Skip to main content

With the big speeches and the big money starting to get thrown around in this 2012 campaign cycle, it is fair to argue that the general election is shifting into another gear as the long, hot summer looms in front of us.

And what little polling dropped this week (one of the thinnest weeks for data in months) painted a very clear picture of the state of play, both in the battle for the balance of power at the White House and on Capitol Hill.

Holy crap, things are gonna be close.

National polling has the Obama-Romney battle almost uniformly close, and the state polling has, to some extent, come in line with that conclusion. A back of the envelope estimate, based on the most recent state polling averages in each state, gives the president an edge of 3-4 points, and a (more math-y) estimate by Nate over at the NYT had it between 2-3 points this morning.

Meanwhile, the Senate could be equally interesting. The range of possible outcomes keeps getting wider and wider, it seems. No one was talking about Maine, Indiana, and North Dakota as critical races in the battle for a Senate majority at the start of the year. Now, they are all there, while races in places like Massachusetts and Nevada continue to look like pure toss-ups that could allow the Democrats to build a bit of a firewall for their Senate majority.

Meanwhile, the roster for November at the House level keeps building week-to-week, as the first half of the primary elections season is rolling to a close by the end of this month.

All this (and more!) in the "school's out, for summer" edition of the Weekend Digest...

THE BATTLE FOR THE WHITE HOUSE

If you compare this week's Digest to those dropped on previous Saturdays, it is pretty clear that there simply was not a lot of polling released this week. Drawing conclusions from this rather small smattering of data, as it happens, is pretty tough.

The House of Ras, to be sure, ain't making it any easier. Midweek, they made folks gasp (and more than a few laugh) when they claimed that Wisconsin, which pollsters have uniformly put in the Obama camp, was actually leaning slightly to Mitt Romney. But then, just two days later, they dropped another new state poll, this one showing a pretty solid lead for the president in a state where nearly everyone assumed the race was tightening noticeably (Michigan).

Other pollsters showed a tiny bit of movement to Romney over the past several weeks, but still gave the president modest leads in two state expected to be important in November (Nevada and Pennsylvania). One state in the 2008 coalition that is starting to look less secure, however, is North Carolina, where PPP gives Mitt Romney his first lead in months.

NATIONAL (Gallup Tracking): Romney d. Obama (46-45)

NATIONAL (PPP for Daily Kos/SEIU): Obama d. Romney (50-42)

NATIONAL (Rasmussen Tracking): Romney d. Obama (47-45)

NATIONAL (Reuters/Ipsos): Obama d. Romney (45-44)

NATIONAL (Tarrance Group--R): Obama d. Romney (47-46)

NATIONAL (TIPP for Christian Science Monitor and Investors Business Daily): Obama d. Romney (46-42)

NATIONAL (YouGov): Obama d. Romney (44-42)

IOWA (Rasmussen): Romney d. Obama (47-46)

MICHIGAN (Foster McCollum White/Boudoun): Obama d. Romney (47-45)

MICHIGAN (Rasmussen): Obama d. Romney (50-42)

NEVADA (PPP): Obama d. Romney (48-42)

NEW JERSEY (Rutgers/Eagleton): Obama d. Romney (56-33)

NEW YORK (Siena College): Obama d. Romney (59-35)

NORTH CAROLINA (PPP): Romney d. Obama (48-46)

NORTH DAKOTA (DFM Research for the N.D. Democratic Party): Romney d. Obama (50-36)

NORTH DAKOTA (Mason Dixon): Romney d. Obama (52-39)

PENNSYLVANIA (Quinnipiac): Obama d. Romney (46-40)

WISCONSIN (Rasmussen): Romney d. Obama (47-44)

THE BATTLE FOR THE U.S. SENATE

AT THE POLLS: This was actually a pretty respectable week as it relates to polling volume at the Senate level. And the general conclusion from those numbers? Damn, this is going to be a long night come November.

Rasmussen's Wisconsin Senate poll is no less absurd than their presidential poll (and I haven't had any takers yet on my bet—you take Tommy Thompson, and I'll take Tammy Baldwin and the 16 points. C'mon, righties, we'll bet a Happy Meal on it, if you don't want to drop that much scratch). However, it does claim something interesting, that merits some exploration. They cite a huge gap between how Thompson performs against the presumptive Democratic nominee, and how the other GOPers in the field perform. If Thompson's lead really is closer to the mid-single digits, does that mean that Baldwin would have pretty healthy leads over the balance of the Republican field? That could be important, because polling last month has hinted that Thompson's victory in the GOP primary is nowhere near guaranteed.

Elsewhere, North Dakota might be a hold for the Democrats, after all (who woulda thunk that 8 months ago?), while Nevada could still quite easily flip to the Democrats, with Shelley Berkley stubbornly clinging right on incumbent Sen. Dean Heller's back over the last several polls. Hawaii still is looking like it has a lean to the Democrats, no matter the potential nominee, and Pennsylvania is looking better and better as a Democratic hold, as well.


HI-SEN (Merriman River Group for Civil Beat): Ed Case (D) 52, Linda Lingle (R) 36; Mazie Hirono (D) 49, Lingle 44

HI-SEN--D (Merriman River Group for Civil Beat): Ed Case 46, Mazie Hirono 46

NV-SEN (PPP): Sen. Dean Heller (R) 44, Shelley Berkley (D) 43

ND-SEN (DFM Research for the N.D. Democratic Party): Heidi Heitkamp (D) 45, Rick Berg (R) 44

ND-SEN--R (DFM Research for the N.D. Democratic Party): Rick Berg 61, Duane Sand 19

NY-SEN (Siena College): Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D) 63, Bob Turner (R) 25; Gillibrand 65, George Maragos (R) 23; Gillibrand 65, Wendy Long (R) 22

NY-SEN—R (Siena College): Bob Turner 16, Wendy Long 11, George Maragos 3

PA-SEN (Quinnipiac): Sen. Bob Casey (D) 51, Tom Smith (R) 32

WI-SEN (Rasmussen): Tommy Thompson (R) 52, Tammy Baldwin (D) 36; Mark Neumann (R) 45, Baldwin 43; Eric Hovde (R) 44, Baldwin 42; Baldwin 44, Jeff Fitzgerald (R) 43

ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL:
  • Tuesday's primaries clarified a number of Senate races for November. In Nevada and Virginia, the "as-expected" results came to pass. In the Silver State, both Republican Sen. Dean Heller and Democrat Shelley Berkley (representing Las Vega in Congress for more than a decade) easily won their primaries. In Virginia, former GOP Sen. George Allen scored a sizable, though far from overwhelming, 66 percent against a handful of challengers. Democrat Tim Kaine, the former governor and DNC head, was unopposed. The most intrigue on Tuesday night may well have come from Maine, where Democrats nominated state legislator Cynthia Dill and Republicans countered with secretary of state Charlie Summers. The intrigue continued through the week, as the DSCC had to hedge on whether they'd offer support to Dill. The delicate dance, of course, is because should independent candidate (and indisputable frontrunner) Angus King win, the DSCC would like to see him caucus with the Democrats.
  • Speaking of Nevada, Republicans are headed to court to try to end the decades-old practice of allowing Silver State voters to select "None of the Above" on the ballot. Why is this in the Senate section of the Weekend Digest? Because Nevada's resident political genius (Jon Ralston) has a pretty smart take on why Nevada GOPers might be eager to kill the NOTA option: fear that more Republican leaning voters will go NOTA in the Senate race than Democratic ones. With the volume of Paul-ites and libertarian types in Nevada, that may not be an unfounded fear.
  • Finally, about that GOP Senate primary in Wisconsin: think that Eric Hovde or Mark Neumann won't be able to make hay with this news? This week, it was revealed that Tommy Thompson, in the fairly recent past (2008) donated to a pair of Democratic candidates, one of whom (North Carolina's Bev Perdue) was in a targeted gubernatorial race. For a guy whose relationship with the tea-infused elements of his state has been problematic, this is not helpful news. The one bright spot, Thompson has quite a bit of time before the primary to contain the damage.

THE BATTLE FOR THE U.S. HOUSE

AT THE POLLS: This week, the big headline was not the rather sparse bit of data that dropped this week, but the actual polling that took place in the Arizona 8th district, where Democrat Ron Barber claimed the seat held by his former boss, Gabrielle Giffords. Barber's modest-yet-clear margin of victory (52-45) over Republican Jesse Kelly gave the Democrats yet another special election victory. Barber's prospects for re-election look especially solid—he carried the part of the 8th that is folding into the new Arizona 2nd district by ten points, and the parts of the 2nd that weren't in the district on Tuesday night broke 2-to-1 for Barack Obama back in 2008.

As for the actual surveys dropped this week, both have "hmm" caveats attached to them. In North Dakota, the same M-D poll had Cramer destroying GOP rival Brian Kalk in the primary (by a better than 2-to-1 margin). Cramer actually won by just 8 points. So, you might need to retrofit these numbers accordingly, since it appears that Cramer's friends, family, and pets were in the sample, apparently.

On a more serious note, that OK-02 primary poll is useful (those primaries come up in less than two weeks), but what is even more useful is what's not there: a general election trial heat. To my perspective, that means one of two things: either the Democrat (Rob Wallace) is more competitive than anyone (myself included) thinks, or Markwayne Mullin is somehow far less electable than his fellow GOP colleagues.

ND-AL (Mason Dixon): Kevin Cramer (R) 49, Pam Gulleson (D) 35, Eric Olsen (L) 4

OK-02—R (Cole Hargrove Snodgrass for Mullin): Markwayne Mullin 30, George Faught 15, Wayne Pettigrew 7

ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL:
  • Tuesday provided another jam-packed evening of primary elections, though it yielded few surprises. The big surprise did not come from a decision by the voters, it came from a decision by the GOP-dominated state board of elections in South Carolina. Early in the night, it appeared that former (Georgia) state legislator Gloria Tinubu, while leading establishment pick Preston Brittain in a mild upset, was going to be forced into a runoff with the better-funded Brittain. Then, inexplicably, the state board decided that votes cast for state legislator Ted Vick, who dropped out of the race last month after being caught with a DUI (and a co-ed in his car), simply would not count. That pushed Tinubu over the 50 percent threshold, and gave her the win without a runoff. South Carolina Democrats, not surprisingly, objected to the decision, and a supporter of Brittain's formally has challenged the decision. In other races, Republicans Danny Tarkanian (NV-04) and Jon Courtney (ME-01) both narrowly avoided upset defeats, and moved on to November. Meanwhile, Arkansas held runoffs on the Democratic side, nominating attorney Scott Ellington to challenge freshman Rick Crawford (AR-01), and state legislator Gene Jeffress to try to defend the open seat held by retiring Democrat Mike Ross (AR-04)
  • Looking ahead on the primary calendar, Tuesday is a bit of a rarity—there are no primaries on the calendar. June 26th has a reasonably full calendar, however, as primaries await us in Colorado, New York, Oklahoma, and Utah. Also, if South Carolina Democrats successfully appeal that frankly absurd ruling by the GOP-dominated state elections board, we might see a runoff in South Carolina, as well. Click the link for the latest fundraising reports from those states which will be holding elections in ten days.
  • Looking even further ahead, we are actually getting reasonably close to closing the books on the filing deadlines (only a small handful of states are still open). This week, your pals at Daily Kos Elections put together helpful list of candidates from the eight states that have had recent deadlines.

THE BATTLE FOR THE STATE HOUSE

AT THE POLLS: Downballot, the data was equally sparse. One poll in the most polled gubernatorial race on the ballot (which shows roughly what everyone else has shown), and a particularly intriguing mayoral race, were the only ones with new numbers this week.

That San Diego Mayoral race is interesting, if only because there was some value in seeing where supporters of Republican-turned-Independent candidate Nathan Fletcher would go post-primary. They broke reasonably evenly, which is bad news for DeMaio, because he barely beat Filner in the primary, and there was another Democrat (Bonnie Dumanis) that scored in double digits. If Republican Carl DeMaio cannot snare more of those Fletcher supporters, the city of San Diego may have their first Democratic mayor in recent memory.

