The Impending Romney Loss and What It Means

[Red Green]

I have said this before and I'll say it again now: Mitt Romney will lose the election come November.

Obama is a seriously weak candidate for re-election. The economy during his administration has shown very little improvement from the mess that followed the Dubya administration. We have sluggish growth, high unemployment, rising commodity prices and low confidence across the broad range of participants in the economy. Beyond the stagnant economy (which Obama has some cover from the mismanagement of the Dubya administration), a famously unpopular piece of legislation was passed by the Dem-controlled congress which has become a namesake of his. Assorted gaffs that occur when he tries to speak without a teleprompter belie his class-warfare ideology that alienates him from the business community. He is an incredibly weak candidate so unseating him from the presidency should be the proverbial 'shooting fish in a barrel' scenario.

Romney, aware of his opponent's weakness seems to understand this completely, and his playbook to date has been designed for such an opponent. He is playing it safe, trying to ruffle as few feathers as possible in hopes that just standing by until November he will get the opportunity to watch Obama implode resulting in a Romney presidency with very little effort.

Romney has reason to be optimistic with his gameplan: he managed to capture the nomination against a crowded field without much real opposition, he has the full backing of the party establishment and he has managed to raise money at a record pace. In short, he should by all reckoning of history be a shoe-in.

But he won't. Or I should say, most likely he won't. There are too many things that can happen between now and November for anyone to know for sure but one thing we do know is how this battle has played out so far. Romney, by the best guesses of pollsters so far, would lose the election if it were held today. Romney is probably not worried about that though. He has a time-tested game plan and most likely he will stick to it. He is looking toward the future realizing a couple of things: the presidential election does not start in earnest until after the nomination at the party convention; that nominees generally see a bounce in the polls as a result of all the "rah-rah" and pageantry at the convention; that when pressed, a weak president will go on the defensive and look bad. These are all reasons to ignore the polls right now and stick to the game plan offered up by skilled political advisers who have a history of getting people elected.

But they won't get Romney elected. Like so many other generals in history, Romney's advisers are fighting the last war when the battle landscape has changed. The equate the money pouring in with eventual political support but what they should realize is that the ideological gulf between the 1% whom that money represents and the lunchbox joe of the 99% who used to rally behind the GOP has become difficult if not impossible to bridge.

The warning signs of this are being played out in the GOP itself as a civil war is brewing within the party. The RNC, in charge of the Romney coronation in Tampa, is threatening to not seat Ron Paul delegates from Main unless they agree to support Romney and shut up if they can't say anything nice. RP delegates from other states had seen the state parties break their own rules to keep RP delegates from going to Tampa, or in other ways demanding fealty to Romney as the price of admission. In Nevada, the establishment basically abandoned the state party to take up camp with the state Romney campaign. The fact is that the RNC, operating as Romney surrogates, has had to resort to heavy-handedness just to keep the convention from being a floor fight. While this may give them a squeaky-clean and orderly convention, the fact that their methods have become public will do more damage to their perception among the 99%. If it's one thing that lunchbox joe can relate to is the everyman getting held back by "the man". Americans love a good fight, and are often appreciative of a winner (and even a loser) who fought fair, but when it comes to an unfair fight, Americans love to side with the underdog.

Beyond garnering a reputation for being the choice of the "1%", Romney has zero grass-roots support. If I looked I could probably not find a single Republican who is genuinely excited about Romney. Keep in mind this is supposedly his home team. Most of the people I know are going to justify a vote for Romney as a vote against Obama. And it gets worse for Romney when he plays to venues outside his home turf. He comes across as a well-manicured but plastic ken doll. Yeah he has great hair and a solid chin-line, but he is famously unable to connect with the common man-on-the-street. He seems uncomfortable talking about anything on a personal level. Not to mention that if the fellow had convictions, you would need a team of private investigators to try and find them. Taking a side on an issue comes naturally for Romney, regardless of the issue or the side since he has a history with all of them. In short, Romney is not the kind of guy who inspires or can lead people into his camp. The ones who are in his camp are there because they share a common goal: money. And this is why he will lose in November.

