General Election Thread (no partisan sniping allowed!)

[Duvall]

McCaskill 46, Aiken 45 in the latest poll from the MO Senate race. I see this as a bad sign for McCaskill as the undecideds are likely to break against her as an incumbent with high negatives.

Akin, not Aiken.

[alteran]

Akin, not Aiken.

May be that's why his numbers are up.

In all seriousness, WeAskAmerica has a pretty strong GOP "house effect," or lean. I wouldn't bank on their results too much.

In fact, I'd argue we know almost nothing.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/...stimate=custom

Despite the significance of the race, I'm not really seeing much in the way of dependable pollsters in the mix here (scroll down the page). Many have very strong R leans. And yet Rasmussen, for goodness' sake, is consistently giving McCaskill a significant lead. Normally, I'd assume that means McCaskill is WAY ahead, but then you have blue-ish pollsters like PPP boosting Akin (from a month ago). That's just weird.

Even though the trendlines look really clear in the default, it appears to me that the numbers are all over the map. If you change the smoothing from the default (upper left corner, crank it either up or down), the picture is rather mixed. I'd say the trendlines are also meaningless.

Unless we get some decent polling outfits in the mix, I'm thinking we may just be flipping coins until election day.

[Udaman]

My prediction on tomorrow's debate:

First with Romney. He's going to HAMMER Obama on gas prices. Just wait. There's been almost no talk about it for the past few weeks, and the price of gas has been skyrocketing. It's an easy point to make. "When the president took office, gas was around $2 a gallon. Today, it's nearly twice that. This has a huge impact on all working families, and he's not doing anything about it." It's also a hard thing to argue against, even if, in truth, it's really not at all the President's fault (nor does he have the ability) to affect it. Just wait. This is coming.

He's also going to hit super hard on the debt. Another big point with independents, and fiscal conservatives.

He's also not going to give any specifics on how he can do his tax cuts without raising the debt, but that's OK.

I think he won't mention the "Are you better off today than 4 years ago." That card was played at the convention, and Obama is ready for it.

As for Obama. He'll play safe. He'll tag Romney on his 47%. He'll tag Romney on cutting taxes for the wealthy (which Romney will be ready for). But I don't think Obama goes for the kill in this debate. And I think that will hurt him.

I've been impressed with Romney's approach here. They have literally talked up how good Obama is at debates (when in fact, he's a great speaker but not the world's best debater). He has effectively lowered expectations for how he's going to do (like Bush Jr did against Gore). I think he's going to frustrate Obama and deliver hard and unexpected punches. When it's over, people will generally feel like Romney won.

Then it will be game on. At the next two debates Obama will come out punching - he'll attack (big time) Romney on not releasing his tax returns. He'll blast comments about the 47%, and try to use Romney's words against him. But by then it will seem like he's just trying to be mean to fight back. He should do both of those tomorrow. Obama is up and has Romney on the ropes and he should go for the knockout blow...but his advisors have consistently preached to play safe with the lead in order to avoid mistakes. I think it costs him tomorrow.

The numbers will get close. I still thin the lead is too much for Romney to overcome (and he has to win so many swing states, that it's almost impossible)...but by election day, everyone will be sweating.

At least that's my opinion.

[Duvall]

I've been impressed with Romney's approach here. They have literally talked up how good Obama is at debates (when in fact, he's a great speaker but not the world's best debater). He has effectively lowered expectations for how he's going to do (like Bush Jr did against Gore). I think he's going to frustrate Obama and deliver hard and unexpected punches. When it's over, people will generally feel like Romney won.

Well, sure. Every campaign tries to lower expectations, and every challenger is deemed to have won the first debate, because he finally gets to be on an equal footing with the frigging President. (The exception was Bob Dole, because he was terrible.)

It almost never matters, and has never decided an election.

[rthomas]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/03/wo...ya-attack.html

Something like this could have a huge effect on the election.

[JasonEvans]

Can you imagine if this happened?

