Prediction: Come November, Obama beats Romney by far more than the margin suggested by polls.

[TheWraith]

Why? Short answer: Support for Romney is about as thin as aluminum foil. The "enthusiasm" for him, such as it is, is based pretty much solely on people wanting to beat Obama. A lot of Republicans and Republican leaning independents may say "Yeah, I'm voting for Romney" for a phone poll, but when it comes time to actually drag themselves out after work to go down and punch in their vote, they'll probably stay home with a drink knowing that Romney is going to lose whether they go out and vote or not.

[obxhead]

1. The polls are completely manufactured.

I simply don't believe the numbers are anywhere near as close as they say they are.

For instance, the meme going around now is that Romney is getting women back to voting for him. Oh really? I don't know a single woman saying anything positive about Romney, including Republican women.

It's all bullshit. If the polling isn't close the pundits have nothing to talk about on their 24 hours "news" channels. The answer is to manufacture close polls.

[Hawkowl]

2. Just like Kerry vs. Bush

Do not misunderestimate Rethuglicans.

[MADem]

5. Kerry had likability issues--but RMoney's are way worse, IMO. nt

[politicasista]

13. Interesting meme that people love to repeat

Last edited Fri May 18, 2012, 06:25 PM - Edit history (1)

If you want to trade Senators, you can have two do-nothing Senators in Alexander and Corker, a GOP controlled state office, and GOP governor, but keep the "likable" Brownie.

Sounds like people didn't want Senator Kerry to be seen as "likable"; therefore, non-political junkies repeat that and link him to Mutt Romney.

Why? Because the media said it, so it's true, but when the media lies about Obama, we all know it's false. Interesting.

It's also interesting that very few can answer as to why those large crowds showed up for someone that was/is so boring, wooden, unlikeable, and uncharismatic. They just wanted to be on TV or just came to see Springsteen or B. Clinton.

Thankfully Obama shows more respect for Senator Kerry than that. He still can't catch a break from his own constituents. Go figure.

[MADem]

18. Good grief--you're **completely** wrong about my reasoning.

This has nothing to do with "memes"--Jesus, am I sick to death of that teen word!

I remember when John Kerry (before computers, before the internet, before LOL cats, before those frigging "memes&quot was trying to get the Tsongas CONGRESSIONAL (the one Niki is in now) seat in Lowell, and he carpetbagged his hiney into that town and was run out of there on a rail by people who didn't "like" his entitled attitude--he learned a LOT in that contest. You wanna see some "unlikability?" He was on fire in that failed race.

Just so we're clear, here-- John Kerry has been my senator since he sat his ass down in Paul's senate seat. Paul T. was my senator before that, and he beat Ed Brook (Barbara Walters' secret black republican lover) handily when Ed's marital problems started to become apparent.

Here's the truth--Kerry is an EFFECTIVE SENATOR, which is why he gets re-elected. His staff does a decent job vis a vis constituent services so he is seen as responsive. He's not terribly "likable" and that doesn't matter. He can be pompous, he can drone on--it's a joke when he bothers to show up at the Southie Breakfast on St. Pat's Day. He occasionally does dumb, rich guy things, like park his yacht in RI because the taxes are cheaper. This kind of thing gets noticed.

You know, it really pisses me off when people go off on a diatribe about getting "respect from his own constituents" when that guy has gotten MONEY and my vote from me, over and over again, for as long as he's been in the Senate. But hey, whatever--you have a magic crystal ball and you "know" what people are feeling just because they dare to say things that are obvious to anyone without blinders on. He gets my vote because he "earns" it, but I don't owe him any "respect" because he decided to run for office and in so doing, accumulated a bit of personal power. He owes me and the rest of the citizens of MA a duty to represent "We, The Damn People" well--and that's the way it should be.

Mitt Romney is horribly unlikable, and he's stupid, too. So what? It's not who votes, it's who counts the votes--we had a very stupid and likable President appointed by the name of Bush in recent history--remember that?

