Home / Culture and Society / RJ’s 2012 Presidential Election Predictions

RJ’s 2012 Presidential Election Predictions

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+2Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

This is now the third consecutive presidential election in which I have made my state-by-state predictions for Blogcritics Magazine. In 2004, I was pretty good. In 2008, I was pretty bad. So I suppose we can consider 2012 to be the rubber match, or something.

What follows are the states that Barack Obama will carry easily, along with the number of Electoral College Votes for each state:

California – 55
Washington – 12
Hawaii – 4
Vermont – 3
Massachusetts – 11
Rhode Island – 4
Delaware – 3
Maryland – 10
New York – 29
New Jersey – 14
Connecticut – 7
Oregon – 7
The District of Columbia – 3
New Mexico – 5
Illinois – 20

Total Safe EC Votes For Obama: 187 (14 states plus DC)

Next are the states that Mitt Romney will carry by a wide margin:

Utah – 6
Wyoming – 3
Alaska – 3
Idaho – 4
North Dakota – 3
South Dakota – 3
Nebraska – 5
Kansas – 6
Oklahoma – 7
Texas – 38
Arkansas – 6
Louisiana – 8
Mississippi – 6
Alabama – 9
Georgia – 16
South Carolina – 9
Tennessee – 11
Kentucky – 8
West Virginia – 5
Indiana – 11
Missouri – 10
Arizona – 11
Montana – 3

Total Safe EC Votes For Romney: 191 (23 states)

The remaining 13 states are at least somewhat competitive. I will discuss them individually.

Nevada – 6

Romney has not led in a poll in Nevada this year, according to RealClearPolitics. The best result he’s had is a tie in a Rasmussen Reports poll back in early October. Obama is at or above 50% in pretty much every recent poll in the state. Lots of union members and lots of Hispanic voters means this one goes for Obama. (Obama by 4%)

Maine – 4

It is virtually certain that Obama will win more votes than Romney in Maine. But Maine is one of two states (the other being Nebraska) that awards EC votes by congressional district. Maine has two congressional districts and four Electoral College votes, so the winner of CD 1 gets one EC vote, the winner of CD 2 gets one EC vote, and the winner of the state overall gets the remaining two EC votes. Obama should handily win Maine’s 1st congressional district (in the southern coastal part of the state), but the result in the 2nd congressional district (the rest of the state) is more uncertain. Although I suspect Romney will keep it close in the 2nd CD, I believe that Obama will ultimately win both congressional districts, and therefore all four of Maine’s EC votes. (Obama by 3% in the 2nd CD, by 6% in the state overall)

Minnesota – 10

Minnesota has not gone for a Republican since Richard Nixon’s landslide reelection in 1972. But remember that George W. Bush came within three points of winning the state in 2004, and recent polls have shown a definite tightening in the race. In fact, one poll taken in late October showed Romney leading by a point. However that polling firm is known to have a Republican bias, and that was the only poll this year showing Romney ahead. Obama will win it. (Obama by 5%)

Michigan – 16

Michigan is the state where Mitt Romney and his wife Ann were born, and where Mitt’s father was a popular governor in the 1960s. Several polls over the summer showed Romney slightly ahead here, but since late August only a single polling firm (Foster McCollum White Baydoun) has shown Romney tied or ahead. The rest show Obama with a small lead. Obama should win here. (Obama by 4%)

North Carolina – 15

Obama won this state by less than half a percent in 2008, but Democrats must have believed they had a real shot to win it again seeing as how they decided to hold the 2012 Democratic National Convention in Charlotte. Unfortunately for them, Obama has not held a lead in the state since a SurveyUSA poll taken in late September/early October. Public Policy Polling (PPP) keeps showing the race a tie, but they are not, shall we say, the most credible polling firm out there. Most other pollsters show Romney leading by between five and eight points. (Romney by 7%)

