people shouldn't be wanting to destroy one of the last vestiges of actual federalism that we have.


I'm not talking about getting rid of the electoral college or GOD FORBID going to a popular vote. In that case, the rural and small population states would have no incentive to vote OR to even remain in the Union.

What would be the point, of staying in the Union when your votes count for nothing and you are controlled by the urban states? Your entire life is at the mercy of morons from Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York City. This is the sentiment in much of Northern California....San Francisco is NOT in Northern Ca.

However, it seems that in states (such as California) where the vote is split and ALL of the electoral votes in that State are given to one side, that many people are disenfranchised.

There hardly seems any point in voting at all anymore for anything at any time. When the 'race' for the candidate is over after a few states or when your vote counts for nothing at all. When your votes are overturned by judges with agendas. When your elected officials are backdoored by appointed bureaucrats and your elected officials just sit sucking their thumbs.

What is the point?

Frankly. I'm about ready for the first time in my life to not vote for anyone or anything. And I actually am hoping that we will have 4 more years of Obama and his ilk. Maybe people will finally get up and rebell against becoming serfs in a socialist country.

I see no one on the horizon who will make a difference. Those who COULD have like Palin and Gingrich have been eviserated by the media, by the establishment politicians and those who don't want to give up power or see the status quo changed. Mitt Romney...don't make me laugh.
If it is going to happen at least let it happen while we are still able to protect ourselves.

Sooner than later. Get it over with. Push the reset button or else just give up and wear the serf's chains.

damikesc said...

I hesitate to show you the facts

A Media Matters link? You just made everything you wrote before it redundant.

btw, many folk might not consider mittens giving $$$ to the Mormon church ie a cult, charity.

Are ALL Progressives religious bigots? Or just Althouse Progressive commenters?

Also, when mittens ever evolving stance on political issues is revealed, then "we" will know exactly what kind of political fool he really is. :D

Wow. An Obama supporter mocking anybody else for having "evolving stances" on political issues.

My irony meter has just exploded.

Chip S. said...

Sure. It's cloudy today. Why not?

Cloudy, or just partly cloudy?

shiloh said...

"My irony meter has just exploded."

Coincidentally Althouse's irony meter exploded (8) years ago when she started this blog.

Calypso Facto said...

Garage said:I'm in possession of some pretty interesting inside info on that.

You're going to owe me that beer for our bet about Feingold yet, aren't you? Told you so.

damikesc said...

You do know irony is, right Shiloh?

Cause I am having doubts that you do.

Bender said...

Frankly. I'm about ready for the first time in my life to not vote for anyone or anything.

DBQ -- Follow your conscience. Stand by principle. If not for their own sake, then for the very practical reason that if you live in Cali, you would be throwing away conscience and principle for nothing.

Obama will take California. Period. And he will take it by many more votes than your one. Don't throw away your integrity to vote for someone who is antithetical to your principles merely because he is not-Obama.

Same goes for people living in 85 percent of the rest of the country -- your vote ain't going to matter one way or the other, so don't allow yourself to be bullied, or otherwise fall for this canard of an argument that if you don't vote for Romney (or whoever) that you're helping to re-elect Obama. Instead, keep your dignity, keep your integrity, follow your conscience. Choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil. Don't do it, especially if the justification for choosing the lesser evil does not really exist.

Rusty said...

chickenlittle said...
@Shilho: Look who comes off looking like the man on moon?

2/1/12 2:11 PM


No. Andy Kaufman was genuinely funny. Shiloh is genuinely pathetic. His incessant recriminations on whining are beginning to sound like, well, whining. So far he has yet to string two ideas together that resemble reason.
We live in hope though.
carry on.

garage mahal said...

You're going to owe me that beer for our bet about Feingold yet, aren't you? Told you so.

Huh? Wha? :-)

ricpic said...

Drill Sgt's analysis (at 2:01) of how things are going to playout in an Obama vs Romney contest makes sense to me. For a significant majority of likely voters Obama's is a failed presidency. As long as the challenger is non-threatening/non-kooky they'll turn to him. And Romney fits that bill.

edutcher said...

Carol, shiloh isn't taunted here.

He's bitch slapped constantly, but not taunted.

ricpic said...

Shorter version of Carol:

And Yes, I said Yes, I will Yes!

shiloh said...

Rusty resorting to name calling and one of my Althouse pets, edutcher projecting.

All is well! :)

btw, Tweety just mentioned a PPP Ohio poll:

Obama 49 ~ mittens 42

But it's early. ;)

Roger J. said...

Seems to me its all about the electoral college and not popular vote. If my assertion is correct, then look at the incumbent's numbers state by state-Mr Obama does appear to have some issues. And I do agree this election will be a referendum on Mr Obama's track record rather than his challenger--Still--lots can happen in the next 9 months.

chickenlittle said...