So what does it mean when Romney does lose (as I predict) come November? It means that the politically wealthy class have seen the sunset of their empire in the US and most likely the civil war brewing in the GOP will boil over outside the party and into the general politic of the US unless the 1% can curb their fears and ambitions and start connecting with the 99% once again.

[Peter O'Donnell]

What if it becomes more widely understood that Hussein (Obama) has knowingly fanned the flames of dangerous political turmoil in the Middle East, suppose that Syria boils over into a war and Israel takes casualties? Or there is an interruption of oil shipments from the region? Just conjecture, but I think the majority of the voters have not connected with this issue yet, and it comes very close to the impeachment thresh-hold for the president. Romney can't look bad against that.

[Red Green]

What if it becomes more widely understood that Hussein (Obama) has knowingly fanned the flames of dangerous political turmoil in the Middle East, suppose that Syria boils over into a war and Israel takes casualties? Or there is an interruption of oil shipments from the region? Just conjecture, but I think the majority of the voters have not connected with this issue yet, and it comes very close to the impeachment thresh-hold for the president. Romney can't look bad against that.

There are a lot of things that could happen in the next few months to make it possible for a Romney win, but all of those things are out of Romney's control. It's like planning on going into battle, knowing your only chance to win is if it rains.

Furthermore, the only people interested in foreign affairs are politicos. People are focused on home-and-hearth issues at this point. If I recall correctly, the avg household net wealth in the US has declined something like 25% over the past 4 years. Think about that for a moment: you are you're average joe who once had equity in his home and a modest pension plan and within 4 years your pension plan is signalling another decade of work for you and you are underwater with respect to your home. Do you really give a rat's-ass about people over in Syria?

What we have had for decades in this country is a political class that knew how to make money of the politics game. Those that played in that game, everyone from politicians to school superintendents to fire-fighters and cops saw themselves able to increase their own wealth with near abandon because of the increasing productivity of the US economy and the ability to borrow money. Now we have had a hiccup in that process and the ability to borrow is becoming more and more difficult so people who cared not about politics and made their money the old-fashioned way are getting squeezed and are coming to the realization as to what has been going on all this time. Some of those are becoming politically active and the political class is fighting back at what it sees as the barbarians at the gate. Eventually, something is going to give.

[Hodgson]

Obama barely beat McCain four years ago.

Now he has a crappy record to run with.
Mitt is bringing in tens of millions more dollars for the campaign.
Unemployment over 8%.
Unprecedented debt/deficits.

Not sure what Obama can bring in order to change the trajectory....

[Charles J. White]

I think it is fair to say that IF Mitt Romney loses to Obama, that all us at Free Dominion, should be doing what we can, to encourage any of our American brothers and sisters to immediately come out and endorse Rand Paul for 2016. The political elites have decided that Jeb Bush should be the man in 2016 and we must not allow that to happen.

[Red Green]

Obama barely beat McCain four years ago.

Now he has a crappy record to run with.
Mitt is bringing in tens of millions more dollars for the campaign.
Unemployment over 8%.
Unprecedented debt/deficits.

Not sure what Obama can bring in order to change the trajectory....

I'm not sure what you consider "barely" but there was about 5% points (correction: 7%) between them on the popular vote and Obama managed to more than double McCain's electoral count. That's not squeaking by. That's a good old-fashioned clear win.

And you are thinking like the Mittens campaign: dollars equal support. That's not the case. People will be sitting at home this time round and that will hurt Romney.

[Red Green]

I think it is fair to say that IF Mitt Romney loses to Obama, that all us at Free Dominion, should be doing what we can, to encourage any of our American brothers and sisters to immediately come out and endorse Rand Paul for 2016. The political elites have decided that Jeb Bush should be the man in 2016 and we must not allow that to happen.

Be prepared (with copious amounts of barf-bags at hand) for a Jeb 2016 campaign to come about. The establishment will again have it's man at the head.

[Charles J. White]

I think it is fair to say that IF Mitt Romney loses to Obama, that all us at Free Dominion, should be doing what we can, to encourage any of our American brothers and sisters to immediately come out and endorse Rand Paul for 2016. The political elites have decided that Jeb Bush should be the man in 2016 and we must not allow that to happen.