Florida – 29

An absolute must-win state for Romney. Luckily for him, he looks likely to win it. Since early October, the vast majority of polls taken in the state (18 of 25) show Romney ahead, several with leads of five percent or more. Of the six polls showing Obama ahead, five of them are by a single point and the other one is by just two points. And two of those polls are by PPP. One poll shows a tie. Obama is not above 50% in any of the 25 polls. He won’t be winning the Sunshine State this time around. (Romney by 4%)

New Hampshire – 4

Polls throughout mid and late 2011 showed Romney beating Obama here, by as much as 11%. Then Obama was in the lead for most of 2012, and one poll in late September showed him leading Romney by 15 points. But after Romney clobbered Obama in the first presidential debate, things changed almost instantly. Romney was ahead or tied in six of eight polls taken in the state between October 9th and October 23rd. Since then, though, Romney has not led in a single poll. But the three most recent polls (all from this month) show Romney down by 2, down by 1, and tied. None of those polls have Obama above 50%. The poll showing the two percent Obama lead is PPP, so you can pretty much discard that one. Basically, this state is tied.

Let’s take a look at exit polls from the last two presidential elections for some insight. In 2008, the electorate in New Hampshire was 29% Democrat, 27% Republican, and 45% Independent (D+2). Independents swung to Obama by 20 points. Obama won the state by nine percent over John McCain.

The electorate in 2004 was 25% Democrat, 32% Republican, and 44% Independent (R+7). Independents supported Kerry over Bush by 14%. Kerry beat Bush by one percent.

Presumably the electorate in 2012 will look closer to 2004’s electorate than 2008’s electorate. Or at least somewhere in between. The partisan breakdown of the recent UNH poll that shows the race to be a 48-48 tie is 29% Democrat, 31% Republican, and 38% Independent (R+2 skew). Romney leads among Independents by two percent. This sounds somewhat reasonable.

But the other recent poll, by Gravis Marketing, does not sound reasonable when you look at the internals. It shows Obama leading 50-49 and has a breakdown of 35% Democrats, 30% Republicans, and 35% Independents (D+5). Romney is winning Independent voters by 2%. They undersample Independents (who narrowly favor Romney) and oversample Democrats. They have a D+5 skew to this poll, when the 2008 Obama landslide was only D+2. Sorry, I’m not buying it.

With an electorate that looks more like 2004 than 2008, and with Independents favoring him, Romney wins New Hampshire narrowly. (Romney by 2%)

Iowa – 6

I wrote a piece for another publication a few months back explaining why Romney would win Iowa. You can read it here. Basically, I am ignoring the polls for this state. The electorate in Iowa, based on actual data from the state on who is registered to vote, is going to look quite similar to 2004, when Bush narrowly carried the state. It will look nothing like 2008, when Obama won Iowa by 10 points. Throw in the fact that Obama’s early voting lead is smaller than he had in 2008, and the Des Moines Register’s shocking endorsement of Romney, and I’m sticking with my prediction. (Romney by 1%)

Virginia – 13

Recent polls show the state pretty much tied. Early voting totals from counties Obama won in 2008 are down, so it’s fair to say that Democrat turnout will be lower than in the last election. Obama won the state by seven points in 2008, and exit polls showed that Democrats had a six percent turnout advantage that year. Obama and McCain were basically tied among Independents. Exit polls from 2004, when Bush won the state by eight points, showed that Republicans had a four point turnout advantage. Independents went for Bush by 10 points over Kerry.

A late October poll by Gravis Marketing shows Romney and Obama tied at 48% apiece. This poll has an unrealistic D+8 skew to its sample. Independents favor Romney by an astonishing 27 points, but the poll is a tie because of their absurd sample.

Roanoke College released a poll in late October showing Romney ahead 49-44. This poll has a D+4 sample and showed Romney leading by 26% among Independents.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that enthusiasm for Obama in Northern Virginia is not what it was four years ago, while GOP enthusiasm is much stronger. Romney needs to win Virginia, and he will. (Romney by 3%)

Colorado – 9

Another state that appears to be basically tied. Let’s look at those fun exit polls again. In 2008, Obama won the state by nine points. Republicans actually had a 31-30 turnout advantage over the Democrats, but Independent voters supported Obama by 10% over McCain.

