I have been watching the Presidential race from afar. Neither candidate has done much to garner my support, while both have done plenty to accrue my disdain.
I would have assumed that a sitting President with these economic numbers would be an easy opponent to beat. Even though the election is still 3 1/2 months away, the polls do not reflect that. Forbe’s Real Clear Politics has Obama 2.4% ahead of Romney. (I put zero stock in the Intrade numbers showing the incumbent ahead 55.7% to 41.5%). Florida should be a safe state for the challenger, instead, its a statistical dead heat.
Color me genuinely surprised.
Hale Stewart (Bonddad) makes this observation:
“The real crime of Romney’s candidacy is that he should be able to run as a successful Republican executive of a liberal state that solved one of the biggest problems the state faces (health care costs). He implemented the Republican health care plan (yes, the mandate was first proffered by the Heritage Foundation in 1989 and again in 1994 in response to Clinton’s health care initiative) which is actually doing pretty well at the state level.
This would demonstrate his ability to work across the aisle. (Of course, this is also when he was pro-choice.)
But, the Republican base has moved so far to the right — and become so hyper-partisan — that Romney can’t mention this. And so, his biggest political achievement — which, again, was pretty impressive — is now his biggest liability.”
That is a rather fascinating observation.
It made me think about McCain (whom I supported in 2000). I thought the 2000 vintage McCain could have made it a closer race than the 2008 “New” McCain (George W. Bush made nearly any republican unelectable in ’08);
I wonder if the 2012 Romney is going to do worse than the 2002 Romney would have done . . .
>
See also:
• Real Clear Politics All Polls (RCP)
• Romney Banks Big on Anti-Obama Vote (WSJ)
What's been said:
Discussions found on the web: