Friday, October 26, 2012

Romney Will Lose If He Continues To Play It Safe

If you only listen to Fox News and Rush Limbaugh you believe Romney is winning. He's not, he's losing. Both Real Clear Politics and Intrade have Obama with 281 electoral votes with 11 days til the election. You only need 270 to win. Intrade predicted every state correctly in 2004 and had two states reversed in 2008.

Move your cursor over each state “click here” to see the candidates chance of winning. Notice Virginia has moved back toward Obama and has more chance of going for Obama than Ohio does of going for Romney. There have been a lot of one-off polls showing Pennsylvania and Michigan in play, however Intrade shows otherwise. Colorado is a toss up and currently leans Obama. Iowa and New Hampshire are trending Obama, while Wisconsin and Nevada are currently dark blue.

This is a far different picture from the one being painted by Sean Hannity, Dick Morris and Karl Rove. So then why is Romney pulling his punches on Benghazi? It's becoming clearer every day Obama refused to send in a rescue mission because he's haunted by the Jimmy Carter failed rescue attempt back in 1980.

I believe the Benghazi scandal has the potential of becoming one of the biggest in U.S. history. So again, why is Romney sitting with his arms folded? Because he's just as risk averse as Obama. He's terrified the media will again accuse him of politicizing the death of these four men. What, and Obama is not playing politics by withholding virtually all information, for nearly two months, until after the election?

Forget about the politics for a moment, only Romney has a megaphone large enough to force the media to get off their butts. The families deserve the truth and the American people deserve the truth. Once the truth comes out, the political consequences for Obama will be well deserved. If people knew Obama did nothing for seven hours while four of our men were being murdered, the election would be over. The problem is most people don't know. Now imagine how you'll feel on Nov. 7th if Romney loses because he played it safe by letting Obama off the hook on Benghazi.


  1. I concur. You can get all of the numbers, and I mean, all of them, at my blog, for I post battlegrund reports every night. I am a Democrat, but the numbers and my reporting of them are/is neutral.

    Obama is ahead in the EC. Even on his worst day, he has been considerably closer to 270 than Romney has ever been.

    The huge disconnect between the state polling (which is generally more reliable) and the nationals is being caused by bad models and very incorrect calculation of the Latino Vote. Too many memes about party identification, too many people thinking this is all skewed. It is not, but in a nation of 311 million, with 200 million RV, who can really expect a poll of 988 so-called likely voters to be representative of 200 million?

    The picture looks different with a 750 LV poll for a state of 4 million people. The ratio is very different.

    Plus, Ohio is bucking history and demonstrating that, while MO is moving to the Right more and more, OH is moving more and more to the Left.

    It looks a lot like Obama 303 / Romney 235 come election night. And if you do a study of the closest elections of the 20th and now, 21st century, you will often see the number around 300 in close elections: Truman in 1948 (303), Kennedy in 1960 (303), Nixon in 1968 (301), Carter in 1976 (297). The exception to this pattern is Bush Jr. from 2000 (271).

    1. Thanks for the link. Very nice work. There are so many people on my side that refuse to even look at anything that could be, in any way, construed as anything less than 100 percent pro Romney.

    2. I don't believe anything coming out of Rasmussen this cycle. I fully expect him to have his thumb on the scale until the very last poll. Gallup went all wacko once they went to lv's. So I'm skeptical of them as well. What do you think the polls will show on election night as far as ec vs popular vote?

  2. That is exactly my prediction and has been for some time:

    Obama 303 Romney 235

    Unless something dramatic occurs to rock the boat, Romney is going down.
    It is far too late for the Libya argument. Romney had his chance in the second debate, and he blew it. If he had been willing to take a risk he may have been able to relitigate it in the 3rd foreign policy debate, but he was to craven to do so. Now, it wold just look like a desperate strategy or sour grapes. Either way, it's too late for Romney now.

    1. I hate to agree but I agree. I almost have to laugh when my side complains the msm is not carrying the water for Romney. Hell they're on the other side, why should they help him. If Benghazi ends up being a big story they'll eventually cover it, but what's the hurry.