Obama 49 ~ mittens 42

But it's early. ;)


9% undecided or are they for Obama's opponent?

shiloh said...

Again clittle, Bush43 won re-election w/48% Gallup job approval:

2004 Oct 29-31 48/47

as presidential elections come down to choices.

take care and keep hope alive! :)

Jay said...

garage mahal said...

Nah, less than a year. Can't see a gaffe prone Thurston Howell taking states like Ohio, where he has a 28% approval rating, down by 8 to Obama, according to PPP


Yes, nice for citing a Democratic poll.

Idiot.

Jay said...

btw, Tweety just mentioned a PPP Ohio poll:

Yes, you are citing a Democratic polling outfit.

Are you hoping for credibility or something?

Note:
Ohio voters give President Obama 51 - 44 percent thumbs down on his job performance and say 51 - 45 percent he does not deserve a second term in the Oval Office, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll finds.

OH well, your stupidity was fun while it lasted, wasn't it?

Rusty said...

Rusty resorting to name calling






I didn't call you a name. I called you a descriptive adjective. Which means pitiable or contemptibly inadequate. Both of which you live up to, admirably.
Now if we could just work on your reasoning skills so that you could debate the issues intelligently.
carry on

Bender said...

There are a lot of yellow dogs in Ohio. And there are a lot of yellow dogs elsewhere, especially the urban areas.

Sure, they will bitch and moan about how crappy Obama is. And then they'll go and vote for him because, by definition, any Republican is always worse.

Just look at the hell-holes that are most of the big cities -- controlled by Dems for generations because the only thing worse than a corrupt, incompetent, thug of a Democrat is a Republican.

It is that kind of deep-seated, knee-jerk animus and irrational antipathy towards Republicans, and conservatives in particular, that will lead many (including a certain blogger) to talk about voting Romney, but then ultimately going and voting Obama (again).

edutcher said...

If all shiloh has for assurance is polls from the Kos pollster, even he knows what deep tapioca GodZero is in.

shiloh said...

Rusty resorting to name calling and one of my Althouse pets, edutcher projecting.

shiloh clearly doesn't know the meaning of projection.

Not to mention the meaning of pet.
Pets don't bite you in the ass regularly.

shiloh said...

And to the other few liberals at Althouse, please be nice to my pet edutcher.

Remember "we" are empathetic to the confused and downtrodden.

edutcher said...

As shiloh limps off to get some treatment for his freshly wounded behind.

garage mahal said...

Yes, nice for citing a Democratic poll.

It leans right. They have a solid track record.

But you're perfectly fine with the GOP hack from Marquette who put out a poll showing Newt Gingrich was more popular with women, than men, in Wisconsin.

Do you know the track of that pollster? There is none! It is their first poll.

Jay said...

garage mahal said...

It leans right. They have a solid track record.


Hysterical.

Do you even believe the bullshit you post?

PPP is a Democratic polling firm.

That is a fact
.

Note:
Public Policy Polling (PPP) is an American Democratic Party-affiliated polling firm based in Raleigh, North Carolina.[1][2][3] PPP was founded in 2001 by businessman and Democratic pollster Dean Debnam,

Jay said...

garage mahal said...

Do you know the track of that pollster?


Which pollster?

Quinnipiac has Obama and Romney tied in Ohio.

You cited a Democratic pollster, then claimed it "leans right"

You're an idiot.

Jay said...

But you're perfectly fine with the GOP hack from Marquette who put out a poll showing Newt Gingrich was more popular with women, than men, in Wisconsin.

Nice attempt to change the subject.

You cited a Democratic polling firm.

That is a fact.

garage mahal said...

You cited a Democratic pollster, then claimed it "leans right"

Nate Silver found ranking them from the 2010 election they did lean right from their results. The Wall Street Journal ranked PPP has one of the top swing state pollsters in the country.

Jay said...

garage mahal said...

Nate Silver found ranking them from the 2010 election they did lean right from their results


Um, and then what?

One opinion from one election cycle means they are no longer founded by and connected to Democrats, right?

Wall Street Journal ranked PPP has one of the top swing state pollsters in the country.

Which of course has nothing to do with the fact it is a Democratic polling firm.

Jay said...

garage mahal said...
You cited a Democratic pollster, then claimed it "leans right"

Nate Silver found ranking them from the 2010 election they did lean right from their results.


No.

No he did not you silly little liar.

Here is what he said:

I mentioned in passing in last night’s post that surveys that use automated scripts rather than live interviewers — what are sometimes called ‘robopolls’ — have shown more Republican-leaning results this year.

Don't worry, stupid, if it weren't for lies you'd have nothing to post here.

edutcher said...

NB

PPP has been found to regularly skew its samples in favor of the Demos.

Which is why Kos, shiloh, Alpha and all the other trolls quote it so often.