In 2004, Bush beat Kerry in Colorado by five points. Republicans had a nine point turnout advantage that year, according to exit polls. Independents favored Kerry by seven percent.

Based on the above, one would expect the GOP to have a turnout advantage of around maybe 5% or so this year. So let’s look at some recent polling in the state. Purple Strategies released a poll in late October showing Obama leading Romney 47-46. The poll shows Obama and Romney tied among Independent voters. They used a D+1 sample size. In other words, the pollsters apparently believe that enthusiasm for Obama in Colorado has actually increased since 2008. Unreal.

American Research Group also released a poll in late October. It showed Romney ahead of Obama 48-47. The poll uses an R+2 sample size, which is certainly more realistic than the Purple Strategies poll, but probably still undersamples Republicans/oversamples Democrats. Independents in this poll surprisingly favored Obama by 8%.

So let’s look at a Marist poll from late October. It shows a tie race, 48-48. The sample was D+1, the same as Purple Strategies. Sigh.

Okay. How about the SurveyUSA poll from late October that shows Obama leading Romney 47-45? D+1 sample. Wow.

Look, these polls are almost certainly based on a false premise about what the electorate is going to be in Colorado. But even if they are correct about the composition of the electorate, the race is basically tied, and undecided voters tend to break for the challenger over the incumbent. Romney will win Colorado. (Romney by 3%)

Wisconsin – 10

Romney has not had a lead in Wisconsin since mid August. The two most recent polls from Rasmussen Reports have the race tied 49-49, but every other poll shows Obama ahead. The GOP has a superb ground game in Wisconsin after all the recall battles over the past two years, and the Chairman of the Republican National Committee, Reince Priebus, knows the state very well. Oh, yeah, and Romney’s running mate Paul Ryan is a sitting congressman from Wisconsin. That helps, too. But I suspect all of that will only serve to keep the final outcome close. (Obama by 2%)

Pennsylvania – 20

There is no question that the race in Pennsylvania is a lot closer than it was just a few weeks ago. There is no question that Romney is seriously contesting the state. The majority of recent polls show Obama below 50%. But this is probably an instance of too little, too late. Pennsylvania has not gone Republican for president since 1988. That’s almost a quarter century of voting for Democrats. Obama won the state by 11% in 2008. He won’t win by nearly that much this time, but he should still win. (Obama by 4%)

Ohio – 18

We’ve been hearing for months how it’s all going to come down to Ohio, and guess what? It’s all going to come down to Ohio.

Obama won Ohio by 5% in 2008, or by a margin of about 262,000 votes. (Keep that number in mind.) Exit polls show that there was a D+8 advantage in turnout four years ago, and Independents (about 30% of the electorate) went for Obama by eight points.

In 2004, as you probably recall, Bush narrowly defeated Kerry in Ohio by two percent, or a margin of about 119,000 votes. Exit polls showed Republicans had a five point turnout advantage, which was important because Independent voters (25% of the electorate in 2004) went for Kerry by almost 20 points. Republican turnout was almost certainly boosted by Ohio State Issue 1, a ballot measure to make it unconstitutional to perform or recognize same sex marriages in the state.

So it’s fair to say that there will be no R+5 turnout this election. But then, there very likely won’t be a D+8 turnout, either.

On to the polls. Romney has had the lead in exactly one poll (Rasmussen Reports, by two points) since early October. He has been tied in five others (two of which were also by Rasmussen Reports). In the polls in which he is trailing (which is most of them), the margin has been anywhere from one point to six points.

Let’s take a look at the most recent poll from Marist. It has Obama leading Romney 51-45. The sample is D+9. Ridiculous.

The Columbus Dispatch has a poll showing Obama up 50-48. It has a D+3 sample size (possible). Independents favor Obama by 10 percent. That seems unlikely. Are Independent voters really more supportive of Obama now than they were in 2008?

The University of Cincinnati poll shows Obama leading 48-46. It has a D+1 sample (possible). Obama has a whopping (and difficult to believe) 14% lead among Independents.