NC-GOV (PPP): Pat McCrory (R) 47, Walter Dalton (D) 40

SD-MAYOR (SurveyUSA): Bob Filner (D) 46, Carl DeMaio (R) 43

ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL:
  • One of the recurrent themes of the 2012 cycle downballot has been a fair amount of housecleaning that progressive Democrats have done at the primary level. The most recent example came this week in Nevada, where Democratic state senator John Lee, who had angered progressives with apostate votes on bills ranging from environmental legislation to taxes to gay rights, was easily dispatched in his primary by Patricia Spearman.
  • Congratulations, GOP gubernatorial nominee Ken Cuccinelli! That might be a bit premature, but the moves this week by the Republican Party of Virginia seems to cement that into reality come 2013. The party this week decided to select its statewide slate of nominees in the next statewide general election by convention, rather than by primary. Now, Cuccinelli (the far-right attorney general of the state) may well have won a primary, in any event. Recent polling had him smacking around state Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling. But an activist-driven convention plays to the activist base. For a quick numerical way to describe the difference: state legislator Bob Marshall (for whom the designation "far-right" seems to undersell it a bit) almost won a Senate nomination in 2008 in a convention. In a primary in 2012? Marshall snared just 7 percent of the vote, and finished a very distant third.
  • I guess it's never too early to look ahead to 2014, since we're looking at 2013. And in Arkansas, the first salvos of the 2014 cycle have already been fired, in June of 2012. In an early announcement, Democratic state attorney general Dustin McDaniel made clear his intentions to seek the governorship in 2014. This drew a smackdown from former Lt. Gov. Bill Halter (who nearly upset Sen. Blanche Lincoln in a whale of a primary challenge in 2010). Halter's beef with McDaniel's early move—it undermines candidates this cycle to be running for an office 30 months in advance. Likely, Halter has another, unspoken, beef: if Halter was going to announce for governor himself, but was planning to wait until after November, McDaniel just bought himself a six month head start.

THE ELECTIONS DIGEST “AIR BALL” OF THE WEEK AWARD

It's a Mitt-free edition of the Air Ball this week, but the all-GOP group is a diverse crop, including the first "journalist" so honored with an air ball nomination. Add two state legislators (well, one about-to-be-former legislator) and a state electoral body, and you have four fitting nominees for this week's Air Ball.

State House Speaker Jase Bolger (R-MI): So you can legislate vaginas all the live-long day in the state of Michigan, but if you say the word? Into the penalty box for you, according to the absurdly right-wing speaker of the Michigan House. Better still, calling them out for legislating lady parts is derided as a "temper tantrum" by the speaker. Hopefully, that's not part of this dude's job title after 2012.

Neil Munro (The Daily Caller): There's little doubt that this "journalist" is pulling for Mitt Romney. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that his little tantrum yesterday probably did not bolster his guy's cause. But Munro did accomplish one thing—he can cash in on the right-wing speaking circuit posthaste. Ask Sarah Palin, buddy, that's some seriously lucrative "work"!

The state election commission of South Carolina: Psst...Republicans...this is what election fraud looks like. The better-funded, establishment-backed Democratic candidate avoids catastrophe when the lesser-funded Democrat just misses avoiding a runoff. What does a good Republican do? Simple! Pretend that one of the candidates (who dropped out after the mother of all campaign screwups) doesn't exist, strike his votes from the tally, and hand the election to the lesser-funded candidate without a runoff. Um, yeah—there's gonna be a lawsuit here.

former state Sen. Van Wangaard (R-WI): Fiscal conservatism at its best! Wangaard is seeking a recount (for which his campaign will only be on the hook for $685, with the state picking up the balance) of a race that he lost by over one percentage point. No race with this margin (834 votes) has ever been overturned on recount, leading to speculation that this is a way to artificially keep the GOP's state senator "majority" alive artificially a bit longer. How many hours of quality teaching could this vanity exercise have paid for?

Originally posted to Daily Kos Elections on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 02:00 PM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Poll

The winner of this week's Daily Kos Elections Weekend Digest 'Air Ball' of the week is...

13%303 votes
69%1550 votes
10%243 votes
6%150 votes

| 2246 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (18+ / 0-)

    "Every one is king when there's no one left to pawn" (BRMC)
    Contributing Editor, Daily Kos/Daily Kos Elections

    by Steve Singiser on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 02:00:06 PM PDT

  •  I really think the Ras Wisc poll is off by so much (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    devtob

    that Baldwin and Thompson could be in a coin toss. I figure the presidential numbers are definitely off by 10 points and may be of by as many as 13, since We Ask America shows Obama winning it by 5 and they had Walker by 12 in the recall. So it's conceivable that the senate race is actually even or close to it.

    The Iowa Ras poll is probably closer to the actual state of the race, they are probably just a few points leaning repub there.

  •  Voted for SC Commission but I think they are (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    redrelic17, SLDemocrat, devtob, roadbear

    almost misplaced in the air ball poll - given that it is a blatant assault on democracy. I reckon that Neil Munro is probably the rightful winner of the three idiots in there !

    Town Planner, 30 years Old, Election Junkie, Thinks John Boehner is starting to be worried about holding the House...

    by CF of Aus on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 02:20:01 PM PDT

    •  Indeed he is (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      devtob, CF of Aus

      given that he really made a fool of himself. Bolger just gets a bit freaked out when a woman tells him that 'no means no' like so many Republicans. As for Wanggaard, I think the standard for further airballing should be high for a guy who just got recalled, and asking for a recount doesn't cut it.

      Male, 21, -4.75/-6.92, born and raised TN-05, now WI-02, remorseless supporter of Walker's recall. Pocan for Congress and Baldwin for Senate!

      by fearlessfred14 on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 03:43:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  So where in all this narrative... (5+ / 0-)

    ...is evidence that Mitt Romney is going to win in a landslide (as Romney aides were quoted as saying in Time magazine)? Here's Obama campaign aide Stephanie Cutter speaking about the Romney campaign's ill-considered optimism:

    "Some Romney advisers sound especially bullish, with one positing that a big win by their side is now more likely than a narrow Obama victory ..."
    That's a quote from a Time Magazine article saying Republicans are getting confident this race is theirs.
    Based on these numbers, there is only one way to describe the unnamed Romney aide's remarks (hint: it's a phrase Stephanie has used to describe the Romney campaign's lies against Obama).

