From a tweet I saw via @politicalwire:
A New York Magazine poll of political insiders, asked to predict the winner of the presidential election, finds President Obama overwhelmingly favored over Mitt Romney, 82% to 18%. --Politicalwire
Upon further investigation, I found out that New York Mag polled a bunch of Dems and Republicans and found this:
What does Washington’s political elite really think? Over the past two weeks, we surveyed 74 Beltway insiders—37 Democrats, 37 Republicans—on the election, the state of politics, and what comes next. We wanted honesty, so we offered to keep their answers anonymous (in some cases, they allowed us to quote them). Among the respondents: Romney adviser Eric Fehrnstrom and Obama adman Jim Margolis; Kerry right-hand Bob Shrum and McCain consigliere Mark Salter; former senators Bob Bennett (R-Utah) and Tom Daschle (D-N.D.). On Capitol Hill we found a lot of strong opinions—and even, occasionally, a little consensus.These are people who could be both said to be literally in the trenches while also having a bird's eye view of the situation...notice that half of them are Republicans...and they still think Obama will crush Mitt. Though I'm not suggesting this is a great sample size (it isn't), it's interesting that when asked for their off-the-record, ostensibly actual views, both Dem and Republican insiders by a wide margin think Obama's going to be re-elected.
Let's dissect below the slanted orange S & P, shall we?
My impressions: About 75% of the Dems think Obama will win by a 1-3 point margin; only 12% of the Repubs think the same of Romney.
My impressions: Dems are extremely confident that we will control the Senate. It's not looking good for the GOP in that vein.
My impressions: The chance of retaking the House is not high. As for North Carolina, Romney currently holds a slight lead. Then again, NC's Winston-Salem Journal, which endorsed McCain in 2008, just endorsed Obama. You know Romney's bad news when a newspaper that last endorsed a Dem in 1964 (LBJ) skips over him. More bad news for him: Obama may be trailing nationally, but he's leading in Ohio...without it, Romney's chances are slim to none.
My impressions: Romney's nose is a bit longer, even for the GOP. I'd like to add that the calls on here for Obama to go for the jugular on Romney's lies–with some going as far as clamoring for Obama to call Romney a liar to his face–are short-sighted. Lying is a part of politics (see below), and Obama will do himself no favors pulling a Joe Wilson on air.
I am still amazed that a lackluster debate performance (purportedly) held the same electoral gravitas as Romney's damning 47% news cycle. It's almost like the media wanted to have something to latch on to as a sort of equivalence a la "This is Obama's 47% moment..." Hmm. Maybe I'm just imagining things.
My impressions: But, folks, the contrast could not be clearer. It's like the difference between telling your mother "You are really irritating me right now!" and telling her "go fuck yourself". That's the difference between Obama's debate and Romney's 47%. How in the world the two got covered and treated almost identically by the Beltway is just beyond me. But whatevs.
My impressions: See? How can a muted debate performance or even Bill Clinton's energizing speech be bigger turning point than a hot-in-the-pants political scandal like the 47%, which was by far the biggest news story in this election? Pretty assbackwards if you ask me.
My impressions: Damn, I remember exactly where I was teh day I first saw that Firms ad: at a Doral, Florida gas station, where I had to literally pull over to watch the video again, which I did some 7 or 8 times in a moment of sheer floored-edness. Remember how we all felt that day?
There are many, many more infographics over at NYMAG, but I don't have the time to caption them, but I will add the penultimate one:
My impressions: Meh. Although I do take great joy in seeing the most uprated comment on this video over on Youtube: "Romney, fuck you." LOL!