Romney Victory called by Kim Strassel (of WSJ)

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Ripley, Nov 6, 2012.

  1. Nov 6th, 12:01 PM

    'I'm Calling It for Mitt'
    By KIMBERLEY STRASSEL

    Predicting an election is risky business, but political journalists ought to be expected to take some risks. So I'm calling it for Mitt Romney.

    This isn't blind enthusiasm talking; I've spent much of this election cycle assuming Mr. Romney would lose. He ground out an uninspiring victory in the primaries. He ran an equally timid general-election campaign, right through to his pick of Paul Ryan as a running mate. The Republican then risked all the benefit he'd earned from that bold move by staging a lackluster GOP convention.

    But the Romney that has emerged since the first Denver debate is the sort of leader that voters have been hoping for at a time of economic uncertainty. As a result, Republican voters have gone from wanting to simply get rid of Barack Obama to wanting to vote to elect Mitt Romney as president. That wave of enthusiasm on the ground has infected independents as well and is the key to a Romney victory.

    Many of the battleground polls assume the electorate will look somewhat like 2008, when Democrats had a seven-point partisan voting advantage over Republicans. This is inconceivable. The Obama turnout machine will be good, and probably bring out Democrats at about the party's historic average; they will make up 37% to 38% of the electorate. The difference is that the GOP turnout machine, fueled by voter intensity, will likely equal (as it did in 2004) or even exceed that Democratic turnout. If that is the case, this election turns on independent voters, who are now behind Mr. Romney by a comfortable margin.

    My final prediction is that at a minimum, Mr. Romney wins 289 electoral votes, a tally that includes Florida, Virginia, Ohio, Colorado, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Wisconsin. If it is a big night, he also picks up Pennsylvania and maybe Minnesota.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203347104578102751903774078.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
     
  2. pspr

    pspr

    They are saying there is big turnout today. Since Obama focused on early voting this has to be bad news for him. Early voting was muted or offset for the Dems. A big turnout today means people are pissed and want this liar gone.
     
  3. Obama will surge to an early lead, but then when republicans get off work Romney will make a big comeback.
     
  4. Ricter

    Ricter

    In other words, no working rep was captured on any of the polls?
     
  5. exGOPer

    exGOPer

    So what's her track record?
     
  6. Pekelo

    Pekelo

    Dear Ripley. You already proved your stupidity in the other thread, so just who the fuck is this Kim, and why is her opinion more important than mine?

    The short answer, it is not. And stop with the early celebration because the reality will hurt you by 10 pm....

    I am more interested in her rack. She also has one asshole*, just like you do or I. In short, her guess is as bad as any Republican's... :)

    *this is an important fact about opinions and assholes
     
  7. Early voting numbers so far foretells a certain disaster for Obama'12.
     
  8. 377OHMS

    377OHMS

    If it turns out to be meaningful then it might help the public accept the result somewhat better than if it is very close.

    The country is so divided that if either man is elected by a microscopic margin it will simply enrage the losing side and will stimulate all kinds of speculation that the election was stolen.

    A landslide for either guy would be much better as at least there would be no question about cheating or biased judges etc and might help people accept what has occurred. A big victory might help the winner to pass legislation in congress and would also send the message to other countries that the President truly represents the will of the people in our foreign policy.