    "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." --Gandhi

    by alaprst on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 02:20:36 PM PDT

    •  And this is why Romney will lose. (8+ / 0-)

      He's clearly becoming overconfident. Sorry, but if he's losing Nevada, New Mexico, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, and New Hampshire, how on earth is he winning The Electoral College? Even if he manages to flip Indiana & North Carolina Red again, he needs more states to get to 270... And right now, he's at risk of losing Arizona & Missouri.

      •  Just wait until you hear the attack and smear (2+ / 1-)
        Recommended by:
        annecros, True Independent
        Hidden by:
        keetz4

        ads coming in the fall. The Republicans are going to use a lot of PAC money to hammer Obama like you've never seen him attacked before and it will have a negative effect on his image. A lot of people hate Romney and the more you learn about him the more you will hate him, but that will be countered with some very nasty ad campaigns that will make Obama bleed.

        It is much too early to predict what will happen in November, but you can bet Obama will lose if he can't excite the Progressives and so far he hasn't been very successful at reuniting the base. Many members of the gay/lesbian community were encouraged by his endorsement of gay marriage, and the decision to stop deporting immigrant children helped calm the Hispanic coalition, but still, this has been a very bad week in many ways for the President. The article in the Washington Post (re: his handling of Hispanic criticism) drew blood, but he did a fairly good job of fighting back, but a lot of people are still cautious because this president has a very poor record of keeping his word. And the new revelations about the secret negotiations being conducted for the TPP have hurt him, but it is the offer to make cuts to Social Security and Medicare that are going to hurt him the most:

        It had to happen sooner or later: Jamie Dimon, the bank CEO who's become the public face for our greedy and corrupt banking system, is openly backing the austerity plan pushed by former Senator Alan Simpson, the arrogant and abusive voice of our country's bought-and-sold elite "bipartisan" consensus. Will the Democratic Party led by Barack Obama stand up to that corporate consensus, or submit to it?
        The Simpson-Bowles plan is designed to force the American people to pay for the wealth, greed and criminality of the banking class that Jamie Dimon has chosen to represent. The day after Dimon's testimony another institution announced that it was planning to impose the Simpson-Bowles austerity plan on us: the Presidential Administration of Barack Obama, as represented by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner.

        Tim Geithner, who said on Thursday that the right economic path "really began with Bowles-Simpson and that's where it's going to end." Geithner said that the President's Fiscal Year budget "differs in slight -- in small respects from that basic framework, [but] is very close to that basic design. That's the neighborhood in which we've planned to govern."
        Richard (RJ) Eskow,

        And re: TPP:
        Well, we already knew that Obama's anti-NAFTA campaign speeches were pretty much for show, but this is rather staggering.

        Consumer groups and unions are particularly outraged over the Obama administration’s plan that would allow corporations from TPP countries to bring suit before a multinational tribunal when laws or regulations in another member country harm their profits.Tucker warns that such language means that an individual company “that’s not necessarily pursuing the national interest as a whole can attack environmental regulations without first having to go through any kind of diplomatic process.” He notes that “We’ve seen over $300 million paid out to investors as a result of NAFTA cases” challenging environmental and financial regulation. Tucker gave the example of a Mexican municipality forced to pay $15 million to a U.S. investor who had bought a landfill which was being subjected to regulation. Tucker said companies are also “using it preemptively to cast a chill on regulation that might be coming down the pike.”

        Susie Madrak
        Crooks and Liars

        And as Digby pointed out, Obama's supporters have been excusing his failures by saying the President can't wave a magic wand and make things happen...in other words, he can't help people on the bottom rung of the ladder because his hands are tied and he is too powerless to act. Unfortunately, that argument fell by the wayside when he showed he can issue an executive order if it suits his political interests:
        It's interesting that in the wake of a blistering analysis of the administration's blind eye toward Latinos in the Washington Post, the president issues an executive order today allowing the DREAM kids to stay in country. In the article the president seemed befuddled by angry activists, saying, "I'm not a king" and telling them to go talk to congress. But it turns out the president does have some power, after all. Who knew?

        Digby (DREAMing of presidential power)

        In the end, what will motivate voters the most is how they have experienced life under this administration, and from everything I'm hearing from my progressive friends, it doesn't bode well for the Democrats.
        •  You do a good attack and smear job yourself (11+ / 0-)

          "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

          by conspiracy on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 05:01:15 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You believe Obama's best chance for re-election (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            annecros

            is to present him in a positive light and to condemn the criticism that is being leveled at him. That's okay, if that is your belief, then I can respect it, but I don't agree. I think his greatest chances for being re-elected rest on his ability to acknowledge his mistakes and to correct them. He has helped more Republicans than members of his own party and that has made a lot of Progressives angry. In fact, the number of angry Progressives is large enough now to cost him the election. There is good reason to dislike what he has done. Just look at the incredible income disparity that has occurred since he took office. The people who are angry at him don't buy the argument that he can't - or couldn't - do anything because of Republican obstructionism. He's the most powerful man in the world. If the president can't make things happen, then why worry about Romney?

            The people who are angry at him aren't going to suddenly stop being furious because a blogger presents a list of talking points. That isn't how life works. Most people push back when their family's well-being is being endangered, and if you attack them for fighting back, then you have created an enemy... and if you marginalize and mock them, then they usually will become even more determined to have their voices heard.

            The Democrats have become arrogant and corrupt...and that is very painful for me to say because I have been a lifelong Democrat, and if the party faithful don't wake up and hold our current leaders accountable for their misdeeds, then they have succeeded in changing the Democratic Party in a way that will cause long term damage.

            If you like TPP, then you're going to be happy. If you want the President to put Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid on the bargaining table, then you're going to be happy. If you have no problem with the President protecting the criminals on Wall Street, then you are on solid ground. If you want to watch the income disparity grow, then re-elect Obama without pressuring him to change his policies. If you have no problems with the environmental catastrophe that is heading our way, then support this president. He is not a good "steward of the environment."

            There are more Independents now, than Democrats. There are more Independents now, than Republicans. That is going to have an effect on our political landscape at some point, and it might be sooner than you think.

            •  WTF are you talking about? (17+ / 0-)

              "In fact, the number of angry Progressives is large enough now to cost him the election."