Mr. Obama wins the states where he has at least an 85 percent chance of victory in the forecast, but no others. Then we’d be left with the following map:


If you add up the electoral votes in that case, they come out to Obama 269, Romney 269: an exact Electoral College tie. The election would then be thrown to the House of Representatives

Romney almost certainly wins if it goes to the House. Lets imagine though that Obama has clearly won the nationwide popular vote... by about 3 points. Would the House GOP really vote to break the Electoral College tie by putting the guy who lost the popular vote into office? I wonder how much of a backlash we would see in that case, if any?

I tend to think that Americans just trust the electoral process to work properly. The Constitution has provisions for breaking a tie. If Romney wins in that scenario, so be it. I think America would buy that, even if Obama had won the popular vote.

-Jason "that said, the national uproar over it would rival the 2000 Florida recount, I bet" Evans

[SoCalDukeFan]

In 1980 did the people elect Reagan because they wanted him or because they did not want four more years of Carter?

SoCal

[OldPhiKap]

In 1980 did the people elect Reagan because they wanted him or because they did not want four more years of Carter?

SoCal

Yes.

[Mike Corey]

Jason,

Scary though that scenario is, didn't Nate pin the chances at less than one percent?

[sagegrouse]

Can you imagine if this happened?



Romney almost certainly wins if it goes to the House. Lets imagine though that Obama has clearly won the nationwide popular vote... by about 3 points. Would the House GOP really vote to break the Electoral College tie by putting the guy who lost the popular vote into office? I wonder how much of a backlash we would see in that case, if any?

I tend to think that Americans just trust the electoral process to work properly. The Constitution has provisions for breaking a tie. If Romney wins in that scenario, so be it. I think America would buy that, even if Obama had won the popular vote.

-Jason "that said, the national uproar over it would rival the 2000 Florida recount, I bet" Evans

Looking at the composition of the House of Representatives, Republicans have the majority of Representatives in 33 states. I can't imagine such a House electing a Democrat, no matter the popular vote.

sagegrouse
'Democratic majorities in the House are only in 10 Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states, four states bordering the Pacific, Iowa and New Mexico. Minnesota is evenly divided'

[snowdenscold]

Can you imagine if this happened?



Romney almost certainly wins if it goes to the House. Lets imagine though that Obama has clearly won the nationwide popular vote... by about 3 points. Would the House GOP really vote to break the Electoral College tie by putting the guy who lost the popular vote into office? I wonder how much of a backlash we would see in that case, if any?

I tend to think that Americans just trust the electoral process to work properly. The Constitution has provisions for breaking a tie. If Romney wins in that scenario, so be it. I think America would buy that, even if Obama had won the popular vote.

-Jason "that said, the national uproar over it would rival the 2000 Florida recount, I bet" Evans

They discussed this on C-SPAN radio tonight, but a couple of the people felt if it were actually a 269-269 tie, that one of the electors would break off and cast his vote in favor of the person who won the popular vote. So it would never reach the House.

[throatybeard]

They discussed this on C-SPAN radio tonight, but a couple of the people felt if it were actually a 269-269 tie, that one of the electors would break off and cast his vote in favor of the person who won the popular vote. So it would never reach the House.

Does that make such person a faithless elector, or a double-secret reverse vampire faithful elector?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector

[tommy]

My prediction on tomorrow's debate:

First with Romney. He's going to HAMMER Obama on gas prices. Just wait. There's been almost no talk about it for the past few weeks, and the price of gas has been skyrocketing. It's an easy point to make. "When the president took office, gas was around $2 a gallon. Today, it's nearly twice that. This has a huge impact on all working families, and he's not doing anything about it." It's also a hard thing to argue against, even if, in truth, it's really not at all the President's fault (nor does he have the ability) to affect it. Just wait. This is coming.

