Dropping the Hammer: Paul Ryan Rally in Minnesota on Sunday

I REALLY wanted to go all Dave Chappelle with the headline but quite honestly too many people read the blog now and the Patton reference this morning was about as far as I can push it these days:


112 Comments

  1. displacedRhodeIslandConservative
    Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:42 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Promise us that this isn’t to good to be true desperation?!

    • Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

      This is most definitely the polar opposite of desperation . . .

      • displacedRhodeIslandConservative
        Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:48 pm | Permalink

        I’m from Rhode Island…we can’t even get Republicans on the tickets to run…seriously. But I am just afraid to take to deep a breath of excitement and have the whole deck fall down!? This is very exciting news, all too often I feel like GOP especially establishment plays soft and nice…time to take it to the true blue bastions finally!

      • valleyforge
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:25 am | Permalink

        displaced – Cook just marked your rep Cicilline for defeat. He’s polling at 43 up only 1 on Doherty. 43 is death to an incumbent. RI can join in the celebration on Tuesday too.

  2. Brian
    Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Obviously just a desperate hail mary attempt by a flailing campaign.

    /sarcasm

    I say again….Mister Romneychev, TEAR *DOWN* THIS BLUE WALL!!!

    • Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:36 am | Permalink | Reply

      I am in Minneapolis, MN
      Definitely we Republicans are pretty well energized. We might gain one senate seat that was stolen 4 years ago by Democratic dominated Committee’s dirty re-counting tricks.

      Ryan’s rally will enhance already abnormally lifted Republicans’ sprit! Go Ryan, go!

    • Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:58 am | Permalink | Reply

      It looks like Romney and Ryan are going all Harrison Ford on that Obama Midwestern Firewall….

      • MikeN
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:32 am | Permalink

        Really, you want to remind us of that disaster?

      • Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:39 am | Permalink

        I was hoping someone would get the film reference :).

  3. Jake
    Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:48 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Keith, I remember you a week or two back remarking that Obama’s “firewall” was a Maginot line.

    Between MN, PA, and MI, it looks like R&R are busy cutting their way through the Ardennes.

    • Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:51 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I love that. I may steal it šŸ™‚

    • Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:03 am | Permalink | Reply

      Good lord. I can see some lefties coming here and seeing this reference and then running to the Kos Kids and screaming: “See! See! Republicans are Nazis!”. I think its a good analogy though.

    • Jon
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:22 am | Permalink | Reply

      I heard Dick Morris use that tonight magiont line

  4. Ryan
    Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:48 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Can’t wait to see my state turn red on Election day! Welcome to MN Mr. Ryan

  5. Hestrold
    Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Why Penn? Why Wisc? Why Minn? At first I thought he’s going to lose Ohio and he’s trying to pull down something, anything. But after thinking about it, if it were true he’d be focusing on just Ohio and Wisconsin and a small state, not scattering these blue states. So the tea leaves must be good.

    • margaret
      Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:59 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I posted in an early thread a link to a Breitbart News article that Pew polling shows Obama losing 14 points of support among white Catholic voters to Romney since September when they had even support. A 14-point drop among this very important voter bloc of very likely voters and they are concentrated in the midwest: PA, MI, WI, MN, OH. There’s your breach in the firewall and the door of opportunity that could be motivating the Romney campaign to go for it. I don’t think there’s anything that Obama or Biden can say or do right now to get those voters back. I mention Biden because there’s a new ad out with Biden saying to Catholics that he and Obama share their Catholic values – which is an obvious lie. They’ve lost those voters and, unlike some African-American Christians who say they just won’t vote, the Catholics are heading over to the Romney side to vote their conscience.

      • jeff
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:08 am | Permalink

        Good point about tge Catholic vote and how I think its going to bite Obamas behind particularly in PA and OH.

    • jeff
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:05 am | Permalink | Reply

      I think its because Romney unlike Mcaine in 08 has heaps of cash to spend and because if Romney can pick off any of these blue states he can set a precedent that will serve the GOP well in future elections. MINN has been trending Republican and may well end up being a stable red state much like the once reliably red state of New Mexico has flipped to being blue. So I dont see this as a desperation move at all.

    • Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:23 am | Permalink | Reply

      Romney is a data miner. He pays attention to numbers and trends. He likes to surround himself with people that pay attention to those details. Firstly, if Ohio is going to skew so heavily Democratic, why aren’t we seeing predictions of upheaval in their House delegation? Same goes for these national polls or even here in FL. A D+9 electorate should mean the House is in play. It’s not. The Obama people are likely “encouraging” many polling firms to use their 2008 election model, but if the House isn’t in play then their model doesn’t hold water. Same in Ohio.

      Republicans control 13 of 18 House seats in Ohio. Ohio is falling to 16 House seats and it appears that each party will lose as seat, so I’d guess it’ll be 12 Republicans and 4 Democrats or 11 GOP and 5 Democrats. Does that look like a D+9 turnout? Nope. After 2008 the Democrats had a 10-8 advantage in the Ohio House delegation that swung to 13-5 in favor of the GOP only two years later in a close election at the Presidential level. Shouldn’t the Democrats have a shot at taking the Ohio delegation if they are also going to win the state? Yet it appears like they don’t. Why? They are overpolling Democrats.

      How can Romney be sure of Ohio? Romney likely has access to the polls done for the districts of all of the sitting Republican House delegates. House delegates usually do weekly polls of about 500 people in their districts and also tend to ask about party id, likelihood of voting, who someone will vote for in the Congressional race, and who they will vote for for President. You can bet that Romney has a good idea about how Ohio is shaping up, likely better than Obama does because of the Republican advantage in the state. He probably is also doing his own detailed polling and putting the data all together to figure out turnout. On top of that he has a turnout org in Ohio that Rove has said is much more impressive than Bush’s in 2004 – and Romney has strong support with indies.

  6. GAF
    Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:52 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Anecdotal … but interesting nonetheless re Pennsylvania. Was talking to a co-worker who lives in Penn about the election whom I knew to be very strongly supporting Obama. She said, “This is going to sound terrible, but I really don’t mind if Romney wins. I’ve been watching all the debates, it’s obvious that they’re both very smart, and I would trust either one to be President.” My jaw almost dropped.

    So is she voting for Romney? No. But illustrative, I think, of the underlying enthusiasm gap that the Dems seem to have.

    • Tony
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:06 am | Permalink | Reply

      I heard this from so many women during the primary, who were terrified of Santorum, but didn’t mind Romney.

    • allthingsgeography1
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 7:08 am | Permalink | Reply

      Even I’ve said that Romney would be a step up from George W. Bush in my opinion (I said that on Facebook, which got a ‘like’ from a conservative friend of mine, but a “No he’s not!” type of comment from a liberal friend of mine). Only the most hardcore Obama supporters believe Obama is all that and Romney is all nothing. Hence why I always thought Romney was being underestimated by the left. I support Obama, but it’s not like we’re electing dictators here. Presidents generally deal with a centrist country that likes to swing a little in either direction, but if the President pushes the swing too hard, there is always a correction back in the other direction. If Romney wins, I’ll give him an honest chance and keep an open mind.

      • Posted November 2, 2012 at 7:35 am | Permalink

        you’re a good dude. On election night 4 years ago I opened a good bottle of wine and toasted our new President at 6pm. Even a partisan like me knew what was going to happen than night. I wished him well because that is good for all Americans. I’m glad to hear from people like you on the other side because we only hear the nasty partisan voices usually. Here’s hoping no matter the result on Tuesday we both win.

      • allthingsgeography1
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 7:47 am | Permalink

        Thanks. My Dad who’s a big politico like me taught me that we should always hope for the President’s success no matter what party. Their success, is America’s success. I mean, really what’s the point of political warfare just for the sake of it all? And shouldn’t election night be a celebration of our democracy? I’m certainly happy to be here voting in a booth South Dakota on Tuesday, instead of some other country having a pretend election knowing some Ayatollah actually pulls the strings. American first, Democrat second.