              So they're going to sit out or vote third party?  Get real.  After 2000-08, even most disappointed "progressives" realize the folly of allowing a Republican victory to "teach the Democratic party a lesson" or whatever such bullshit.

              36, MD-8 (MD-6 after 2012) resident, NOVA raised, Euro/Anglophile Democrat

              by Mike in MD on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 07:59:42 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  2010 taught us progressives a lesson (14+ / 0-)

                in that if you sit out or take the democratic party for granted bat shit fucking insane republican's get elected and take our country back 20-30 years.

                Sitting out won't teach us a lesson, it just gives the crazies a free pass to do crazy shit.

              •  You didn't learn anything from the 2010 election. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                mithra

                I have seen a lot of articles posted lately by political insiders that I trust, and they say the race is a dead heat and that the loyalists of both parties have made their decision and all the information says the vote is pretty much an even split. The block of voters that both parties are desperately trying to win now represent about 8% of the voters, and unfortunately for the Democrats, most of them say they are very unhappy with the President's performance. Many of them are former Democrats who have registered as Independents, and most of them say they are willing to sit out this election. That is why the Democrats in California are freaking out.

                I, on the other hand, am trying to get Progressives to pressure this president to start acting in the best interest of his constituents. My hope is that he will see the light before it is too late and do the right thing so we can win this election. I agree with Van Jones; Wisconsin was a wake up call for Democrats, but guess what? They aren't listening, just like they didn't listen in 2010.

                The Democrats have become so myopic they don't realize what lies ahead for our party if they don't push Obama further to the left. Let's say he wins this election and then he implements the policies that most insiders say he is going to push after the election, namely, placing Social Security and Medicare on the bargaining table, approving the Keystone pipeline, and allowing the unions to go under...what do you think will happen in 2014? Can't the President read the polls that say only 12% of the people in this nation want to see cuts made to our safety net programs? And who will get the blame if the environment suddenly turns to shit? The Democrats had better start solving some problems now or they might never be a true political force again. And the time to do it is now, not after the election.

                And those of you who keep saying we're abetting the Republicans by complaining: do you really think they don't know what is going on? Do you truly believe they don't read newspaper comment sections and progressive blogs enough to know that millions of members of the Democratic base are unhappy with this administration?

                •  Don't you try and tell me, or anyone else, (8+ / 0-)

                  we haven't learned anything.

                  And again, are you seriously suggesting that liberals and progressives won't vote in 2012 and let the GOP win?  What a crock of shit.

                  36, MD-8 (MD-6 after 2012) resident, NOVA raised, Euro/Anglophile Democrat

                  by Mike in MD on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 09:49:42 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Read this: (0+ / 0-)
                    WASHINGTON -- Since mid-April, the average price for a gallon of regular gasoline has dropped nearly 40 cents. President Barack Obama has announced support for same-sex marriage. Government statisticians have delivered two disappointing monthly jobs reports. Tensions have ebbed and flowed with Iran. And Mitt Romney has clinched the Republican presidential nomination.

                    And the presidential polls? Flat-lined.

                    Contradicting reams of punditry, national polls have not moved an inch amid those events -- not to mention the lesser political battles that have animated cable news programs. In Gallup's daily polling, to take one example, Romney and Obama were tied 46%-46% on April 11. Two months later, the poll had Obama up one point, 46%-45%, a statistically identical result. For more than seven weeks, neither candidate's standing has moved more than 3 percentage points -- well within the poll's margin of error.

                    Instead of a race, the campaign for president has turned into something more closely resembling trench warfare: dug-in armies, intense exchanges of fire, no movement.

                    The lack of movement is problematic for Obama. Both candidates, of course, would like to have broken free by now. But for Romney, just keeping Obama below 50% counts as an advantage, on the assumption that a majority of late deciders are more likely to vote against the incumbent.

                    As you see, the margin for winning this race comes down to about 8% of the vote, and like I said, it doesn't favor Obama. You can scream at me all you want, but it doesn't change the facts.
                •  I've talked to a number of such folks where I am (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  LordMike, buffie, keetz4

                  I live in Madison, and there are plenty of True Progressives in this town. Yes, there is a lot of discontent with Obama here, especially over foreign policy, and he might not have as many canvassers here as he would have if he were more liberal, but nobody I've talked to wants to punish Obama by staying home. One person I canvassed with said she though BO would go to Hell for drone assassinations, but that she would definitely vote for him nevertheless.

                  As for learning from June 5 here in Wisconsin, that was emphatically NOT the result of progressives staying home. Minority turnout was very high, and many downtown wards in Madison had upper-nineties turnout. The problem was that rural voters felt the recall was unjustified. These voters are genuine independents, not reluctant progressives like you seem to imply are the problem. There is no phantom reservoir of votes on the left side of the political spectrum. And, by the way, the recall was always about Walker, not Obama.

                  Finally, this is five months before an election. Obama can try to make a few policy changes, but a radical new agenda right before the election would be a horrible idea on the face of it. First, he has a campaign to run, and that takes a good deal of effort. Second, he needs to project confidence, not panic. Thirdly, the GOP will work extra hard to scuttle anything he does immediately before an election.

                  Male, 21, -4.75/-6.92, born and raised TN-05, now WI-02, remorseless supporter of Walker's recall. Pocan for Congress and Baldwin for Senate!

                  by fearlessfred14 on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 10:29:01 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  I can't really blame him for not doing enough (7+ / 0-)

                  When people like you don't give him credit for anything.

                  "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

                  by conspiracy on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 03:37:04 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Once you start with an absurd premise (0+ / 0-)

                  that the race is a dead heat, that renders the rest of comments just anti-reality speculating.

                  Obama has a huge lead at this point.  There is no logical way to dispute that.  All he needs is to win CO or VA or OH to win the elections, and in all those states he has a pretty consistent lead.  Add that Obama can also win with any of FL, MO, IN, NC, and Romney faces very long odds.

                  Anyone who wants to bet Romney straight up is still free to say so.

                  Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

                  by tommypaine on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 01:20:40 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  That isn't my belief at all (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              askew, DCCyclone

              I just don't accept your premise or agree with your conclusions. I don't believe polling data supports it.