Gravis Marketing shows Obama leading 50-49. It has a D+8 skew (not at all likely). In this poll, Independents support Romney by 12 points. Hmmm.

Quinnipiac’s most recent poll in Ohio has Obama up 50-45. It has a D+9 skew (nope). Independents favor Romney by six points.

So as you can see, the polls are all over the place. They either have unrealistic skews that favor Democrats, or they have an unrealistic percentage of Independent voters supporting Obama.

But we do have some actual hard data from Ohio, besides polls. Remember the number I wrote above, Obama’s margin of victory in Ohio in 2008? That number is roughly 262,000 votes. Well, about 180,000 fewer Democrats have voted early in Ohio than voted early in 2008. And about 75,000 more Republicans have voted early than did in 2008. Add those numbers together, and you get a net gain of 255,000 votes for the GOP. Which pretty much wipes out Obama’s margin of victory from four years ago.

If Team Romney has a strong enough Election Day ground game in Ohio, he will win. And I think he does. (Romney by less than 1%)

Total Electoral College Votes:

Romney/Ryan – 285 (30 states)
Obama/Biden – 253 (20 states plus DC)

Popular Vote: Romney/Ryan 51%, Obama/Biden 48%

Oh, and if I’m right, I demand my own blog at The New York Times

Powered by

About RJ

  • A good article and I like the conclusion that Governor Romney will win, even narrowly. However, to the extent that the conclusion relies on opinion polls, they have many inherent problems and reliance may be misplaced.

  • Given that Romney is a proven liar that even betrayed his own father in law, I really hope he doesn’t embarrass the USA by winning.

  • Dr Dreadful

    I see you’ve learned your lesson from four years ago, RJ, and this time around you’re being much more realistic. (Well, at any rate, more realistic than the guy who wrote the blog article I still cherish from mid-2008 explaining in minute detail how Ron Paul was going to sweep into the White House by a landslide.)

    I think you’ve called most of the battleground states correctly, including Florida. However, wishful thinking does make for an inherently unsound analysis. Romney is not going to win New Hampshire, although that probably isn’t going to make much of a difference. As you say, it all comes down to Ohio, and there I’m afraid it doesn’t look good for Rombles. He’s led in only five of over 40 polls taken since the beginning of last month. I can buy some polls being out of whack, but not the majority of them.

    People do, of course, change their minds, but with recent events in the northeast in mind I feel that change is going to tend to be in the President’s favour.

  • Josh

    Great article. I hope you’re right.

  • Baronius

    Any guesses on when we find out who won? If Ohio is close, the absentee and provisional ballots will be an issue. And neither of these guys seems like an early conceder to me.

  • Nabber

    I buy it all, except Wisconsin–you don’t cite any analysis about the Independents as you did with the others. I find it hard to accept that Romney won’t equal Walker’s success. The state is in the process of going red.

  • Dr Dreadful

    Baronius, gathering together all of the absentee and mail-in ballots is probably going to take a while (2000 all over again, anyone?), but if Obama carries any one of Florida, Virginia or North Carolina (not that I think that’s likely), Ohio won’t even be an issue.

  • Patchy

    It’s interesting to see the denial take hold on the left as evidenced by the repetitive ‘Romney’s a liar’ refrain that is/was the last-gasp slogan of the Obama campaign and its true believers.

    The ‘liar’ charge comes courtesy of, at worst, shifting positions during a long campaign but that hardly makes Romney unique among politicians. In fact, when Clinton did it we were told it was an art form. For some odd reason, the incumbent’s supporters don’t want to talk about the incumbent – and especially his subordinates – peddling falsehoods even in the most dire circumstances i.e. dead Americans.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    What causes me to bite my nails, so to speak, is the level of voter suppression and apparent voting machine tampering – especially in Ohio but elsewhere as well (see here), all of it in such a way that would benefit the Republicans. And what frustrates me no end is that the oh-so-patriotic Republicans seem to have no problem at all with tampering with elections, as long as the tampering benefits them. Such grand hypocrisy!