      • Ken
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 8:33 am | Permalink

        I really like keith’s reply above. You would not believe the political argument I heard going on in the hallways of my office yesterday. The democrats in the argument were so intensely shrill and intolerant of anyone with a differing view, name calling, leaping to ridiculous strawmen. It has been tough to see all the vitriol on facebook on both sides. BUT, on the topic at hand, polls, I have been seriously confused by the polls for the past 2 weeks until, that is, I found this site. Bravo, Keith.

  7. Brad
    Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:53 pm | Permalink | Reply

    We’re not going to win MN so I don’t get this…. Head fake?

    • Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Oh Brad, what are we going to do with you?
      http://battlegroundwatch.com/2012/10/19/election-night-surprise-why-minnesota-will-turn-red-on-november-6/

    • Brad
      Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:56 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I don’t know…and don’t care as long as we win OH.

    • Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:57 pm | Permalink | Reply

      If Ohio, Virginia, and Florida were tight that needed singular focus, then you would see them in those states like Obama is parking himself in Ohio for the majority of time until election day. The internal polling must be awfully good and the RR campaign is awash in cash so might as well make a serious play for those states as well.

      • Pete
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:05 am | Permalink

        +1

    • Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:01 am | Permalink | Reply

      Friend from Minny has told me the M-SP suburbs are filled with Romney signs. It’s been 40 years and Minny is trending for the GOP. It’s time.

      • David
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:20 am | Permalink

        This is great to hear. Back in the 80s when I lived in Minnesota I was GOP precinct chair for a caucus that drew only two people (my boss and myself) from the whole precinct. And who could forget the one state that went for Mondale against the 49 for Reagan? Sure it was a home state thing, but how embarassing it was! Minnesota in the red will be particularly sweet in 2012.

  8. Christopher
    Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:53 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Go Vikings! We love you Minnesota but think about your kids and grandkids before your vote. Vote R/R 2012 for our future!

  9. No Tribe
    Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:56 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Here’s the thing. ROmney has an event at an airport in Ohio a few hours before this MN event by Ryan. And then look at this (could Romney be flying up to meet Ryan at the MN event and then they both go over to WI later than night?)

    Victory Rally with Gov. Scott Walker, Rudy Giuliani, Norm Coleman at the Hudson Victory Center in Hudson, Wisconsin on Saturday, November 3, 2012

    Victory Rally with Gov. Scott Walker, Rudy Giuliani, Norm Coleman at the Hudson Victory Center in Hudson, Wisconsin on Saturday, November 3, 2012

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

    Doors Open 4:30 pm

    Rally Begins 5:30 pm

    Hudson VIctory Center
    213 2nd St.
    Hudson, Wisconsin

  10. Posted November 1, 2012 at 11:58 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Hmmm. Not sure what this accomplishes. VP visits dont amount to much, but no way Romney is wasting even a moment of Ryan’s time, when so many states are so close. Romney/Ryan must see something in MN. Would Ryan’s visit make the news in western WI? Perhaps this is a small play in MN, and a smaller play in western WI?

    • Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:05 am | Permalink | Reply

      How about ‘all of the above’ ? GO R&R GO! šŸ™‚

  11. Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:00 am | Permalink | Reply

    So Romney in the Philly suburbs and Ryan in Minneapolis/St. Paul? 100 surrogates spreading out across the battlegrounds. I never imagined that Romney would be in position to do this. If he were desperate he’d be living in Nevada, Wisconsin, Ohio, Iowa, and Colorado – just sticking to those. He’s punching Obama and the Dems in the gut.

    • No Tribe
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:05 am | Permalink | Reply

      They should hold the Sun night Philly rally someplace huge. Roll it all out.

      • displacedRhodeIslandConservative
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:10 am | Permalink

        I will be there no matter where in Philly it is!

    • Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:07 am | Permalink | Reply

      in the gut? I think the Dem’s call that … in the binder šŸ˜‰

  12. Derclaw86
    Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:02 am | Permalink | Reply

    If Romney were really in trouble in Ohio and elsewhere, wouldn’t Obama be the one looking to expand the map? In the last days of 2008, when McCain was making his last stand in Pennsylvania, Obama was campaigning in places like Indiana and Missouri. He spent some money in North Dakota, Montana, Georgia, and even McCain’s home state of Arizona. Now, here in 2012, Obama isn’t looking at even the pinkest of the McCain states. All he can do is desperately try to hold on tho what he won four years ago.

    • Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:05 am | Permalink | Reply

      That’s a damn good point, and one the media is ignoring. Obama is completely defending turf he won in 2008. He is making no forays into any new territory. Of course, one could argue that Obama doesn’t need to expand his map from 2008…but if you are winning states, you ALWAYS EXPAND YOUR MAP. If Obama was really up in Ohio, Wisconsin, NV, IA, etc, Obama would not visit those places.

    • William Jefferson
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:08 am | Permalink | Reply

      Yes, but according to National Journal we are looking at D+8, which is a larger wave than in 2008, so….yeah.

    • No Tribe
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:09 am | Permalink | Reply

      Romney is hitting Ohio plenty. He’s in Columbus burb and Cincy burb on Friday, in Cleveland on Sunday, and in Columbus again on Monday.

    • WillBest
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:18 am | Permalink | Reply

      The alternative theory is that he is in so much trouble that he is abandoning it. But then if that were the case Obama wouldn’t have 3 events in 3 days there.

    • Hestrold
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:34 am | Permalink | Reply

      That’s my earlier point. Romney has Virginia, Florida and North Carolina. He needs 22 more electoral votes to go over the top. He accomplishes nothing to go after states that are harder to get than Ohio if his internals show they are in fact harder to get. He’d be better off sitting in Ohio and picking off Iowa or New Hampshire. Instead he’s making a strong play for Wisconsin and he’s moving into Penn, Michigan and Minn. That must mean that it must be more than a head fake.

    • valleyforge
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:34 am | Permalink | Reply

      In 2012, Obama expanding the map means campaigning in Florida and Virginia. At this point he needs to expand the Kerry map.

    • AC
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:14 am | Permalink | Reply

      I think that one could argue that Obama is on the offense in the core swing states and pinning Romney down. For example, Obama is still spending lots of time and money in FL — the largest and most expensive of the swing states. If he had given up there, that would have really helped Romney. Obama is battling everywhere — even NH with just four electoral votes — and even NC.

  13. docsazman
    Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:08 am | Permalink | Reply

    I hope this is a good sign. I’m starting to get worried about Ohio. Romney is getting crucified in the press over the Jeep ad. The MSM is getting away with calling it dishonest, even though everything in the ad is factually accurate. Anyone have a good pulse on the Cleveland or Toledo area who knows how this is really playing?

    • Interested Party
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:11 am | Permalink | Reply

      Its too late in the campaign for stuff like that to matter. It’s now about running up margins in your key counties and holding the other guys margins down. In other words, turnout. We should start to see the undecided shift in the next 48 hours, which is going to happen barring any really major disaster.

    • Tom
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:27 am | Permalink | Reply

      Yes I have a diehard democrat cousin in Toledo. Her dad was huge in a union there until he retired about 10 yrs ago. She has a like on her facebook page for Mitt Romney! I almost spit my drink out when I saw it earlier this week. Ohio is Romney’s, Mitt-Mentum

    • MikeS
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:49 am | Permalink | Reply

      I am from Toledo and have not seen 1 TV ad about Romney and Jeep. For every 1 TV ad I see from Obama, I see 5 or 6 Romney ads.

    • AC
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:51 am | Permalink | Reply

      I think that some of the Dem-leaning newspapers are attacking Romney, but the Romney campaign has not pulled the ad — so they must think it’s helping them. I heard or read somewhere that Romney is running a whole bunch of new attack ads and is counting on his money advantage to drown out any criticism.

    • Guest
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:19 am | Permalink | Reply

      Well, if they want Mitt to move on to GM instead of Chrysler, I suspect he’ll happily oblige.

      Because there’s actually a video of their CEO talking about expanding in China, even as taxpayers, dealers, and non-union employees were left on the line and the companies continue to falter.

  14. Interested Party
    Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:09 am | Permalink | Reply

    The nail is hit on the head. Carville rule number two for Repubs: If Romney is campaigning in Pennsylvania, Michigan, or Minnesota in early November, it’s over. Looks like the Republican take on the electoral composition is turning out to be correct. They probably saw the Colorado early voting stats on 1.3 million early voters so far (38R, 34D) and realized that their modeling fit the real data.

    • Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:26 am | Permalink | Reply

      This is the key. If Republican models prove right, Romney should win this comfortably. Even the Democrat heavy polls show him up big with indies – only a few outliers say differently.

    • AC
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:57 am | Permalink | Reply

      I am not so sure. Romney may be looking for another path to victory if Obama wins OH and WI, or VA and WI. Or he may just be trying to stretch the field — forcing Obama to spend money in PA and MN and thus less money in NV, WI, OH, FL, and VA.

  15. GAF
    Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:12 am | Permalink | Reply

    Anyone wondering whether the “narrative” of the heroic government response to Sandy helping Obama may soon start to flip? Granted it’s a Republican source, but notice the headline that’s been on Drudge all night (with a picture of New Yorkers scavenging for food in dumpsters):

    OBAMA LEFT THEM BEHIND: HUNGRY DUMPSTER DIVING IN NYC

    Rightly or wrongly, once this storm and its tragic consequences becomes firmly associated with Obama, doesn’t that ultimately hurt him? Echoes of Katrina…

    • No Tribe
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:15 am | Permalink | Reply

      I went over to ABC news among the commoners in the comments to view it and it was an all out war there on the topic. Man, people are pissed off.

    • valleyforge
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:40 am | Permalink | Reply

      The contrast to New Orleans is incredible. So many more people stuck in Lower Manhattan yet so little complaint – either by the victims or the media. I thought two days ago when Keith posted that first-hand account that this story would develop badly by the weekend if power were not restored, and no sign it will be yet.

      • Brad
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:53 am | Permalink

        Given them a couple more days in the dark…reality always has a way of sinking in.

    • AC
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:47 am | Permalink | Reply

      It will be interesting to see. The mainstream media has been lauding Obama’s handling of Sandy, but the story may change now that Obama is back on the campaign trail (in Las Vegas of all places!) and people are still suffering. I would like to see Chris Christie issue a statement supporting Mitt Romney sometime soon — in order to counter the idea that he secretly hopes that Romney will lose. He was the Keynote Speaker at the Republican Convention for gosh sake!

  16. Interested Party
    Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:14 am | Permalink | Reply

    Another thing. Say what you want, but I think R and company ran a great campaign, on multiple levels. This 100 surrogates fanning out across the country is fabulous, as is the last minute 8:1 outspending of O. Brilliant.

    • No Tribe
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:18 am | Permalink | Reply

      Yea, I had my slight doubts in Sept as to the strategy, but all along it seemed like Obama was in huge over-reach the way they had painted Romney. A terrific well run Romney strategy that they kept to and it unfolded perfectly. Ignore the conventions and wait till the debate to move to the center. Caught Obama totally flat footed. Timing was exquisite.

      • jeff
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:31 am | Permalink

        At the end of the day the whole election may well hinge on the democratic turnout in Cayahoga county in Ohiio If Obama cant get the kind of turnout he got in 2008 he will lose Ohio and the election. And from what I hear from the folks tuned in to Ohio politics things are not looking good for Obama there.

    • JGS
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:21 am | Permalink | Reply

      +1 — even if they don’t win, I’ve been very impressed with their campaign. After the McCain disaster, it is great to see.

    • AC
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:32 am | Permalink | Reply

      I agree and disagree. First, if Romney loses, then his strategy was garbage. He made a lot of decisions to attack Obama here and not there; to go in one policy direction or another; chose Ryan as his running mate; etc. Second, he was wrong not to borrow and spend money during the summer months. Third, he got very lucky with that first debate performance. If Obama battled him to a draw, then Romney wouldn’t have a chance right now. And I am saying all this when I have been a huge Romney supporter from the beginning, and I absolutely loathe Obama (and Pelosi and Reid and virtually every other Democrat), and I hate the mainstream media for so unfairly favoring Obama.

      • Ron
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 3:17 am | Permalink

        I strongly disagree. Luck had nothing to do with it. He was better prepared, had more coherent responses, was more interesting to listen to. There are few politicians–I can’t think of one–who combine the talents Romney brings to the table. Not one is as articulate as he with as much knowledge about the way our system works. He’d have won that first debate on the economy no matter how well Obama performed. And it’s not true he lost the second debate. He may have lost on points–but he advanced the ball. He was as feisty as Obama–but with a thousand times more class. Ditto for the third debate. More class, more vision. As Krauthammer said, he went big, Obama went small–I’d say petty.

    • Brad
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:56 am | Permalink | Reply

      Agreed, IP. If RR goes down, they go down the right way. Can’t say I agree with Romney’s strategy to let O define him early and then outspend him late nor did I love the corny convention, but I like the way he managed his time, money and performed at the debates. Overall, nothing to be ashamed of.

      • Ron
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 3:23 am | Permalink

        No campaign is perfect. But Romney’s a fighter. He’s also very very smart. He had a plan and went through with it. His first major decision was brilliant–and it put WI into play. It somehow rejuvenated the whole campaign. It was up and away after that, despite a few inevitable gaffes and tilts with the media and grousing from conservative journalists. In 4 more days he’ll score big.

  17. AC
    Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:20 am | Permalink | Reply

    Fyi, One thing that has bothered and mystified me is that Rick Santorum has not been actively campaigning for Mitt Romney during the past two months. (I understand that Gingrich has been campaigning for some Republican candidates like Akin.) Santorum and Gingrich are somewhat polarizing figures, but it seems to me that they could deliver some votes in key states like Iowa and Virginia — even if they just endorsed Romney to their mailing lists (e.g., via snail mail and e-mail advertisements).

    • Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:32 am | Permalink | Reply

      That’s why they’re not. They are polarizing. Santorum wouldn’t help in PA. Giuliani would be a good surrogate to Pennsylvania.

      • AC
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:36 am | Permalink

        I get the feeling that Santorum has done zilch for Romney. Santorum is a big baby and would have lost to Obama in a landslide. He has zero future in elected office. Even given all that, he has hurt his own popularity and position in the Republican party by sitting on the sidelines. I don’t understand that attitude. He should hand over his mailing list to Romney and ask his supporters to work for Romney and vote for Romney.

      • Brad
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:58 am | Permalink

        So would (have) Christie. Man, I’m still chaffing about slobbering love-fest this week.

      • Ron
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 3:46 am | Permalink

        I agree about Giuliani. In fact I think the great tragedy of 2008 might have been averted had we nominated Rudy. He had almost universal name recognition and was polling in double digits above both Hillary and Obama in PA, NJ and CT. Romney faced the same hostility in the primaries the second time around. Again, the same people who blocked Rudy blocked Romney. Yet both men had broad appeal outside the red states.

    • stuckinmass
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:32 am | Permalink | Reply

      Gingrich is too polarizing, but he has been hitting the Benghazi stuff hard so he’s helping on another front

      • AC
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:42 am | Permalink

        Yeah, but I don’t think that I have heard Gingrich offer full-throated support for Romney. That’s what I want to hear every 60 seconds; Obama is horrible, Romney is great. Instead, everthing is about Gingrich himself. Donald Trump is the same way, only worse; although I love that he is keeping the birth certificate and college document issues alive.