              "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

              by conspiracy on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 03:22:23 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  "The fall" (2+ / 1-)
          Recommended by:
          happymisanthropy, mithra
          Hidden by:
          keetz4

          Eventually Democrats will learn that Republicans throw their biggest haymakers in the summer, while Dems are writing it off as the "silly season".  BUt.  The Swift Boats attacked in the summer.  The whole Death Panel rise of the Tea Party was a summertime event.  Those things not only mattered after Labor Day, they largely defined the campaigns that ensued.  But, please, Dem consultants, enjoy your summer-long vacations every campaign year.  Because nothing that happens in the summer could possibly matter in November.  All the conventional wisdom says so, and what do today's Dem consultants have except conventional wisdom.  Nothing.  Nothing at all.

          The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike from sleeping under bridges. ~ Anatole France

          by ActivistGuy on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 08:42:21 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  my life the last four years (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sapelcovits, EcosseNJ, keetz4, DCCyclone

          Yes, it's truePresident Obama is not as progressive  as I would likr, but he is a paragon of intelligence and virtue compared to Mr. Mendacity Mitt. Any progressive with a brain(and I like to think that most of us are intelligent and well-informed) will be highly motivated this fall. Consider the alternative and imagine Mittens in the White House with a Republican House and Senate. In four years this country will be unrecognizable. So I respectfully disagree with your opinion.

          "Well Clarice, have the lambs stopped screaming?"

          by buffie on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 04:03:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Confident Mitt (4+ / 0-)

        leads to comments on grits.  Every time Mitt would get really confident & brash (i.e. after NH primary, NV caucus, before AL/MS primaries), he'd talk about his inevitability and it makes him look like a horrific Gordon Gekko caricature.

        Sign the petition & help me honor Paul Wellstone! http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/02/1080114/-My-Idea-To-Honor-Paul-Wellstone

        by RVKU on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 08:06:02 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  FL? (0+ / 0-)

        FL is leaning red this election.

        •  Only if Obama +4 means "leaning red" to you (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sapelcovits, JBraden, DCCyclone

          Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

          by tommypaine on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 01:58:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Only if you accept (0+ / 0-)

            Only if you accept only polls that favor Obama, Obama is at worst probably down 1 or 2 but he is not ahead by 4,  PPP has a Dem lean this cycle

            •  Um, no, the corretc line is (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              fladem, R30A

              "only if you accept polls with a history or reliability"

              All polls are not right.  Some are garbage.  If Q is right, then PPP and Marist are very wrong.  Averaging them give as +0 amount.

              But the only two pollsters that show a Romney edge are Purple Strategies, which is a no track record outfit, and Q which has gone from Obama +7 to Romney +6 in two months, while no one else sees anything like that kind of movement.  Their Obama +7 is just as likely garbage as their Romney +6.

              Face it, averaging all pollsters is Romney +0.  Tossing out the no track record, bad track record, and obvious nonsense (a 13 point shift in two months) leads to Obama +4.

              Regardless though, the bottom line is Florida is a toosup.  There is no way to justify "leaning red".  The statement is false, based on the public polls.

              Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

              by tommypaine on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 04:40:15 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  It's a lie (10+ / 0-)

      to try to flip the narrative. Up until now, the CW has been that we could see anything from a narrow Romney win to a big Obama win. All the stories about Romney needing to "run the table" in all the major swing states just reinforces that.

      So he's just trying to challenge that assumption - and he's doing it by making shit up.

  •  May I add... (12+ / 0-)

    ...something I've said before. This is shaping up far more like Mitt Romney's 1994 Massachusetts U.S. Senate contest against Ted Kennedy. The polls were very close then, too, but something happened. The more folks learned about Mitt Romney, the less they liked him. These arrogant Romney aides who flaunt their ill-reasoned optimism reminded me of the owner of the 1938 Pittsburgh Pirates who spent $50,000 to build a press box extension he thought he'd be using in that year's World Series. The investment was incredibly premature as the Pirates wound up losing the National League pennant to the Chicago Cubs on Gabby Hartnett's "homer in the gloamin'" at Wrigley Field.

    "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." --Gandhi

    by alaprst on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 02:27:42 PM PDT

  •  It will be a long night only if everything east of (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    praenomen, devtob, askew

    the Mississippi goes wrong, and we are dependent on Colorado and Nevada. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but assuming the "Kerry States" hold, all we need east of the Miss. is one of the following ... Ohio, VA, FL, NC.  And if we get one of those, we will most certainly get IA, CO, NM, & NV.  But if we don't get ANY of those eastern states -- it could be Mittens for the next four years .....

  •  clown question, bro (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AZ RedWingsFan

    Deputy Political Director, DGA. Opinions here are my own and in no way represent the DGA's thinking.

    by Bharat on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 03:26:36 PM PDT

  •  SD-Mayor (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bythesea, atdnext

    Dumanis, though apparently relatively moderate, is a Republican.

    social democrat (with a small d) the point of politics is policy not power

    by octaviuz on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 05:08:56 PM PDT

  •  Group question (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike

    What does everyone think that justice Ginsberg's non-statements mean?

    •  No takers? (0+ / 0-)

      I am sort of surprised by that.

    •  At first, I was very despondent... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, R30A

      ...it seemed very bad, but after reading some other DK readers takes, I feel better.  One good point that one reader made was that Ginsberg wouldn't be cracking broccoli jokes if things were looking bad for us.  Certainly, there is the possibility of gallows humor, but apparently, she had a wry smile going on the whole time.

      So, who knows.  Tom Goldstein, who's a famous SCOTUS attorney on our side, argued a case immediately after the health care case was complete.  He noted that the liberal justices were in unusually good moods that day.  He took it to mean nothing, but I have a hard time imagining our folks being in good moods a few days after getting hammered.  I'd be devastated.

      So, take with as many grains of salt as you wish...

      GODSPEED TO THE WISCONSIN FOURTEEN!

      by LordMike on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 01:04:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Close now, but (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ahumbleopinion

    will it still be close after the Republicans outspend the Democrats by some hundreds of millions in the next four months?

    I certainly hope so, but we are in uncharted waters.

    And negative ads work.

    A public option for health insurance is a national priority.

    by devtob on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 08:13:04 PM PDT

    •  They do work... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      devtob, R30A, Micheline, askew

      ...but are they as effective when used against as known a quantity as an incumbent president?   I'm just not sure.