  • RJ

    Ugh. The total electoral college vote should read 285 for Romney, not 283. Is there any way an editor could go in and fix that?

  • George

    Great analysis, but nerve-wracking. It all comes down to Ohio, and Romney wins by “less than 1%”. I don’t know if I could take that kind of suspense. Uggh. . .

  • Ron

    The saddest thing is that we can vote out the traitorous leadership, but what can we do about the 49% of the people that actually like what Obama’s administration has done to our Republic? You can’t fix stupid.

  • UCFan79

    As an Ohioan, I accept that Ohio will go Romney but for different reasons:

    1. The war on coal has turned eastern counties, normally democratic, into more likely voters for Romney. Coal and coal power are the source of too many jobs in those counties. In short, the state is so finely balanced between big city democratic support and urban/exurban/rural republican support that any upset in that apple cart will tilt the election. That upset cart will fall in Romney’s direction.

    2. The repubs own the machinery of the state government: governor, treasurer, attorney general, secretary of state, house, senate, supreme court. With the sec of state being the office that conducts elections, the chances of fraud are limited. With the governor and atty general having the prerogative to prosecute any fraud, the tilt is again toward the republicans. With the supremes being the near final deciders of any contest, the tilt is republican.

    Final analysis….Ohio goes to Romney

  • Re #12. it is far sadder that someone expects to be taken seriously when writing complete and utter drivel. Far too many Americans really need to grow up, sober up or both…

  • Ron

    Re #14. “If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.” – Samuel Adams

  • Re #s 2 and 14. To quote and turn back to it’s author # 14,

    it is far sadder that someone expects to be taken seriously when writing complete and utter drivel. Far too many Americans really need to grow up, sober up or both…

    So, perhaps, do some who watch from afar. How, by the way, is Sunny Spain doing these days? Booming economy and tranquility for all, I suppose.

    We should all praise the author of #s 2 and 14 for his great example of “complete and utter drivel.” Three Cheers!

  • Costello

    Why should we take aeriously the predictions of author who only picks Repubs and doesn’t know how to get an article corrected after eight years? No one with any sense thought McCain was going to win in the last few weeks.

  • Carlo3b

    I agree with most of his opinions, except, I believe Wisconsin is Romney, and Minnesota – 10, is a toss-up, advantage Obama, but by a whisker, if he does..

  • Ron, spewing random and irrelevant quotes does nothing to strengthen your “argument”.

    Dan, it’s sad to see you succumbing to the political partisan hysteria and marking atypically silly remarks. Hopefully when this obscenely expensive election is over sense will replace sensibility.

  • However, to treat your sneering question with more respect than it deserves, apart from some typically boisterous mass demonstrations of political views, all part of the normal democratic process, by and large life in Spain, where I have happily been for the best part of three months now and will regret leaving next month, goes on much the same as it always has.

  • Dan

    Pretty convincing research RJ.

    I tend to agree with a previous commenter that Wisconsin is slightly more likely to fall Romney’s way. for the reasons you gave except with more enthusiasm.

    The early vote counts by party in Ohio is the best of the story so far. flipped from four years ago.

    I want to go on record as saying that biased oversampling of Dems really means a solid Romney win. No landslide, but enough to be a surprise.

  • I already made my prediction here.

    That said, it’ll be a nail-biter for all of us. I think Florida is Romney’s with Virginia & Colorado bouncing blue and red so much that it’s anyone’s call.

    The polls (skewed) are clearly breaking for Obama in NV, Iowa, MN, Ohio, WI & NH.

    I’m giving this one to Obama with something between 281-303 e.v.

    Contrarian, I share your anxiety about the many mitigating influences. Since I’m giving Romney FL anyway, Ohio is the state to watch. Maybe we can get some foreign observers for 2016.

  • For a bit of perspective, Nate Silver – the NYT’s poll stats wonk whose analyses are automatically disregarded by most GOP fans because they don’t predict a Romney win – had this to say about the possibility of bias. (It is to be stressed that he’s talking about statistical, not human, bias.)