    • Dewayne
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:32 am | Permalink | Reply

      I think Santorum has been in western PA but it’s been pretty low key. I don’t think the campaign wants to call attention to the Senator for his outspokenness.

      • AC
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:43 am | Permalink

        OK. That would be good.

      • Frederich
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:42 am | Permalink

        There is bad blood between Santorum and Romney. If you followed the races and paid attention, you would know that Santorum had Romney beaten in MI and other midwest states. In MI, Romney found the votes in Detroit but Santorum destroyed him in the rest of fthe state. Santorum would have destroyed Obama in the Midwest because he had Evangelicals and Catholics. This is water under the bridge but layoff slandering Santorum. He has been helping conservative candidates.

    • Ron
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 3:31 am | Permalink | Reply

      Santorum isn’t big enough to admit Romney is the superior politician. We nominated the right man.

    • Loach
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 8:51 am | Permalink | Reply

      You guys are wrong – Santorum is all in for Romney. I contributed to Santorum in the primaries so I’m on his email list. I get emails ever couple days from him and his PAC – Patriot Voices. He is actively raising money for Romney and several Senate candidates. Sometimes I get what I think are duplicate identical emails from the Romney campaign, but when I check the small print at the bottom it says “This email was paid for by Rick Santorum for President” or something like that. I just think Santorum is keeping a publicly low profile because that’s what Romney wants him to do.

  18. Jon
    Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:30 am | Permalink | Reply

    Keith – Have you or anyone looked at the percent of white population in the battleground states from 2000 to 2010 census?

    I was looking at some numbers and the drop in percent for OH is staggering. WI actually becomes more likely than OH. What about MN?

    If Obama is really at 35-36 of whites, then i have WI and IA. Unfortunately, I have to close to call at that level in OH. Anything higher than 36 and Obama is winning OH, due to the demographic shift in that state.

    • valleyforge
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:45 am | Permalink | Reply

      Obama has better support from whites than average in the midwest, especially IA, MN, and WI. Otherwise he would have ceded them long ago. That strength is offset by abysmal showings with whites across the border and southern states.

    • William Jefferson
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:49 am | Permalink | Reply

      What are you talking about: 81.1% non-Hispanic white is low?

  19. Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:31 am | Permalink | Reply

    When somebody flails around proposing a Secretary of Business, when there is already an unfilled position called Secretary of Commerce, you know they are toast.

    • AC
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:38 am | Permalink | Reply

      Romney handled this issue pretty well on the stump today, but I think that he should have said something like “When I am elected President, you will have a Secretary of Business in the oval office.”

    • valleyforge
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:49 am | Permalink | Reply

      Yet another echo of the 1992 losing campaign: Bush promised to make Baker his economic czar. The press asked, then why don’t we cut out the middleman and elect Baker?

      But Obama’s been promising to consolidate all these corporate welfare programs into one department for 4 years.

      Secretary of Business… Sounds so… 1908.

    • AC
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:53 am | Permalink | Reply

      It is a pretty tame and lame idea for the last weak of the campaign. Sounds like one of Romney’s 58 economic ideas — before he consolidated down to five.

      • Ron
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 3:55 am | Permalink

        He’s flailing around, trying to show he’s got plans. He keeps popping from one thing to another. He’s often incoherent. He sort of drifts from topic to topic. I’d say he’s mentally lazy. Even his stump speeches are retreads from ’08.

  20. Matt
    Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:48 am | Permalink | Reply

    Paul Ryan is gunna refresh himself in Lake Minnetonka

    • AC
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:54 am | Permalink | Reply

      Is Norm Coleman going to campaign with Ryan in Minnesota, or is he still working the SuperPac angle?

      • EpiphoneKnight
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:38 am | Permalink

        Norm! Norm! Norm! (My brother once witnessed this chant when Coleman was running for Senate.) I miss Norm.

