Mitt Romney

The Night's Watch

Seven swing state polls came out today and each showed President Obama with a decisive advantage over Mitt Romney, making this a bad start to the week for the Republican presidential nominee.

Mon, Sep. 24 Electoral Vote Predictor

Can Romney Duplicate Bush's 2004 Path on the Electoral College?

In 2004, George Bush won 31 states and 286 electoral votes. An obvious question is: "Can Romney follow Bush's path?" The answer appears to be no. If Romney were to win all the Bush states, he would have 292 electoral votes due to changes from the 2010 census. For starters, New Mexico looks hopeless and Iowa not much better bringing Romney from 292 to 281, still enough to win though. Increasingly, Ohio looks tough for him. Without its 18 electoral votes, he is down to 263 and a loss. Furthermore, Virginia is looking ever more Democratic. Colorado, Florida, Nevada, and North Carolina are tossups now. Unless something changes quickly, the Bush path is not going to work for Romney.

Republicans Advise Romney to Be Himself in Debates

Mitt Romney has changed his positions so many times that nobody knows who he is and what he stands for. Republican operatives are advising him to just be himself in the debates. He should claim to be a successful businessman and governor and just talk about himself and his vision for the country. So far that has proved quite difficult for him, however. But to win, he has to come off as a sincere, credible leader. Just attacking Obama day and night over the economy won't get him where he needs to be.

Democrats are already trying to raise the debate stakes for Romney by pointing out the fact that Romney is a very experienced debater, having participated in 20 primary debates this year, while Obama hasn't debated since 2008 and is a bit rusty. But it is true that Romney needs a clear win, not a tie, in the first debate to start getting momentum.

Romney Taking the Bus this Week

While Mitt Romney's normal mode of transportation is the chartered aircraft, this week he is taking the bus. In particular, he is planning to barnstorm through Ohio, a state he absolutely must win and in which he now appears to trail in. He will travel around the state for three days, stopping in Cleveland, Dayton, Columbus, and Toledo. He hopes to be able to connect with the voters after spending the weekend in Southern California at high-dollar fundraisers with wealthy donors.

It's Triage Time for the National Committees

For many congressional candidates, especially ones running for the first time, the lifeblood of their campaign is financing from the parties' national committees, the DCCC and NRCC, respectively. Now that the national conventions and Labor Day have come and gone, the national committees are taking stock. Those candidates deemed able to win on their own won't get any money. Those expected to lose no matter what won't, either. Only those whose victory depends on national money will get financing. It won't be pretty for the people cut off but the parties are pretty hard headed about this. In some cases, superPACs and others may disagree with the parties' judgment and come to the aid of the candidates cut off, but it is up to the candidates to arrange this. The chairman of the DCCC is Rep. Steve Israels (D-NY). The NRCC is run by Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX). Neither of these is in any danger, so both can devote all their time to helping other candidates in need.

The parties also have Senate committees, the DSCC, chaired by Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), and the NRSC, chaired by Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX). They perform similar roles but are not as critical as senators and senatorial candidates are much better known than ones running for the House and are often better at scrounging up money, so they are not as dependent on the national committees as House candidates. This is also true for first-time candidates since nobody gets to be a Senate nominee in a competitive state without a bruising primary and winning that means the candidate is capable of fundraising.

Congress May Let the Voters Decide What To Do about the Fiscal Cliff

If Congress does the one thing it is really good at--nothing--the Bush tax cuts will expire at midnight Dec. 31, 2012. In addition, automatic budget cuts will take effect for both social programs and defense as a result of Congress kicking the can down the road on the budget. Nobody wants to go over the fiscal cliff but Democrats and Republicans have totally different visions of what should be done to avert the crisis. More and more voices in Congress are saying: let the voters decide. What this means in practice is that if President Obama is reelected and the Democrats keep control of the Senate, mainstream Republicans in the House will side with the Democrats and approve some tax increases. The tea party Republicans will howl at the moon, but assuming the Democrats pick up some seats, they plus the mainstream Republicans will have enough votes to move the bill. Senate Republicans will understand they have to go along with the deal. If Romney is elected President and the Republicans capture the Senate, then Democrats will understand that they have to accept tax cuts for the rich.

If the verdict is mixed, it gets dicier. With Obama as President and Republican control of Congress, Obama could play hardball and just go over the cliff. Then in early January he could announce that he is willing to sign a bill with tax cuts for the middle class but not for incomes over $250,000. If the Republicans refuse the deal, then all taxes will stay at the levels they were during the Clinton administration, something the Republicans desperately want to avoid. It could get messy. Both sides hope the voters will give them a clear mandate and the other side will be forced to concede.

Click here for full story

The Republicans' Foreign Policy Problem

textsfromhillaryclinton.tumbler.com

Pop quiz: if you had to describe the Obama foreign policy in one sentence, what would you say? Not easy, is it? Back in 2008, it was pretty simple: "Not Bush." Now back then, there was something called the "Bush doctrine," which may have had a subtle meaning to those working in the administration, but as far as the public was concerned mostly meant "invading lots of countries and making everyone in the world hate us." So it was easy to imagine Obama as a breath of foreign policy fresh air. He'd use a less-bumbling combination of diplomacy, "soft power," and carefully restrained force. He'd get us out of Iraq. Things would change for the better.

But now that Obama has been president for four years, "Not Bush" has lost its relevance. Obama's actual foreign policy is too complicated to sum up easily, and probably therefore too complicated for most voters to understand. We did get out of Iraq, but things don't seem to be going too well in Afghanistan; Obama has dramatically increased the use of drone strikes, which have solved some problems and created others; though opinions of America are somewhat better, lots of people still don't like us. It's a complex picture, and in the context of an election, the Obama campaign is going to react to most foreign policy questions with, "Remember that guy Osama bin Laden? He's dead."

True enough, but this complexity has left Republicans seemingly unable to critique the Obama foreign policy.

Latino Enthusiasm Bounces Back

(Steve Rhodes/Flickr)

Latino enthusiasm is one of the wild cards of this election. In 2008, a record percentage of Latinos reported high enthusiasm for the election, and their turnout—9 percent of the electorate—was critical to Barack Obama’s victories in Colorado, North Carolina and Florida.

Obama has managed to maintain his support among Latino voters, but for most of this year, their enthusiasm has lagged behind where it was four years ago. This summer, according to NBC News, Wall Street Journal and Telemundo, only 49 percent of Latinos were “highly interested” in the election, compared to 62 percent of all voters. Likewise, a Latino Decisions survey from the beginning of the year found lower enthusiasm compared to 2008; at the time, 38 percent of Latinos said they were more enthusiastic about 2012 while 46 percent said they were more enthusiastic back in 2008.

Since the Democratic convention, however, all of this has changed. Not only has Obama increased his vote share among Latinos—according to the latest Latino Decisions survey, he leads Mitt Romney, 69 percent to 24 percent, with 7 percent undecided—but Latino enthusiasm has spiked. Here is a nifty chart that illustrates the change:

Latino enthusiasm is upside down from where it was in January, with 46 percent reporting greater excitement for 2012 than 2008. It’s hard to understate the importance of this for November. At Romney’s current vote share, and with Latino turnout at 2008 levels, Colorado becomes a stronger bet for Obama, thus strengthening his position in the Electoral College. Indeed, the latest Colorado survey from Public Policy Polling shows Obama with a 6 point lead over Romney and 65 percent support from Latinos—a 4 point improvement over his 2008 results.

It’s increasingly clear that the GOP cannot count on an enthusiasm advantage this November. As was true four years ago, Obama’s core supporters are both fired up and ready to go.

Romney's Wrong Right Move

Once it became clear that President Barack Obama received a significant bounce from the Democratic National Convention, the next question was whether this bounce would translate to an enduring advantage for his campaign.

On Friday, polls from National Journal and Reason magazine gave Obama a 7-point lead over Mitt Romney, 50–43 and 52–45, respectively. Saturday was a quiet day for national polling, but Sunday saw the release of two tracking polls by Rasmussen and Gallup. Rasmussen was unchanged from the last few days; Romney and Obama remain tied with 46 percent support, though Obama’s job approval has ticked down: 48 percent approve, 50 percent disapprove.

Today in Anti-China Rhetoric

Mitt Romney’s dwindling chances depends on outsized support from working-class whites in industrial states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Wisconsin. Which is why, in recent weeks, he’s taken a harder line against Chinese economic practices. But his latest ad, “Stand Up to China,” crosses the hard line and moves into straight-up xenophobia.