It's not a contest. I don't want to "trade" Senators so you go on and hang on to yours--or better yet, get out there and work for their replacements at every opportunity. However, I'm going to call 'em like I see 'em and not play any "meme" games while so doing. Our Senators and Representatives--indeed, all of our elected officials--are not gods to be worshipped, they are public SERVANTS, and we PAY them to represent us. We owe them no blind fealty, no favors, no nothing. They owe US an honest day's work for the generous salaries we pay them. John Kerry is NOT "Sammy Sunshine." He never has been, he never will be. But then, we don't pay him for that. So long as he continues to represent my interests as my Senator, I'll keep voting for him, getting signatures for him so his name appears on the ballot, and driving old people to the polls to vote for him. But there won't be any bowing, scraping, forelock-tugging, or any other expressions of "respect" -- if anything he should thank ME and hundreds like me who get off our old asses and GOTV for the guy quite faithfully.

[politicasista]

21. Ok....

but the whole "pompous" rich guy stuff doesn't sound good (or that must be highlighted as a complement). Maybe he could use that for charity purposes. That may or may not get noticed, but it would be more of a humble thing to do.

Get what people are saying Obama = Good, Kerry/Gore = Bad (Not you, but sometimes here).

Hold on to your Senator. Hopefully you will get your wish (that he will thank you for GOTV, etc).

Just tired of people thinking it's still cool to dump on him (and Gore) for that matter just to praise Obama or Ms. Warren (hope she wins , instead of attacking Brown and the GOP. They are the reason we are in this mess that Obama is trying to get us out of.

It's all good. Posts like this haven't made people happy, but we agree to disagree.

Apologies for the over the top post. Peace.

[MADem]

24. Like I always say, it's NOT a CONTEST.

We're looking for good candidates who can win and people who are willing to GOTV and make that happen. The winners don't have to be "cool" or even beloved, so long as they're good!

I am an enthusiastic Warren supporter and I hope she can pull it off. She is battling entrenched sexism but I hope she can carry the day in MA. The Naked Senator needs to put on his barn coat, get in his truck and drive off into the sunset--he's a do-nothing idiot.

I very much liked Gore, but I thought he should have stuck to the blue suit and the red tie and not tried to get all "Donna Brazille Earth Tones" on us. His particular strong suit was that he was a Highly Competent Dork, and I mean that in the nicest way possible. He was the "adult" in the room--I wish he'd followed his instincts and stuck with that, instead of fretting with a comparison over this very likability thing with a dry drunk who liked to dance naked on bars in his youth... but no matter, really--the Supreme Court was pre-ordained to shove Bush in that job, no matter what, I think. Who counts the votes, that's how it works when an election is close--if you can cheat within the margins of the major polls, people will buy the result, even if it's BS.

Obama needs a blow-out, or at least he needs to win enough states DECISIVELY so that there's no question or opportunity to cheat within those margins. I plan on helping in that regard--MA will be "contested" because of RMoney's weak association with the state (even though we know in our hearts that he hates us as much as we hate him, by and large--notice how the bastard cannot even articulate the word "Massachusetts" -- he always says "my state" like he's talking about Utah or Michigan!).

[politicasista]

31. Ok, agree that

Just as long as you are good for office, that's fine.

Still what does the "pompous" "rich guy" thing have to do with the Senator. Kinda too bad that he gets dogged out by Dems for being rich. People in the DUK group didn't see what you saw, unless it was on a bad day. To each his/her own though.

Hope that Ms. Warren can pull it off. The Native American thing sounds silly and it's bought out alot of vile tweets from the GOP.

As for Gore, wish we could have seen a more "adult" without the black suit persona. He seems more free now. Just like Cahill and Shrum, Brazille dropped the ball on his campaign. It's unfortunate that he lost TN, and it was disgusting to see the people in Carthage turn on him and Democrats labeled as the party of immorality because of B. Clinton's sexual flaws.

Do agree that Obama needs a blow-out (or landslide), especially with the hideous voter ID laws in many states. Complacency is not an option.

[MADem]

34. We need real campaign finance reform, so we can have guys like Paul Wellstone representing us.

Nothing against these rich guys, but I don't go for the "noblesse oblige" attitude. Why should you have to be rich and spend millions to get a job that pays less than two hundred grand a year (unless you're in a top leadership job, like President Pro Tem--then you might break two hundred grand)? Something is wrong--seriously so--when people run around gathering millions to get a job that doesn't PAY millions (well, at least not OVER the table). Also, plenty of guys who started out poor in the House got rich by the time they ran for the Senate. This wasn't an accident, of course. In the "real world," they'd call it Insider Trading and they'd go to jail like Martha--in the halls of Congress, it's a time honored activity and considered a perk of the job, like free postage and rides home on the taxpayer dime to one's district. And even with recent laws passed to limit that kind of shit, it still happens, and it happens in a big way. Nothing will ever change so long as the foxes are watching the henhouse.