      Much more important, I think, will be the jobs and unemployment numbers that will be coming out over the next five months.  

      •  May's numbers hurt Obama and the Dems (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LordMike

        If the numbers get better between now and November, Obama wins easily

        If they get worse, Obama probably loses.

        If they muddle along, it will be too close for comfort.

        A public option for health insurance is a national priority.

        by devtob on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 09:13:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Indiana's Democratic Convention completed its (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike

    State wide ticket today. Govenor is determined by Primary, to be filled by John Gregg.  The other three State positions will have women in those races, determined by Convention vote.  Let. Govenor, State Treasurer and State School Supt. will all be female candidates.  This seems like a good counter againes Republican Mike Pence and crew.  Pence is locked into Tea Bagger money and language.

  •  According to Romney's team they have this in the (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, buffie, askew

    bag.  In fact, I believe they used the word landslide.

  •  Blumenthal: Gallup Tracking Undercounts Minorities (7+ / 0-)

    Race Matters: Why Gallup Poll Finds Less Support For President Obama

    ISSUES OF RACE

    For estimates of race and other demographics, pollsters typically turn to the highly reliable data produced by the U.S. Census. They sometimes look at the full Census, but since that occurs only once every 10 years, many depend instead on the more frequently fielded Current Population Survey or the American Community Survey.

    The CPS and ACS feature in-person interviews, enormous sample sizes and very high response rates, making them some of the most reliable surveys available. The CPS, for example, talks to roughly 60,000 U.S. households per month and typically achieves a 90 percent or better response rate.

    Gallup currently weights its adult samples to match the March 2011 CPS, the largest monthly CPS sample that is currently available to the public.

    Gallup adds an unusual twist, however, which most other widely reported independent national polls do not: It filters the CPS data to use the estimates for adults "living in U.S. telephone households." Thus, rather than weighting its survey to match the demographics of all adults, Gallup removes a small sliver of adults (3.2 percent) who have no access to telephone service of any kind, either landline or mobile.

    The omission is consequential because the majority of Americans who lack all forms of phone service are non-white. In the March 2011 CPS, 54.4 percent of adults living in non-telephone households reported they were Hispanic, black or another race other than white, compared to 31.5 percent of adults with telephones.

    Why filter out telephone households? According to Jeffrey Jones, managing editor of the Gallup Poll, "that is our usual approach, to match the weighting targets as closely as possible to our sample universe."

    Most other pollsters have opted to go in a different direction, basing their weighting targets on the full population, since that is ultimately what their polls of "all adults" endeavor to measure. By filtering out the non-telephone households, Gallup slightly underestimates the number of blacks and Hispanics in the full population.

    •  Yup (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin

      There has to be a reason why both trackers are less favorable to Obama than all other polling. It makes sense given Gallup undersample minorities and Rasmussen undersamples Democrats.

      "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

      by conspiracy on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 09:31:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Only one player launched an air ball (0+ / 0-)

    Munro, as you note, might have had a moment of being true to himself. Being a dick is commonplace at Daily Caller, as it seems that Tucker Carlson likes dicks. After all, this is the spam mail outfit that had white supremacists (plural) on staff. The only missed shot was allowing the creature into the rose garden -- someone must have thought there was a need for fertilizer.

    The SC Board was doing what it does, what GOP boards do. After Alvin Greene, they've learned: do the crime, and then demand to be caught. If your opponents are poor, they can't afford to sue. If they sue anyway, use it. See "dick."

    Wangaard, the great back protector, as you yourself note, is accomplishing the thing he's aiming for: enabling massed ranks of rank bills.

    Jase Bolger, on the other hand, was trying to teach that woman a lesson. In fact, he was going to teach those women a lesson. He jumped in the air. He launched the ball. He turned his back and celebrated. The ball landed in the hands of the opposing team's point guard.

    Every reductio ad absurdum will seem like a good idea to some fool or another.

    by The Geogre on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 04:25:53 AM PDT

  •  Screw the Numbers!Nothing will affect Pres Obama's (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    buffie, LordMike, EcosseNJ, R30A

    re-election like Not voting!

    No matter whether you believe polls are accurate or not-the ONLY thing that determines the outcome of an election IS the Informed voter.

    Polls are only as reliable as the person who paid for them is honest.

    Adelson Alone (and we Know he's not the only one) can buy every single poll and commission them to ask questions in a common manner that reverses the response from you to the one they want.

    Stay confident, ignore the BS, mute, turn away, walk away-do whatever but Reduce your exposure to the crap.

    Educate others.

    They have been studying our psychology for Decades-they know what to say, the "shading" on photo's, buzz words, misinformation, background "music" to terrorize, tell out-right lies-they will use All means, methods and a variety of approaches to create as much fear and doubt in the Dem base as they can.  Their Largest targets are the swing voters.
    This tactic is not new and its worked everytime. Will we see through it this election and essentially reject Citizens United?  I sure hope so!

    Vote.

    •  Money will count (0+ / 0-)

      Adelson and his cronies will not stop spending as long as the polls remain close.  This morning, Ras has Romney up three, while we all know that that probably means it's even or Obama has a narrow lead, those rich guys will not back off until Obama has a clear-cut advantage and there's no sense in pouring money into Romney if he's going to lose.

      The problem as I see it, short of better economic numbers, which I do not expect, this will be a desperately close election, so there will no incentive to stop the carpet-bombing of the money boys.

      •  Is it actually close or (0+ / 0-)

        have the paid off pollsters performed some "creative wording" to manipulate the outcome to create the illusion of a close race?

        Seriously, we have been "duped" into believing that somehow polling is an honest and reliable means of measuring the public mood-if it ever was it sure as hell Isn't now.

        Yes Adelson et al will spend their money because they have it and it won't hurt them. They are willing to pay a King's Ransom to have total control over our us and our govt and they've damned near succeeded.  
        They will spend whatever it takes because they want what they want. This is their last stand.

        As far as I'm concerned they determine the outcome of the polls using a lot of "tricks of the trade"-a lot of voters use them as a guide-an alternative to researching facts about the person(s) up for an election.  They know that

        We are "conditioned" if you will to actually believe when much of what we hear are just sound bites. Pro-Politicians love that.

