Cant say i see that happening at all. The dems would have a pretty indefensible position if they started going after Rubio based on the same issue they spent the last 4 years painting conservatives as racists over. I obviously disagree strongly with the right over the birther issue, but if dems were to try to use it as an issue, they would have no way of justifying their attacks, unless they are also racists in their own eyes. It would be similar to kkk47 pretending to be against racism, then turning around and constantly making racial slurs about black conservatives. Maybe if it happened people would start to realize how full of shit they are as it pertains to racism.
But you are missing the point. The hardcore Democrats will vote for "their guy" no matter who the hell is on the ticket. The independent voters who bought into the whole "hopium" myth in 2008 are completely off the bandwagon. That's a big problem for Obummer. Of course, the fanboys conveniently like to forget the mid-term elections that basically were a referendum against all things Obummer as well. Do any of you fanboys actually remember that Democratic candidates were literally cringing at the thought of Hopey showing up with one of his teleprompter speeches...just like the Repubs were cringing at the prospect of Dubya on the campaign trail.
One big problem is that both Rubio, and Christie are stars in the republican party, who have their own political ambitions. Democrats are not going to allow much of the legislation that republicans want to pass if Romney was to win in 2012, as they will be bitter over Obamas failures. So both Christie and Rubio might look at the situation and say that they dont want to be on a ticket that is fucked from the get go. There is a strong chance that both Rubio, and Christie, assess the situation and come to the conclusion they dont want any part of it. If that happens Romney loses both of his aces, and he might be stuck picking someone who is simply to plain to garner any support like Mitch Daniels. I think Mitch Daniels is smart as is Romney, but unfortunately we have already seen that the public doesnt simply vote for smart, they want to see a show. I never even thought of the morman organization Romney must have before.... Arent Mormans the ones who go around knocking on doors trying to convert people? If so that could be one hell of a ground game for Romney regardless of where he goes(as long as they dont try to convert people at the same time), as these people are already used to banging on doors and getting shit all over, I did door to door sales for a summer when i was in university, and there is a real art to randomly harassing someone while they are at home and getting them to like you, then selling them on something..... The mormons must be pretty good at it by now, i was only trying to sell a 30 dollar coupon book, converting someone you just met must be a real skill...
LOL, yes the missionary training certainly helps. If you want a demonstration of what a bunch of rowdy Mormons can do, just look at Prop 8 in CA. That goes overwhelmingly the other direction if the Mormons don't get involved. Most people are so used to viewing Mormons as a small inconsequential fringe church. They don't realize that when it comes to activism, one Mormon does the work of about 10 traditional Protestants. They really live their religion and when they get behind something, they put a lot of money and effort into it. Something like 70% of all donations for Prop 8 as well as tens of thousands of volunteers, came from the Mormons. Not the church itself, but the members. Obviously, the church is not going to take sides as they would lose their tax status, but something like 95% of all Mormons are republican leaning. It isn't just about all Mormons voting for Romney either. It is about the groundswell they create. A 5% Mormon voter base will increase Romney's portion of the vote by about 10-15% in the general election compared to a generic republican. That's why I don't think Obama has a chance anywhere in the Mormon corridor. California will actually be very interesting in November. I think Obama still takes it, but just barely. He will be sweating it for sure. There are half a million Mormon voters there, and they will be pushing Romney really hard. I think Romney will at least get 45% in CA, and if Obama can't hold a huge majority of the Hispanics, that could put Romney over the top there.
Wow. 'hopium' - 'obummer' - 'fanboy' - nice to see we're having an intellectual discussion. I'll try to look past the silliness and just respond with this. The approval rating is below 50%, when 50% have to say they hate the President no matter what. If the situation were reversed, you would likely discount a report like like this with some 'lefty' comment, or some such. But even if they're upset with the President, doesn't mean they will go for a Romney. Just doesn't make sense to so many. Pretty plain and simple I think. c
I said that i think Obama still takes Cali, but if you think that NV, CO, and NM are all gonna go Obama over Romney, you are not being very realistic. NV -- Romney needs to beat McCain's numbers by 6% to win, and look at the primary numbers in NV during '08. Even though he lost to McCain pretty handily, Romney still got 51% of the NV vote in a four man race. NV is 100% guaranteed for Romney over Obama. CO -- Romney needs to increase the '08 numbers by 5% to win. A base disillusioned with Obama and large Mormon support makes that 5% really easy. NM -- Is the biggest challenge for Romney in the Mormon corridor. He would need a 8% increase. I gave this one to Obama in my earlier analysis. AZ -- a lock for Romney UT -- a lock for Romney ID -- a lock for Romney So how is my thinking seriously impaired?
I'm just responding in kind when I read the "we" comment in your initial post. The "we" suggests "fanboy" as there is no objectivity whatsoever. As I also stated in my post, the mid-term elections were a vote AGAINST the incumbents in many of the races. That sentiment has grown since that time as suggested in the various polls. I agree about one thing: your analysis is "pretty plain and simple".