Back in the old days, Congressmen and Senators would room together in cheapass houses/apartments near the Hill---now, they drag their families along with them, and buy multi-million dollar homes in McLean, VA while maintaining a crackerbox in their district or state to 'check the residency block.' Hell, VA has the most "senators" of any state in the union!

When Gore lost TN, I was disgusted--particularly since we worked so frigging hard to give those ungrateful bastards thousands of US government jobs by moving the administrative arm of the Bureau of Naval Personnel (much wailing and gnashing of teeth over that business) to Millington, TN. Talk about a hearty fuck you! That move was All Gore (with a little bit of Mike Boorda), ya know. We should have left it in DC and simply done vertical staffing cuts and job realignments for all the good that did!

[politicasista]

35. Ok. You must be a

Clinton fan. Nothing wrong with that. Assesment of your Senator is still a little troubling, but to each his own.


Agree to disagree. Peace.

[MADem]

36. I've given my Senator my votes, my money, and my time.

Over and over again.

I've known him well enough since the seventies. I think I'm entitled to give him my honest opinion.

I like the Clintons--both of them--just fine.

I am not one of those "Perfect is the Enemy of the Good" types. I also like President Obama, and no, I don't think he's "perfect" either, but that won't stop me from working for his reelection because he's a damn sight better than anything else on offer!

[politicasista]

37. Understood

fair enough.

Again, apologies for the over the top post. Thanks for your patience. Peace.

[MADem]

38. We're cool--I like a little discussion! Never worry!

backatcha!

[politicasista]

40. Yes we are.

Same to you.

[longship]

15. Bush was the likable drunk; Kerry had a mediocre campaign.

Rmoney, on the other hand, is a thoroughly unlikable untea-totaller. (He doesn't even drink tea.)

We all know that Obama is likable.

I agree that Rmoney's support may be shaky. But I think Dems are in real danger of losing in Nov. And it has nothing to do with rigged elections. Rather, I think people in the US are seriously that ignorant.

[politicasista]

16. Thanks to Cahill and Shrum

Some of those that ran Kerry's mediocre campaign worked for Obama in 2008. They must have done something right.

Obama is very likable, but guess that people will always use him to bash Senator Kerry and Gore. Speaks volumes that Obama still respects them even while some Dems, Liberals, Progressives continue to throw them under the bus. JAO.

[Hawkowl]

41. Agree on the ignorance

Although lately I think it goes beyond ignorance and into willful stupidity. Or at best, most Americans are just way too gullible and susceptible to the 24/7 propaganda of Fox News and right wing hate radio.

[AverageJoe90]

42. If we sit on our asses this year, then yes, we really could be in serious danger.

However, though, I've noticed a significant change since 2008. More people are becoming more active on our side of the fence.....while some more moderate conservatives have begun to disassociate themselves with the GOP by either sitting out, throwing their support behind a third party(as many did for Perot back in 1992), or, in a few cases, switching sides altogether. And it's mainly thanks to the Tea-Baggers and their ilk, as well as certain other things.

[WI_DEM]

3. I think he will win, but won't be surprised if he loses...

if Walker can win here in Wisconsin after all he did (and hopefully he won't but right now it's not looking good), then anything can happen.

[MADem]

4. It would not surprise me if people who purport to support RMoney publicly vote for Obama privately.

Not because they love Obama, but because they have other competing interests that do not include that Heathen Mormon.

Example--the Santorum crowd. They can fake being a good Republican and pretending to support RMoney, but they'd rather wait four years when their Fecal Hero can run again, as opposed to risking the possibility that RMoney could get in and force them to wait eight years.

[newblewtoo]

12. Your position is akin to whistling

by the grave yard. Are you not yet familiar with the term "broken glass republican"? They are not voting for Mitt, they are voting against President Obama. And just how the heck did Massachusetts elect both Romoney and Brown in the first place?