I think Obama would be ready for that with a relatively easy retort: "Mitt, you've been criticized a lot during this campaign on a lot of different issues, much of it justified in my view. But one thing I've never heard anybody say is that you're not a smart man, and that's because you are. You're smart enough to understand what does and what doesn't affect the price of a gallon of gas at the gas station, and frankly, so are the American people. You are insulting the intelligence of the American people when you try to sneak this little attack in here tonight, when you know good and well that the price at the pump is a result of the price of crude oil on the worldwide oil market, a price which is set primarily by the simple laws of supply and demand. It's not set by the President of the United States, and the President has very limited, if any, ability to directly influence those prices, as it is a world market. That is a fact. I know that, you know that, and the American people know that."

[throatybeard]

I think Obama would be ready for that with a relatively easy retort: "Mitt, you've been criticized a lot during this campaign on a lot of different issues, much of it justified in my view. But one thing I've never heard anybody say is that you're not a smart man, and that's because you are. You're smart enough to understand what does and what doesn't affect the price of a gallon of gas at the gas station, and frankly, so are the American people. You are insulting the intelligence of the American people when you try to sneak this little attack in here tonight, when you know good and well that the price at the pump is a result of the price of crude oil on the worldwide oil market, a price which is set primarily by the simple laws of supply and demand. It's not set by the President of the United States, and the President has very limited, if any, ability to directly influence those prices, as it is a world market. That is a fact. I know that, you know that, and the American people know that."

I wish the President would say that, but I'm less confident than you are in the ability of the American people to understand the facts.

I guess I'm insulting the intelligence of the American people. </Yakko creaky voice indicating awkwardness>

[rthomas]

Debate drinking game:

What are the words or phrases that we should drink to tonight?

You must take a drink when Obama says:
47%
1%
economic patriotism
auto bailout
tax returns
middle class
healthcare

You must take a drink when Romney says:
100%
Reagan
medicare
middle class
failure
unemployment
stimulus
Ryan
Biden

[moonpie23]

soooooo...alcohol poisoning...?

[Mike Corey]

I will be taking a sip of my beverage every time President Obama and Mr. Romney advocate a position of which they once held the opposite view.

I suspect that Mr. Romney is feeling a little better this morning, as a new poll from NBC/WSJ showed him closing Virginia and Florida to within the margin of error. He still trails in Ohio, however, by eight points.

[davekay1971]

As long as Romney doesn't stoop to mentioning the words "Wright" or "2007 Hampton Roads Convocation Speech" I'll be happy. If he mentions either of those words, I may close out the drinking game by turning up my bottle of Jack and chugging.

[JasonEvans]

I think Obama would be ready for that with a relatively easy retort: "Mitt, you've been criticized a lot during this campaign on a lot of different issues, much of it justified in my view. But one thing I've never heard anybody say is that you're not a smart man, and that's because you are. You're smart enough to understand what does and what doesn't affect the price of a gallon of gas at the gas station, and frankly, so are the American people. You are insulting the intelligence of the American people when you try to sneak this little attack in here tonight, when you know good and well that the price at the pump is a result of the price of crude oil on the worldwide oil market, a price which is set primarily by the simple laws of supply and demand. It's not set by the President of the United States, and the President has very limited, if any, ability to directly influence those prices, as it is a world market. That is a fact. I know that, you know that, and the American people know that."

"Hey America! I can't do anything to help you with this one."

I don't think too many Presidents get elected making comments like that. I also think the first part, talking about Mitt's intellect, sounds like something Aaron Sorkin would write and would never, ever, ever be said in a forum like a nationally televised presidential debate. The first rule or looking presidential is staying above the fray.

One more comment about the debate. I bet we don't hear Obama say "47%" one single time. I feel it would be somewhat unseemly for him to attempt to make comments (unless he is prompted by the media questioners) about a hidden camera video taken during a private campaign moment of his opponent. Again, staying above the fray.

-Jason "I could be dead wrong" Evans

[JasonEvans]

I suspect that Mr. Romney is feeling a little better this morning, as a new poll from NBC/WSJ showed him closing Virginia and Florida to within the margin of error. He still trails in Ohio, however, by eight points.

The past couple days have unquestioningly showed a tightening in the polls, especially the national ones. But, several of the swing state polls continue to show troubling news for Mr. Romney. I think it is a safe bet that Ohio is not in play any longer.

-Jason