Nate Silver has Mitt’s chances down to 13.7 percent, and a new NPR poll taken entirely after Hurricane Sandy shows the President ahead, 48 percent to 45 percent, among likely voters.
Republicans in Ohio and Florida are blatantly working to suppress Democratic votes and hand the states to Romney. One of the reasons I worked out the Poll Closing Watch List yesterday was to try to understand for myself how much it mattered. It would certainly hurt if Romney claims both Ohio and Florida, but it isn’t necessarily fatal.
And don’t forget Virginia. Virginia is leaning Obama, although it’s very close. If the President does win Virginia, the odds that Florida and Ohio won’t matter are much improved.
Lots of people are laughing at Politico —
Democrats have a liberal problem
If President Barack Obama wins, he will be the popular choice of Hispanics, African-Americans, single women and highly educated urban whites. That’s what the polling has consistently shown in the final days of the campaign. It looks more likely than not that he will lose independents, and it’s possible he will get a lower percentage of white voters than George W. Bush got of Hispanic voters in 2000.
A broad mandate this is not.
The pressure on Obama to deliver for this liberal base will be powerful. Already, top left-wing groups are pressuring him not to buckle on a grand bargain that includes any entitlement cuts.
And if Obama wins, he will be dealing with a House Democratic Caucus more liberal than he is. The past four years have decimated the once-strong bloc of conservative Southern Democrats, leaving behind a caucus more liberal than ever. By POLITICO’s count, there will most likely be roughly 14 conservative “Blue Dog†Democrats in the next Congress, down from 50-plus only a few years ago.
I almost don’t know where to start.
Josh Marshall snarks: “Or to be more specific, Obama’s winning but not with the best votes. I mean really, if you can’t win with a broad cross-section of white people, can you really be said to represent the country? Really.”
Steve M: “Never mind the fact that if you’re a successful Republican presidential candidate, you’re considered to have a ‘broad mandate’ if you get suburban white voters in Michigan as well as suburban white voters in Mississippi.”
Yes, children, if President Obama wins on quantity of votes, he will still lose on quality of votes and therefore have no mandate to govern. He’s not a real President, because angry old less-educated southern white men don’t like him, is why.
Scott Lemieux: “Shorter Politico: Democratic states should get 3/5ths representation in the Electoral College.” Hah.
And, of course, I see the increased percentage of real Dems, as opposed to Blue Dogs, in Congress as a feature, not a bug. And “Already, top left-wing groups are pressuring him not to buckle on a grand bargain that includes any entitlement cuts.” Yes, thank you. Exactly what’s needed.
A WHITE vote, is the REICH…. er, uhm,… is the RIGHT vote!
And, as I said earlier, something the feckin’ idjit’s at PolitiCLOWN won’t ever acknowlege, is that, no matter the results, President Obama will win a higher percentage of WHITE males and females, than Mitt will Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Gays, and any, and EVERY, other minority group out there – maybe even, COMBINED!!!
“Or to be more specific, Obama’s winning but not with the best votes. I mean really, if you can’t win with a broad cross-section of white people, can you really be said to represent the country?”
Translation: we don’t give a f*ck about the 47% either, because we think that’s not “us”.
So in other words Obama is winning with a majority of the country. I have news for the snickering white men in this country: They are a minority. By the next election they may find themselves with out a voice.I recently heard a bunch of white guys on TV saying that this is the last election they will be able to play the white card..they almost seemed sad to see the era passing.
On morning joe today I heard rove and others in the gop are putting the blame on sandy for getting in the way of mittwitts campaign. I wonder why they dont see that as God’s will and be humbled by it instead of angry. How dare God question the great mittwitts desire to be president. Did the right wing bible thumpers ever think they got an answer to their prayers and the answer was NO? I have been reading on certain right wing blogs mittwitt will win BECAUSE he has the power of all the christians praying(the polls that say otherwise don’t factor this in because they are satans work). How come when the right wins something it was Gods will but when they don’t get the desired outcome it isn’t Gods will also? Already they are saying, and mittwitt is using it as a threat on the campaign trail that if Obama is re- elected the right will continue to be the party of no. Wouldn’t be AGAINST their God’s will ? How is it the “faithful” has the least faith?
I’ve wondered the same thing. The Republican God must be a slacker who takes long vacations.
Krugman on Sandy vs Katrina, which of course translates into Obama vs Romney:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/05/opinion/krugman-sandy-versus-katrina.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
Krugman suggests revisiting the Katrina timeline to see how bad the federal response was. I’d love to see such a timeline, but it would probably make me punch things all over again.
All I know is that if my praying had any effect on politics, The Bush and Cheney gang would have remained in obscurity for this century.
I wonder why they dont see that as God’s will and be humbled by it instead of angry.
This is the religion of immature people. They’re so convinced of their own righteousness (and of how anybody on the outside is the spawn of satan) that of course God is on their side. The Nazis had a similar viewpoint – stamped into the metal belt buckles of SS troopers was the phrase “God With Us”.
There was a year when several major hurricanes blasted Florida – of course the right wingers were completely silent when it came to turning their argument about God punishing people against themselves.
It apparently has never occurred to the geniuses at Politico that “Republicans Have a Conservative Problem”, or more accurately an extremist problem.
Apart from the “voter quality” issue, or all this supposedly immense liberal pressure on Obama (good news to me, if true), I doubt that Obama is going to change at all. We pretty much know who this guy is, and what his predilections are. People don’t change that much.
The Grand Bargain scares me. I anticipate another giving away the store move by Obama, in order to bring the GOP on board. Republicans will then campaign successfully in 2016, that it was the Democrats who cut SS and Medicare.
But in the meantime, let’s win tomorrow. Thank God for the Sandy bounce.
Though against the death penalty, I would be happy to see the Cheney gang’s heads on pikes, excluding GWBush because I definitely don’t believe in punishing the disabled, whether their fault or not.
moonbat,
I think it was Lincoln who said, ‘The question isn’t, ‘Is God on our side,’ but ‘Are we on the side of God?’
And the answer was, “Yes.”
As for the “Grand Bargain,” that scares me, too.
But I look on it this way – if President Obama wins, at least he’ll bargain.
Mitt and Paul would just total The New Deal and The Great Society, and not think about it twice. They’d run over them, back up, run over them in reverse, and then go forward, running over them again – to make sure they were dead.
And you never know, maybe the Democrats will realize that if they even so much as raise the eligible age, Republicans will use that as a cudgel to beat them with in elections for the rest of their lives. Not that the Republicans want to save it – far from it. But they use any and every thing for their political advantage. They even have the audacity to say that Obama’s response to Hurricane Sandy is inadequate. THIS, from the side that brought America, “Heck Of a Job, Brownie”!