[MADem]

19. No it isn't. I invite your attention to very recent American history.

There was a cadre of people who initially supported a clown named Ronald Reagan during the election that put Ford against Carter. These people pretended to support Ford, but they breathed a HUGE sigh of relief when he lost, because they knew if he won, they'd be stuck with him for eight years, but since he lost, the Reagan crew could go up against Carter in a scant four years.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. The Santorum people have no fucking reason to vote for Mitt Romney--all he is is an OBSTRUCTION to them in four years. Obama, OTOH, is done, with no clear successor in four years. If they want to see "President Santorum" in the White House in the next go-round, the guy to vote for is OBAMA or some third-party asswipe, not RMoney.

Anyone playing a long-view game can see that quite plainly. I won't even go into the demoralized attitude of the GOP--they have reason to feel that way, too--they're all a bunch of whining idiots.

Massachusetts is a woefully SEXIST state. We have yet to send a woman to the Senate, and we have a lousy record with female office-holders in general. It is an interest area of mine, seeing more women in public office in MA.

The voting public voted for Brown because they didn't like his female opponent. They voted for RMoney because they didn't like HIS female opponent. I voted for both female candidates, but alas, I am but one individual. Also, RMoney ran millions of dollars of very pretty ads that promised that the second he was elected governor, he'd call up all his "business" friends and they'd fire up factories in the poor communities in western MA and elsewhere. Of course, once elected, he did no such thing, and MA dropped to 47th in New Job Creation. We lost a congressional seat (Barney's, in fact) because we were redistricted out of a seat due to the exodus from MA due to Romney-era job losses.

You probably don't understand that MA is a "weak governor" state (like TX). The governor does nothing without the consent of Beacon Hill, which is overwhelmingly Dem, overwhelmingly "old school," and overwhelmingly corrupt in the sense that it's not just who you know, it's who you (rhymes with know). It's why RMoney got little done, unless the Powers That Be in the MA legislature said it was "ok."

So, to answer your question, THAT's how we got Naked Brownie and RMoney. They got the gigs, but were hamstrung from the git-go.

[Wait Wut]

6. I agree.

However, I don't want our side becoming complacent, either. So, yeah...your thread isn't helping. J/K

I've also talked to a few Rs and Is that "say" they're voting for Romney, but have no real reason. He offers them nothing. It isn't just an enthusiasm gap, it's apathy.

[Initech]

7. Well his attempt to outdo Obama failed miserably...

[0rganism]

25. that stadium appears to be about 1% full

Coincidence? Maybe...

[hifiguy]

8. I suspect the final margin

will be similar to '08.

That said, everybody get off your butts and VOTE in November!!

[HopeHoops]

9. And Rmoney will claim voter fraud and see if the USSC can pull a shrub for him.

[AtomicKitten]

10. I think Pres O will bury RMoney in the debates. nt

[randome]

11. Leave it to Obama to liven up a normally deadly dull telecast.

I'm looking forward to that first debate.

[CK_John]

39. I don't think there will be any debates.nt

[Speck Tater]

14. Prediction: Everyone is so confindent of an Obama win they stay home and Romney wins. nt

[randome]

17. Confidence can also mean acknowledging the truth.

And Romney truly looks like a loser.

But you're right that OVER-confidence can sink us. We should not let that happen.

[RBInMaine]

27. Silliness.

[cali]

20. I don't buy it. Why?

In brief: When times are really tough people tend to opt for change- any change.

And I think you underestimate how much hate there is for the President.

[sendero]

22. For once..

.... I agree with you

[Dawson Leery]

23. kick

[FSogol]

26. Make it so. K&R

[StitchesforSnitches]

28. If People are Convinced that Obama will win

They will be less likely to turn out and vote.

People need the sh*t scared out of them so they will turn out and vote.

Obama hate alone will get Mitt close to 50 million votes.

[Scuba]

29. Sure, Obama will whip Robdme, but what about Diebold/Sequoia/ESS?

[madokie]

30. I'm hoping you are right

My worry is the thievery. We know that the pukes like to win at all cost. By hook or by crook matters not to them as long as they win.

[Logical]

32. I doubt it. People are fickle. They just vote their guts feeling. Not logic.

[Prophet 451]

33. I disagree

I think you're underestimating quite how much berzerker hatred the right have for Obama.