        I never get polled and if I were-I wouldn't play. I have zero trust in their wiilingness to accurately record my responses. It's all rigged.

        We need to question everything, evaluate by actually hearing what we listen to-IOW-Think Critically and research independently.

        They're blaming the pres for not doing "stuff" he hasn't the authority to do, like spend money and for things that happened or were set in motion before his inauguration...like Solyndra.

        What we should be worried about are the Voting machines.
        We don't seem to be very concerned about that which surprises the shit out of me-I mean have we No memory of the 2000-2004 bushco elections?

        I will not use or even consider any economic numbers in my "presidential" decision making because the republicans are directly responsible for the terrible jobs numbers, high unemployment, low taxes on the wealthy, BigOil subs and etc.

        The repubs have obstructed and defunded everything "good" for all of us to benefit the few at the top, literally.  The pres has tried to implement a lot of different ideas/plans that would have increased Jobs, offered relief to millions, increased revenue and tightened up regulations to no avail.  
        I hold a handful of "dems" and the entire republican party responsible for this mess we are in.

        The repubs and a few willing democrats have Used BushCo's Recession as a means to punish us for having the audacity to  elect This man as POTUS because what He Wants to do does Not suit their end goal.

        The stakes are Way higher now.  They're so close to finishing a 4 Decades long mission---"They" know this is their "last stand" also. One thing they want most of all is to pick the next two Supreme Court Justices-but they want it all.........That is simply unacceptable..

        WE do not "have to" allow money to win-and we won't as long as We stay focused and ignore their expensive BS.

        MSM's contribution is a whole 'nuther despicable entity on its own.

  •  I don't think this election will be as close as (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, EcosseNJ, LordMike, keetz4, itskevin

    2004.  I think Obama will win with about a 5% point margin. Dems will certainly have the money to compete with the GOP and win., but probably not to the extent of expanding the map until October.  Romney is a shitty candidate and Obama is a good one and I do think that matters, probably more than one might realize.

    As far as the economy is concerned, I do see a lot of positive things happening in various sectors that impact the middle class including important ones like auto and housing. Gas prices are also coming down and will probably be at an acceptable level through election day.  That has to impact the mood of the country if not the actual growth/jobs data. There won't be a government shutdown before the elections, nor do I think the Euro crisis will do any more than we've seen thus far to stymie growth.  In fact, if people think that the EU is unstable, the logical place to put one's money would be in the much more stable US.  

    The potential budget/Bush tax cut crisis could cause monied folks to keep it on the sidelines, but I don't really think so.  The election will sort out that issue.

    Alternative rock with something to say: http://www.myspace.com/globalshakedown

    by khyber900 on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 08:50:12 AM PDT

  •  Why is Romney so afraid of Ed Rendell (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    geoneb, itskevin

    that he bypassed a stop on his bus tour, when informed that Rendell was leading a separate stop?

    I think, therefore I am. I think.

    by mcmom on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 09:14:07 AM PDT

  •  Seriously? (0+ / 0-)

    Roberto Unger, Obama's Former Harvard Law School Professor, Says The President 'Must Be Defeated'

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

  •  Looks like the greek elections are good for us... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    itskevin

    Bad for greece, but good for us.  This is some welcome good news (assuming it holds).

    GODSPEED TO THE WISCONSIN FOURTEEN!

    by LordMike on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 01:10:40 PM PDT

  •  More on the Blumenthal/Gallup audit cited above (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, DCCyclone, itskevin

    "Over the past few years, however, polling junkies have noticed something curious: Gallup's polls have produced results that appear slightly but consistently more negative to President Obama than those produced by other firms."

    They looked at the most frequent national polls in April compared to the totality and found the Obama lead over Romney, according to Gallup, at little more than 1 point.

    Over the same period Rasmussen found Romney ahead by almost 2 points.

    The Obama lead according to YouGov was exactly 3 points.

    PPP found the president ahead by almost 5 points.

    Taken together, the rest of the field during this period averaged out at an Obama lead of almost 4 points.

    In addition, Gallup reported job approval almost 3 points lower than the field over the last year. The graphs at the link are pretty striking.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

    "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

    by conspiracy on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 02:24:30 PM PDT

  •  So far, Romney isn't doing any better than McCain (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, R30A

    If you look at polling averages over the course of 2008 and 2012 (so far), one thing you'll notice is that Romney has yet to equal McCain's biggest lead over Obama:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/...

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/...

    While Obama has already equalled the biggest lead he had over McCain (6 points) with Romney.

  •  As I sit here in Dem HQ in Olympia WA (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike

    As I sit here tonight in an empty Dem HQ office (well it is Father's Day and some have a life) I can say emphatically that the base is not enthusiastic about Obama.  They are luke-warm to moderately enthusiastic about Jay Inslee for Governor but so far there is little interest in Obama.  

    Yesterday we threw a kick off party for what we call the coordinated campaign in this state. Which signifies the opening of regional combined Obama/Inslee field offices.  Our office had a good turn out of just over 200 people which isn't a bad number.  Inslee dropped in and gave his stump speech that was well received and we had a good write up in today's newspaper.  

    The relevant part is that while Inslee placed lots of yard signs and bumper stickers very few people were interested in Obama Swag.  Not the most scientific measure but since I'm the was the "gear guy" in 08 and now again in 12 I see a world of difference.  

    Sitting here tonight we still have a drawer full of Obama stickers, buttons & signs.  In 08 anything with Obama on it flew out the door.  I had trouble keeping stocked.  This year there are few takers and to me that equals no enthusiasm.  Maybe it will come later.  Maybe people assume Obama will win and will finally wake up.  Who knows but right now the connection just isn't there.  

    Having said that, it's unlikely that Obama would loose WA State.  However the governors race has Rob McKenna ahead by a few points and he will not go quietly into the night.  Without enthusiasm for the top of the ticket it also is unlikely that there will be coat-tails to carry Inslee to the governorship.  Lack of interest in Obama could very well set us up for a WI like state government next year so the disconnect has far reaching effects.  

    A bad idea isn't responsible for those who believe it. ---Stephen Cannell

    by YellerDog on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 09:08:50 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site