  21. EpiphoneKnight
    Posted November 2, 2012 at 12:55 am | Permalink | Reply

    Guy from realclearpolitics said about a week ago Obama is “likely to lose” and Romney has “slight advantage” in Ohio. He said this in interview with Hugh Hewitt. This was despite their polling showing O ahead in most Ohio polls. His reasoning was that O’s numbers are too low for an incumbent. People don’t factor that in much apparently. http://www.hughhewitt.com/transcripts.aspx?id=3ae1bb4f-76c0-4f0e-bbb2-ddf4e9cf089a

    The next time someone uses RCP to claim O is still ahead, tell them to read this.

    • Brad
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:00 am | Permalink | Reply

      Hugh Hewitt is a cheerleader…not a good source for objective discussion or reasonable discourse.

      • EpiphoneKnight
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:16 am | Permalink

        Hewitt wasn’t the source…. the source was the guy who works for RealClearPolitics.com. Try to pay attention to what you’re responding to before you try to influence people.

      • Brad
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:26 am | Permalink

        Oh, I read what you wrote..you’re just not going to get me to click on a link to Hugh’s site. So pay attention yourself.

      • EpiphoneKnight
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:36 am | Permalink

        If you don’t want to read it that’s your prerogative. That doesn’t change the objective fact that the RCP staff guy said Obama is likely to lose and Romney has an advantage in Ohio. There may be others who may find the link informative, as I did. Hewitt’s reputation in some people’s eyes has little or nothing to do with this. RCP has been used by Obama fans to push the idea that he (Obama) is leading. RCP’s own staff member essentially disavowed this idea. That is substantive.

      • Brad
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:43 am | Permalink

        An opinion is an objective fact…weird. EK, relax, you’re getting worked up that an obscure commenter might keep hardcore Mitt fans here from clicking a link to feed their political junkie cravings? LOL. I highly doubt that I have that kind of power.

      • EpiphoneKnight
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:56 am | Permalink

        I did not say his opinion was fact. I said it was a fact that he said those things. Whether those predictions and assertions turn out to be true or not we will see next week. Whether or not people read the article is not the important thing either, necessarily. My concern was that the reason for a lack of interest in the material would be the result of a mis-characterization of the nature of it. So often the most important points on a subject are missed because of mis-characterization. If not for this phenomenon, I doubt Obama or the left would even succeed in being a major player in the cultural/political scene of influence.

      • AC
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 2:57 am | Permalink

        Tom Bevan from RCP has been appearing all over the place this past week, and not just on conservative outlets. In fact, I think that RCP wants to grow its audience by reaching out to political mavens in general.

    • AC
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:01 am | Permalink | Reply

      I am worried that Obama’s numbers have been rising (1-2 points) during this past week. His job approval numbers are better. It certainly doesn’t look like Romney is going to break away. The job creation and unemployment numbers being issued tomorrow may help tell the tale. The stock market had pretty big gains today — after going down quite a bit in October.

      • EpiphoneKnight
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:18 am | Permalink

        They haven’t. Gallup hasn’t been polling this week; Rasmussen still has O at 47. The only gains were from groups no one had ever heard of that flooded the polls on Wednesday.

      • AC
        Posted November 2, 2012 at 2:54 am | Permalink

        I agree that the National Journal poll that showed Obama up by five was the biggest change, but even Rasmussen had Romney up by 4 at one point and now he’s done to two. I am nervous about what Gallup will show when they come back on line. Their Obama job approval numbers have been all over the map but largely positive for Obama.

  22. MikeN
    Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:34 am | Permalink | Reply

    I have a general question about these stops at airports. I realize why it’s good for the candidates. But how many of you would know where to go if told there was a rally at the airport?

    • Frederich
      Posted November 2, 2012 at 1:48 am | Permalink | Reply

      I think these rallies are at smaller regional airports. I am sure they have signs for where to go and security set up. It is a good way to set up a rally. Land, have the rally, gas up the plane while you are giving a speech then fly to the next town.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: