Romney a Lock - You Can Put it On the Board YESSSS!!

Sure, I understand this.

I would also assume you, and the others who predicted big gains for the Dems in the '10 midterms also understood this.

So, you'll forgive me if I don't get too worried about your current predictions.

Based on what? The 2008 electoral map?

What makes you think states like North Carolina, Virginia, Arizona, Ohio, and Florida favor the President?

Besides, at this time, we have no idea how much money each side is going to have. In 2008, President Obama swamped McCain in spending, thanks to his breaking his pledge, and opting out of the Federal campaign funding.

This time around, Romney will also opt out:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-26/romney-shunning-federal-funds-in-post-watergate-election.html

He should be close to Obama in spending, which will allow him to compete in ways McCain couldn't. And, it will force Obama to focus his money where he needs it, and not spread it around.

We also don't know how the Super PAC spending will influence the race. Between McCain's Super PAC and Rove's, the spending in support of Romney might actually exceed the spending in support of Obama.

And, despite some missteps, we really don't yet know what kind of general election candidate Romney will be. It would be hard to imagine him being worse than McCain. And, the environment he is running in is much more receptive to the message of a pro-growth Republican than it was in '08.

 

1. I never predicted big gains for the Democrats in 2010. It was always going to be a bad year. Based on the map.

As to this:
What makes you think states like North Carolina, Virginia, Arizona, Ohio, and Florida favor the President?

1. North Carolina -- Demographics
2. Virginia -- Demographics
3. Arizona -- Demographics
4. Ohio -- Demographics and a massively unpopular GOP administration
5. Florida -- Demographics and a massively unpopular GOP administration

Now, if you want to have an actual conversation about this stuff, and you can tone down the concern trolling and the nonsense, I'll be happy to have the conversation. Otherwise, not worth my time.

 

How would you suggest college students raise the funds to start a business?

He was speaking to students at a University where the tuition -- before room and board -- is over $28,000.

He cited the founder of Jimmy John's as an example. Jimmy would have been better off borrowing the money from dad. Wikipedia says he got a 45% stake in the business for his $25,000 investment.

Looks like dad spent his money well, and got a much better return on his investment than if he had used it to pay for a college education.

And, really, if you have a good idea, a good business plan, and a proven work ethic, $20,000 isn't a lot to raise from friends and family. And, if you can't raise that kind of money from the people who know and love you, it's unlikely you'll be able to raise it from anyone.

For the audience he was speaking to, it was less than the cost of one year's tuition.

 

If only we the archives still existed.

As for demographics, they just mean that Romney will need to attract a large percentage of the white, male vote. OK. How is that different than any other Presidential election?

Obama will win the vast, vast number of African-Americans. He'll get a large percentage of Hispanics, and he'll beat Romney among women.

But, by how much? How much will Romney beat him among white males?

What will turnout be?

What national trends might emerge to make it more of a national election?

How's the economy going to be doing?

I'm happy to discuss all of this. But, as usual, you have rose colored glasses on. Try to bring a little objectivity to the discussion.

 

I don't think that's what Romney was saying.

The Democrat Party wants the Government to shepherd you through life, from cradle to grave, so suddenly 26-year-olds are dependent children.

Romney was speaking to a specific question about entrepreneurship, from a specific audience. He used a real world example, and he told them the truth.

Loved ones are the best source of start up funds for any new, small business. This is just a reality.

And, it's opposed to the idea that government should be the source for these funds, or that banks should be "forced" to provide these funds.

Go to the people who know you best, who know your character, and your work ethic. Show them your plan. prove to them you are serious. That's how it's done.

 

Yeah, but there's a difference between being a leach, and constantly bumming money from your parents, and going to them with a serious proposal to fund a business.

I don't see a problem with the latter.

 

Obama will win nearly 100 percent of the African American vote and somewhere around 65 percent of the Hispanic vote, barring a shift in the underlying dynamics. A conservative estimate of the female split right now would be 55 percent.

Those numbers leave Mitt Romney needing something like 72 or 73 percent of the white male vote. Bush got 62 percent in 2004. McCain got 59 percent last time. If you think he can get 73 percent, more power to you. I don't see it.

What makes this election different than other elections? Well, for one thing, even keeping their participation rates static relative to population, the Hispanic vote will increase 2-3 points as percentage of total. That's not helping Romney. That's killing Romney.

What will turnout be? Well that's the whole ballgame, isn't it. But my guess is up a point from 2008.

National trends? Nothing. The meltdown in 2008 didn't change the underlying trends in that race. If the economy melted down tomorrow, again, and there was time for that pain to filter down, yes, you'd have a different race. A war could change things, I suppose. But, largely, national trends are media creations that don't effect that much at all. The last time a media narrative really had an effect was probably in 2000, and that was only possible because the race was exceedingly close.

And all of the national demographic numbers are, really, ultimately beside the point as well. Romney has to run the table in a bunch of states where the demographics are pretty strongly against him. I think he'll run a more even-keeled campaign than McCain. But I don't know that that makes up for him being significantly less likable than McCain.

 

Always a landslide. North of 85 percent. Obama just makes it unanimous.

 

In 04, it was 88-11 in favor of Kerry. Indeed a landslide.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html

 

And the Rethugpeepeedoodoo Party wants the government to not give a rat's ass provided you aren't a fetus.

 

People in their 20s need to get insurance the right way - by individually bargaining for it.

 

Unfortunately, YF, that's just what Romney was saying. In what I believe to be an unmalicious but still awful way, he really has almost no awareness of life outside his own experience. He alienates everyone he works with to whom he can't give orders. That's not a formula for a successful administration.