    What it basically boils down to is that the race has reached the stage where the only chance Romney has of winning is if the polls are systematically biased in his opponent’s favour.

  • Silver just bumped Obama’s chances to 91.4%

    No need to opine here. By Wed. morning he’ll either be hailed a genius or charlatan.

  • Dan

    A 91% favorite is the rough equivalent of a 14 point favorite in an NFL game. I think it’s safe to say Silver is an outlyer.

    Calling Obama at 91% would have been too high in 2008 considering the margin of win. Certainly there is more enthusiasm for Repubs this time.

    Don’t know for sure of course, but recurrent oversampling of dems by 6 to 11% in virtually all polls sounds like a possible systematic bias.

  • “A 91% favorite is the rough equivalent of a 14 point favorite in an NFL game”

    No, it isn’t

  • Dan

    “No, it isn’t”

    yep, it pretty much is. The spread to money line ratio won’t be constant for every matchup, but a 14 point favorite will simply win the game about 90% of the time, and that is about how often you would need them to win if you hope to break even betting money lines of -900 or more.

    Independent voters are breaking for Romney in swing states with double digits. That is different from 2008.

  • Dr Dreadful

    Dan, your assessment of the betting analogy would have more weight if we were talking about a single game, but we’re actually not: we’re talking about 51 games (or, really, nine, since the results in the other 41 states and DC are foregone conclusions).

    Your optimism regarding the early voting in Ohio puzzles me. I did some poking around online, and found something claiming that apparently, Republicans have already wiped out Obama’s 2008 margin of victory there. Yet Democrats (assuming all the registered Democrats voted for Obama and all the registered Republicans voted for Romney) are still ahead. There’s something cockeyed about that analysis somewhere.

    Still, another few hours and we’ll know.

    Or maybe not!

  • Les Slater

    I predict, with nearly 100% certainty, that one of the two will win and that sooner… or later, we will know which one. It won’t make much difference.

  • RJ


    Romney wins Indiana and Kentucky. Obama wins Vermont.

    Shocking, I know.

  • RJ

    No surprises yet. Florida and NC disturbingly close.

  • RJ

    Obama won NH. So I was wrong about at least one state.

  • Next time you should put states/analysis in alphabetical order to make it easier to search

  • RJ

    Obama at 244 EC votes.

    Romney at 193 EC votes.

    Romney needs to win almost everything that hasn’t been called yet. He can afford to lose Oregon and Nevada. That’s about it.

  • RJ

    Boy, the GOP really needs better Senate candidates. :-/

  • RJ

    Obama got Ohio. It’s over.

  • TP candidates hurt Republicans this year

  • Zingzing

    RJ 1-2.

  • Clavos

    Tighten your belts, everyone…

  • RJ

    Nate Silver looks like he was 100% right. Credit where it’s due.

    It will be interesting to see if Obama wins a plurality of the popular vote (like Clinton in 1996) or an outright majority. Probably a slim majority.

  • Doug Hunter

    I didn’t read your whole article, you should have followed the numbers better. This was an easy one to pick. You could have bet and won 30-40% return on your money as late as yesterday (which I did, to take the edge off of the loss).

    White vote goes down 3 points every four years… very steady downtrend. Republicans can no longer win without pandering to minorities. Sorry, you’re going to have to get in the game. Hispanics are the obvious choice, the Reagan amnesty should have been latched onto. Even under Bush it was not too late. Under Obama the Dems have made great strides here (the Dream act comes to mind) and have some rising Hispanic stars who can blunt the headliners the Republicans have groomed. It’ll be an uphill battle.

    The future of the US is the policies of western Europe with the demographics of Brazil.

  • Igor

    Doug, maybe there’s a better criteria for office than race.

  • Dr Dreadful

    What worries me is the possibility of the GOP lurching even further to the right on social policy in order to attract the Latino vote, Latinos being predominantly Catholic and (presumably) socially conservative. However, as the years pass it may even turn out that Latinos, particularly younger ones, are not as conservative as they are generally perceived to be.