Jay said...

garage mahal said...

It leans right


No it doesn't, you liar.

And the fact of the matter is that you're only referencing that poll because you read about it on left wing blogs.

And the poll is reference on left wing blogs because it is a Democratic polling firm.

Idiot.

Jay said...

garage mahal said...

Nate Silver found ranking them from the 2010 election they did lean right from their results


Um, no he didn't.

In fact, here is exactly what Silver said about PPP:

Most of the automated polling firms have a Republican-leaning house effect. For instance, it’s about 2 points for Rasmussen Reports (our estimate for Rasmussen includes polls conducted by its subsidiary, Pulse Opinion Research) and 4 points for SurveyUSA. Another automated polling firm, Public Policy Polling, has almost zero house effect.

Your beclowning is complete.

garage mahal said...

To recap:

I said:

Nate Silver found ranking them from the 2010 election they did lean right from their results. The Wall Street Journal ranked PPP has one of the top swing state pollsters in the country.

Exhibit A Although being affiliated with the Democratic Party, PPP has not exhibited a Democratic bias in its polling results; according to Nate Silver of Fivethirtyeight.com, PPP actually had a small pro-Republican bias in its 2010 polling results.

Exhibit B Wall Street Journal
A comprehensive analysis of swing state polls that appeared in the November 6, 2008 edition of the Wall Street Journal identified Public Policy Polling as one of the two most accurate companies in the country.


No it doesn't mean Nate Silver or PPP are Gods. PPP does freely release hundreds of pages of crosstabs and encourages readers to poor through them.

The reason I know a lot of PPP polls is because I followed them on Twitter a while ago to find about up to date recall polling. And why would you get emotional over off the cuff remark? That was grounded in reality by the way. (See above links).

garage mahal said...

*an off the cuff remark

shiloh said...

PPP was spot on re: Ohio Issue 2, but believe what you will Althouse lemmings.

And re: Nate Silver, he was also spot on in predicting the 2008 presidential election.

Indeed, as Jay, edutcher and other Althouse fools would be lost at 538.com as it deal mostly w/fact based info.

>

And please proceed w/the childish name calling and sarcastic responses makin' "you" look more foolish, if possible.

Phil 3:14 said...

Andy said:

Elections are about choices between two people, or two parties. It's not Obama vs. not-Obama (as much as the Republicans might like to pretend that's the case)...Conveniently for Obama, as people get to know Romney they like him less and less.

Wow, what a ringing endorsement:

People dislike Obama less.

edutcher said...

It deal with fact-based info?

Well, I guess you have to make a distinction between factual and fact-based.

Jay said...

garage mahal said...
To recap:
Exhibit A


And of course "Exhibit A" is a link to Wikipedia.

You do understand I linked to What Nate Silver actually said at his own blog, right?

Idiot.

Jay said...

Exhibit A Although being affiliated with the Democratic Party, PPP has not exhibited a Democratic bias in its polling results; according to Nate Silver of Fivethirtyeight.com, PPP actually had a small pro-Republican bias in its 2010 polling results.

Instead of linking to a claim that this is what Silver said, why don't you link to what Silver said?

Jay said...

garage mahal said...
To recap:
Exhibit B


And of course the very first thing readers see when clicking your link:

Talking Points Memo 8/22/11 How PPP became the 'It' Democratic Pollster
"Just a few short years ago, Public Policy Polling was an obscure Democratic outfit,


Again, anyone with a brain and self respect would stop posting here.

Jay said...

And re: Nate Silver, he was also spot on in predicting the 2008 presidential election.

And then what?

That like makes everything he says accurate?

Phil 3:14 said...

A key will be that squishy and independent middle. Unfortunately no noble historic opportunity to vote for the first black president.

Instead they'll see an ineffectual community organizer. He may speak well but folks have grown tired of the words...just words

Jay said...

By the way, I love how this:

PPP has not exhibited a Democratic bias in its polling results; according to Nate Silver of Fivethirtyeight.com, PPP actually had a small pro-Republican bias in its 2010 polling results.

Becomes "fact" in liberal land.

See, even if Silver said that (note garage can provide no source of this), one bias free election cycle does not mean there is no bias.

And since garage is not that bright and easily misled, he can't actually think what he's claiming, through.

Don't worry garage, the bar is set real, real low for you.

Jay said...

Claim:

PPP has not exhibited a Democratic bias in its polling results

And the alleged "facts" backing up this claim:

according to Nate Silver of Fivethirtyeight.com, PPP actually had a small pro-Republican bias in its 2010 polling results.

Well hells bells! There is totally like no bias!

It is all a coincidence that PPP is bragged about by TPM and quoted endlessly by left wing blogs.

Seriously garage, you never cease to amaze with how dumb you actually are.

I kind of feel sorry for you.

shiloh said...