Be prepared (with copious amounts of barf-bags at hand) for a Jeb 2016 campaign to come about. The establishment will again have it's man at the head.

Ron's organization is doing everything it can to hand off the movement to Rand:


Rand Paul to Address GOP Convention

Although the GOP has yet to announce the addition of Ron Paul to the roster of speakers slated to address the party’s national convention later this month in Tampa, his son, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul (pictured), is on the program.

More here:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/po ... ot-invited

[DA_Champion]

Red,

You are totally overestimating the impact of the Ron Paul delegates and of the anger of the 99%.

Romney is raising the most money by a mile, he's going to win.

[DA_Champion]

I think it is fair to say that IF Mitt Romney loses to Obama, that all us at Free Dominion, should be doing what we can, to encourage any of our American brothers and sisters to immediately come out and endorse Rand Paul for 2016. The political elites have decided that Jeb Bush should be the man in 2016 and we must not allow that to happen.

Be prepared (with copious amounts of barf-bags at hand) for a Jeb 2016 campaign to come about. The establishment will again have it's man at the head.

I can see General Petraus running for president as more **** hits the fan.

We're definitely moving in the direction of martial law.

They might just give the presidency to Petraus, and spare him the indignity of running.

[Hodgson]

Obama barely beat McCain four years ago.

Now he has a crappy record to run with.
Mitt is bringing in tens of millions more dollars for the campaign.
Unemployment over 8%.
Unprecedented debt/deficits.

Not sure what Obama can bring in order to change the trajectory....

I'm not sure what you consider "barely" but there was about 5% points (correction: 7%) between them on the popular vote and Obama managed to more than double McCain's electoral count. That's not squeaking by. That's a good old-fashioned clear win.

And you are thinking like the Mittens campaign: dollars equal support. That's not the case. People will be sitting at home this time round and that will hurt Romney.

7% of the popular vote? Obama had a tidal wave of support. It was Obamania. Remember people saying another chapter of the bible would have to be added? Obama will put gas in my car and food on the table?

And with that, he won by 7%.

After four years of malaise you really think Romney is going to lose?

We need to start a little freedominion gambling page.....

[Smaug]

It is a little too early to be picking a winner in this election.

Personaly, I wonder if the election will make any difference. Is anything likely to change for the U.S. wether a socialist idealogue, or a corpratist socialist wins?

[Red Green]

Obama barely beat McCain four years ago.

Now he has a crappy record to run with.
Mitt is bringing in tens of millions more dollars for the campaign.
Unemployment over 8%.
Unprecedented debt/deficits.

Not sure what Obama can bring in order to change the trajectory....

I'm not sure what you consider "barely" but there was about 5% points (correction: 7%) between them on the popular vote and Obama managed to more than double McCain's electoral count. That's not squeaking by. That's a good old-fashioned clear win.

And you are thinking like the Mittens campaign: dollars equal support. That's not the case. People will be sitting at home this time round and that will hurt Romney.

7% of the popular vote? Obama had a tidal wave of support. It was Obamania. Remember people saying another chapter of the bible would have to be added? Obama will put gas in my car and food on the table?

And with that, he won by 7%.

After four years of malaise you really think Romney is going to lose?

We need to start a little freedominion gambling page.....

So do you stand by your statement that Obama "barely" won over McCain? In my books that was a pretty good thrashing he dealt out there.

I am open to a little wagering on this issue. We could do some sort of cross-border donation wager.

[Charles J. White]

It is a little too early to be picking a winner in this election.

Personaly, I wonder if the election will make any difference. Is anything likely to change for the U.S. wether a socialist idealogue, or a corpratist socialist wins?

Wow, I agree with you, which is shocking, I have never seen you speak so clearly about the mainstream in that matter when it comes to "conservative" choices

[Red Green]

Red,

You are totally overestimating the impact of the Ron Paul delegates and of the anger of the 99%.

Romney is raising the most money by a mile, he's going to win.

That is the conventional wisdom DAC, but I think conventions are not well served in the current climate.

By all measures Romney should be able to bury Obama. He won't and it will be close but I give the edge to Obama.