    It’s going to be an interesting next decade or two.

  • Dr Dreadful

    And now that the dust has settled a bit, except in the extreme south-east, I’d like to share my presidential election prediction for 2016. Drum roll, please.

    Here it is: a couple of days before the election, RJ will publish an analysis of the electoral college in which he concludes that the Republican candidate will win.

    I think that’s a fairly safe bet.

  • Baronius

    “TP candidates hurt Republicans this year”

    I’m not sure about that. Akin and Mourdock didn’t do their party any favors, true. But two of the weakest Senate races were run by Allen and Mack, and could have had an impact on the presidential race. Allen was a governor and senator in Virginia, and Mack is royalty in Florida. So it seems like the more establishment candidates dropped the ball, too.

  • The GOP was like a duck trying to fly-the Tea Party was the brick tied to its tail

  • Doug Hunter


    The better criteria is what works. Identity politics and negative ads (scaring people) is what works… no one likes it, but the results speak for themselves. this election was another example, no focus on clear plans for the future, just jabs at the kenyan marxist failed community organizer and his war on America versus the magic underwear wearing draft and tax dodgin corporate raider waging a war on women (and other minorities).

    I hate to use the cliche, but it is so idiocracy out there. Official O campaign videos comparing voting for Obama to first sexual experience? Big Bird ads? Rock star tours on both sides (substituting Romney for ‘Bitch’ in a Jay-Z song)? No regard at all for for the truth or facts, especially by Romney?


    That would be grasping at straws. Most every demographic that votes democrat is growing, every one that is shrinking votes republican. Latching on to social issues is another losing proposition for the reason you mention with the youth, although it might extend the inevitable for an election or two. I think Republicans should shrink to a regional party and purge the racist, the fundamentalist, etc out and focus on their classic liberal economics, limited government, and libertarian leanings. In time, newly empowered minorities and northern whites could return while Christians could shift to the democrats (where honestly they’ve belonged all along).

  • Seriously-What tipped Ohio was the lying ad about Chrysler moving Jeep jobs to Japan, which Chrysler refuted the day it came out.

  • …sorry, I mean China of course

  • I never really believed that Obama would loose. (A few terrifying days following debate #1, not withstanding.

    The problem for the Republicans is that Romney was their most perfect candidate. They created a nominee cobbled together from the mutually conflicting needs of a viable conservative candidate. The knew he was flaw from the beginning which is why they “test marketed” virtually every other prospect on the roster (save Huntsman), always with the same disastrous results. They demanded that their guy be all things to all people.

    You cannot appear sane when the job demands schizophrenia. This is why I always believed that the Republican challenger – whomever that would be – would inevitably be handicapped.

  • Doug Hunter


    It’s not a problem with the candidate. Obama manages to balance the needs of undocumented immigrants and their community with that of union workers as well as socially conservative black and hispanic churchgoers with gay and abortion rights advocates. The key is, as you say, ‘terrifying’ people regarding the opponent so that they forget to look critically at you. Obama, harnessing a literal online army of useful idiots, has proved very adept in that regard.

  • Dr Dreadful

    What tipped Ohio was the lying ad about Chrysler moving Jeep jobs to Japan [sic]

    No, I don’t think that was a tipping point. By the time the “Jeeps to China” nonsense came out, everybody had had such a surfeit of campaign ads that they were pretty much just tuning them out. (At least they were here in California where most races were foregone conclusions, so goodness knows what it must have been like in Ohio.)

    Ohio was always going to be about the auto bailouts (the commenter from a few days ago notwithstanding who thought it was going to be all about coal). Say what you will about its advisability economically, Obama’s approach saved thousands of jobs. Romney’s solution would probably have seen those jobs blown away in the wind. In the end, it was that simple.

  • Sorry Dread but Ohio is the 2nd largest auto employer after Michigan. We were all tuning out the ads (which is all we saw for a month) but when the jeep ad came out, news spread like wildfire here and the northern 3rd of the state went into outrage mode.