Jay

As Bill Murray said quite eloquently in Stripes.

"Jay er Lee Harvey, you are a madman. When you stole that cow, and your friend tried to make it with the cow. I want to party with you, cowboy."

Indeed, 'til the cows come home lol.

Jay said...

Shiloh,

I think it is so cute that you and garage pretend PPP isn't a Democratic polling firm.

I think you should keep referencing those polls.

Really. You should.

Jay said...

I also think it is so cute that garage accepted that according to Nate Silver of Fivethirtyeight.com, PPP actually had a small pro-Republican bias in its 2010 polling results. without investigation or criticism.

Nate Silver said no such thing.

The person entering that Wiki entry misrepresented what Silver said about robo polling. And garage in his comical beclowning trumpeted it as "fact"!

shiloh said...

Jay, you mindless twerp. "We" have mentioned several times PPP is a Dem pollster that leans slightly conservative in its polling methodology.

god you're a frickin' idiot!

Apologies to mindless twerps!

garage mahal said...

Squeal away Jay. PPP is a respected pollster. That could change I suppose. And of course, with all pollsters, grain of salt, compare and check with other respected pollsters, and look for firms that publish their crosstabs. It's great material to read and come back and have an adult sized conversation about!

Where we're we anyway? Oh! Romney down 8 to Obama in Ohio.

ken in sc said...

I'm looking for a brokered convention and a draft of General Petraeus with Mitt as VP.

garage mahal said...

Squeal away Jay. PPP is a respected pollster. That could change I suppose. And of course, with all pollsters, grain of salt, compare and check with other respected pollsters, and look for firms that publish their crosstabs. It's great material to read and come back and have an adult sized conversation about!

Where were we anyway? Oh! Romney down 8 to Obama in Ohio.

Revenant said...

PPP is a respected pollster.

Respected or not, their results are an outlier.

It is certainly true that Ohio is one of the more Democrat-leaning swing states this year, though.

Paul said...

We hope by the time the Republican convention gets here the first round votes will be deadlocked and thus the delegates allowed to vote their conscience.

Romny is just a stunted version of Obama. And thus a clear choice is needed between what Obama holds for the country and a Republican challenger.

Obama 'lite' is not needed nor desired.

Bender said...

We hope by the time the Republican convention gets here the first round votes will be deadlocked and thus the delegates allowed to vote their conscience.

For that to happen, in order to deny Romney a majority of delegates, it will be necessary for both Gingrich and Santorum to STAY in the race.

If either drops out, there is no assurance that the entirety of their support will go to the other. Much more likely, while many will go to the other, a significant proportion will go to Romney instead. Perhaps enough to put Romney in a position to gain 50 percent plus one of the delegates.

Only by both staying in, with Paul too, is it possible to deny Romney a majority going into the convention.

Fen said...

Today, Garage learned that user-edited Wiki is not a credible source re politics.

Tomorrow, we will teach him how to recognize rhetorical fallacies.

Yay!

Love said...

Any of this is based on having an actual electable opponent.

He doesn't.

And when he wins the regulars here will have plenty to go bat shit over.

Love said...

Why does anybody engage Jay?

He's slow witted, uninformed and a complete waste of time.

shiloh said...

"He's slow witted, uninformed and a complete waste of time."

On a good day ...

gk1 said...

It's actually good sport to see Jay slap around the hapless,house liberals. Man, their reasoning skills get so flabby in the echo chamber of KOS and TPM.

Jay said...

shiloh said...
Jay, you mindless twerp. "We" have mentioned several times PPP is a Dem pollster that leans slightly conservative in its polling methodology.


Except it doesn't Lean slightly conservative
in the methodology.

You are lying when you say this.

Guest list said...

Hey i don't understand much about election stuff and politics so i never say anything about it, it is better to stay quite than speaking wrong...

Nightclub Guest List

Jay said...

garage mahal said...
Squeal away Jay. PPP is a respected pollster.


Nice to see you acknowledge you were wrong on the facts.

Of course you're so silly & dishonest you would never bring yourself to do that.

Romney down 8 to Obama in Ohio.


Yes, according to a Democratic pollster who cautions:
One caveat: in March of 2008 we polled Ohio when the current situation was reversed- the Republicans knew who their nominee was, while Democrats were still engaged in a bloody fight to determine theirs. We found John McCain leading Obama 49-41 at that point and of course in the end Obama won the state by 4 points in the fall. So while this is a good place for Obama to be it could change quite a bit once Republicans all get on the same page.



Don't worry dum-dum, we all know you didn't read that far.

Jay said...

Love said...
Why does anybody engage Jay?

He's slow witted, uninformed and a complete waste of time.


So you should be able to totally point out where I'm factually inaccurate, right?

Go ahead, please do so.

shiloh said...

Somebody give Jay a hug! :)