Getting to Know You, Getting to Know All About You

She's getting a bit displeased. (Flickr/Josh Janssen)

Seven months ago, I wrote a column explaining that my increasing irritation with Mitt Romney had made me understand how Republicans probably felt about Al Gore twelve years ago. The politician with the "authenticity" problem whose goals you share just seems awkward—undesirable from a strategic perspective, but hardly morally blameworthy—while the one from the other party seems irredeemably phony and dishonest. But I'm guessing lots of liberals, maybe most, feel the way I do, which is that is seems I like this guy less and less every day.

This has happened before. Before John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign, he seemed like a fairly reasonable person for a Republican, extremely conservative to be sure, but with an admirable willingness to buck his party every now and again and a refreshing honesty. But by the end of the race, I couldn't stand him, and I'm sure most liberals felt the same way. He had revealed himself to be unprincipled, petty, mean, and a whole bunch of other things. I concluded, with the help of copious evidence, that whatever positive feelings I had about him before were terribly mistaken. These days when I see him pop up on TV, my visceral reaction is, "Why do we care what you think, jerk?" So did John McCain change during the campaign? Or was it just that we got a better look at him? And is that what's happening with Romney?

Puncturing Myths about the White Working Class

A new survey and report from the Public Religion and Research Institute—entitled “Beyond God and Guns”—is a valuable corrective to so many stereotypes of the white working class.  Particularly noteworthy in this report are the large and important differences within the white working class—by age, region, gender, and party, to name a few. For example, consider this:

Sun, Sep. 23 Electoral Vote Predictor

Polls Aren't Moving, Both Sides Worried

The bounce President Obama got from the Democratic convention shows no sign of fading and both sides are worried. One reason the polls are not moving is that people have made up their minds and there are hardly any voters left to swing. A large fraction are not really strongly for either candidate but are strongly against one of them. One voter said he'd vote for Saddam Hussein before he'd vote for Barack Hussein but another called Romney the devil. Not much motion is likely there.

Romney's team can read the handwriting on the wall and the pixels on the monitor and is trying to put on a brave face, saying: "We've got a campaign which is tied with an incumbent president [of] the United States." The team knows that in the national polls, it is fairly close, but in this graph of the electoral college Romney has been behind all year and is now down 122 electoral votes. They feel that some fundamentals (such as the poor jobs situation) put them in a strong position, while at the same time ignoring other economic indicators (such as a booming stock market) that favor Obama. They say they have a plan to right their ship and will roll it out this week.

Click here for full story

Sat, Sep. 22 Electoral Vote Predictor

Obama Leads in Poll of Swing States

A new Purple Strategies poll of 12 swing states shows President Obama with a lead of 49% to 44% over Mitt Romney. In August, the same poll had Romney ahead by 1%, so this is a sharp swing towards Obama. Part of Romney's problem is that only 38% of the voters see him in a favorable light vs. 52% who regard him unfavorably. Obama's favorability is above water with 49% to 46%.

Romney Releases 2011 Tax Return, Paid 14%

Willard M. Romney has released his 379-page tax return. His income was $13.69 million, of which $450,740 was earned (business) income. The rest was mostly interest, dividends, and capital gains. He paid $1.9 million in federal tax. Below is the income portion of Romney's tax return.

Click here for full story

The Debates Won't Save Romney

Not gonna happen this year.

If you're a Romney partisan, and you've seen Barack Obama move ahead in the polls over the last couple of weeks, you may be saying to yourself, "Maybe the debates can save him." After all, the four debates (three presidential, one VP) are the the only planned events between now and election day. Though you never know what kind of unexpected events might occur, tens of millions of voters will be watching. And so many times in the past, the race has been transformed by a dramatic debate moment.

Except that's actually not true. As John Sides lays out quite well, after all the sound and fury, debates almost never change the trajectory of the race. Of course, something never happens up until the moment that it happens, but there's strong reason to believe that the debates will change nothing this year in particular. But before I get to that, here's Sides:

Romney's Negative Coattails

Former governor Mitt Romney’s serial gaffes seem to be doing cumulative damage not just to his own campaign, but to Senate and even House races.

In the days since Romney’s clumsy attempt to make political gain from the murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Politico’s piece revealing ineptitude and finger-pointing at the Republican National Convention, and the leak of the infamous “47-Percent” video, Democratic Senate candidates in most contested seats have opened up leads, according to usually trustworthy polls.

Pages