    Trust me, it was a big deal here, and I think I only saw the ad once, but it was all over the local news.

    As for coal, yes Ohio produces humoungus amounts of it, but like it or not everyone here knows what coal is made of and the “clean coal” ads were-and still are-laughed at… until we realized these jerks are being serious and that uneducated people are actually buying their lies.

    You can thank Bush for the tons of tv commercials after after his chief justice Roberts misled the Supreme court into allowing major corporations to spend unlimeted billions supportong GOP causes-MONEY THAT SHOULD’VE BEEN SPENT HIRING PEOPLE- instead of buying politcal influence.

  • Doug Hunter

    “Romney’s solution would probably have seen those jobs blown away in the wind. In the end, it was that simple.”

    Perhaps you or Jet could educate me on this, it’s hard to find non-biased sources. From my recollection/limited research Bush authorized the first emergency bailout for automakers from TARP funds totaling $17 Billion in December 2008/January 2009. By March 2009 Chrysler filed for bankruptcy followed by GM in June or July with Obama admin offering an additional $6 Billion in bailouts to keep them afloat.

    Since Romney was calling for just such a bankrupty in his much touted letter I’m not sure what he would have done differently in the intervening 1-3 months that would have caused all the lost jobs when the end result was basically what he asked for… a government structured bankrupty with the company coming out cleaner on the other side. I think the likely result of a Romney presidency in 2009 would have been the exact same thing in regards to the auto bailout except perhaps not such a favorable deal for the unions in the end. Where does this idea that Romney would have somehow liquidated the auto industry come from (other than the daily kos, et al)?

  • Dr Dreadful

    Sorry Dread but Ohio is the 2nd largest auto employer after Michigan.

    Yes, I know that, Jet, but Michigan was always going to go for Obama anyway.

  • Doug Hunter

    Not that anyone would ever want to give Bush credit for anything but he is the one who authorized the bulk of the actual bailout money which prevented the immediate collapse, the Obama contribution was structuring the bankruptcy… not much different from the Romney plan IMO.

  • Dr Dreadful

    Since Romney was calling for just such a bankrupty in his much touted letter I’m not sure what he would have done differently in the intervening 1-3 months that would have caused all the lost jobs

    Well, apparently he would not have sold Chrysler to Fiat. His NYT op-ed didn’t elaborate as to exactly who was supposed to restructure the company on the other side of bankruptcy, except that they should come from “unrelated industries” – magic wand manufacturing, perhaps. I doubt many of the auto workers had a warm fuzzy feeling after reading it.

  • Doug Hunter

    Magic wand manufacturing? Interesting. The interim CEO Kent Kresa who immediately took over from Rick Wagoner for a couple months came from Northrop Grumman and DARPA (may be they do magic wands there). Ed Whitacre then did a stint as CEO for over a year, almost his entire career was spent in the Telecom industry at Southwestern Bell and AT&T. Entirely consistent with the letter which called for firing current management and bringing in outsiders. The restructuring advice is very close to what ended up happening.

  • Dr Dreadful

    DARPA definitely does magic wands.

  • RJ

    “The future of the US is the policies of western Europe with the demographics of Brazil.”

    Pretty much.

  • Zingzing

    I suppose that’s better than the communist dictatorship you guys predicted four years ago. Maybe this time around, we can all focus on realities instead of paranoid delusions. At least we can make the attempt.

  • don’t hold your breath, zing

  • “The future of the US is the policies of western Europe with the demographics of Brazil.”

    Hopefully. That would be a good outcome for the country.

  • Dr Dreadful

    As a matter of interest, did they call Florida yet? I think the Clavos State got forgotten in all the pallaver.

  • Clavos

    the Clavos State

    I like that! Wonder if I can talk Tallahassee into making it official?

  • Dr Dreadful

    I’m not sure it’s a good idea to talk to Tallahassee about anything at all right now. All they seem to be able to do is come up with new ways to make the management of elections even more inefficient and confusing.

  • Tyler

    I didn’t see what happened…

    Can someone quickly summarize how the election turned out?