• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Romney's imploding campaign is a myth

Schmide

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2002
5,356
281
126
I don't get the title vs content of the article. I was going to fault the author of the linked story because it kind of explains the implosion contrary to your (OP) position.

Maybe you could put a bit more effort into your post?
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
The Greenbay Packers might have gotten screwed.
 
Last edited:

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Administrator
Mar 5, 2001
49,619
162
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
I'm not sure your reading comprehension is very good, OP. I just read that article & it seems to explain, especially at the bottom in those highlighted sections, why his campaign is imploding.

Last fall, as he was establishing the overall strategy for his campaign, Mitt Romney and his team were confident that the Obama presidency would collapse of its own weight; that the economic and job-performance numbers were so bad that the president was unelectable. They felt that the slogan they came up with, "Obama Isn't Working," was so self-evident that all they needed to do was depict how bad things were and the race was over. They saw it as nothing more or less than a referendum on Obama's (and the economy's) record. They were wrong.


Neither charismatic nor convincing, Romney has failed to establish himself as a credible, trusted vehicle for delivering attacks against the president. As a businessman used to spreadsheets and the cold calculus of the deal, he seems to have regarded voters as shareholders in a troubled company, who would welcome a takeover based on what the balance sheets showed.

The GOP candidate's action plan is so vague that it allows the president to be vague, too. And in many cases, Romney is poorly positioned to launch an attack, in part because of the radical anti-government stance he has adopted for this 2012 race. Rather than lean on the banks to write more mortgages, for example, Romney wants to lean on them less, for anything.
<and more>
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
22,753
998
126
Mitt's campaign is imploding because it is a gamble on one particular variable: consumer confidence.

But, GDP is rising, stocks are high, and consumer confidence soared last month.

Mitt has no other campaign platform. He has no public plans other than some vague unpaid promisses. Mitt put it all on the line on one statistic. He lost that gamble. Mitt now has 6 weeks (less for early voters) to come up with any reason to vote for him. And no, saying he isn't Obama isn't enough when people have a favorable view of Obama.
 

sm625

Diamond Member
May 6, 2011
8,176
135
106
Romney is running against a globalist schmuck stooge who gave the banks 5 trillion, the insurance and drug companies even more, lost millions of jobs, lied and said he created jobs, bla bla bla you get the picture. The guy is just goddawfully bad and anyone with a brain knows it. A turnip would be able to beat this guy in an election. But Mittens frickin Romney.... oh at best it will be a close election. So what does that tell you about Mittens frickin Romney?
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
If the thread question is to become, yes no, is the Romney campaign imploding?

We can find our answers in recent polling data, especially in swing States. As I recall on a random goodle check today saying Obama is opening up a double digit lead in Florida and is ahead in Ohio. As I would have to maintain, yes the Romny campaign is now imploding.

Which is not to say Romney can't turn it around or that Obama will not make a giant mistake, but at present, the Romney's campaign is struggling and flip flopping at random to gain any traction with his rosy promises.
 

Schmide

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2002
5,356
281
126
Romney is running against a globalist schmuck stooge who gave the banks 5 trillion, the insurance and drug companies even more, lost millions of jobs, lied and said he created jobs, bla bla bla you get the picture. The guy is just goddawfully bad and anyone with a brain knows it. A turnip would be able to beat this guy in an election. But Mittens frickin Romney.... oh at best it will be a close election. So what does that tell you about Mittens frickin Romney?
Back up that 5 trillion or GTFO.

Most of that is unpaid hidden responsibilities from bushie dude.
 

ichy

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2006
6,940
6
81
Check out electoral-vote.com and electionprojection.com. One is a liberal site, the other's conservative and both show Obama pulling ahead of Romney. "Imploding campaign" is a bit strong and things could still turn ugly for Obama in the final month but it's definitely turned into an uphill fight for Mitt Romney.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
Wasn't the same media narrative used against McCain?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You may be right Jaskalas, but to a large extent the McCain wounds were self inflicted.
McCain bet part of his farm on Sarah Palin and Palin turned out to be nothing but a slogan spounting air head. Then McCain poo pood and denied the looming fiancial mortage crisis, said he was no financial expert, and American voters woke a few days later to find every finacial expert saying the crisis was worse than anyone expected. As the American economy started losing jobs at the speed of light even before election day.

The Mitt Romney problem is that he now advocates GWB type economic policies as Mitt struggles to be believed as he maintains he can use GWB type economic policies without getting GWB economic results.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
11,866
1,193
126
What is unusual about Willard is the death knell is being sounded so early-over a month to go and not a single debate has taken place.

There is plenty of evidence of implosion (for example, the co-chair of his campaign resigning to cash in on a lobbyist job) but one thing you have to remember is that for nearly all of the media, the story IS the story. They have to look for drama every day or they don't get readers/viewers.

I absolutely guarantee there will be a flurry of articles in the next week or two about the Romney resurgence, it is as inevitable as the sun rising.

How to tell when the Romney campaign is truely dead-when the national money switches away from the presidential campaign to senate and congressional races and when Romney starts abandoning his speeches, etc in some of the so-called battleground states.
 

ichy

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2006
6,940
6
81
It's too early to say that Romney is finished. A sudden economic downturn would be VERY ugly for Obama, but right now he's the definite front-runner.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
16,970
4,705
136
What is unusual about Willard is the death knell is being sounded so early-over a month to go and not a single debate has taken place.

There is plenty of evidence of implosion (for example, the co-chair of his campaign resigning to cash in on a lobbyist job) but one thing you have to remember is that for nearly all of the media, the story IS the story. They have to look for drama every day or they don't get readers/viewers.

I absolutely guarantee there will be a flurry of articles in the next week or two about the Romney resurgence, it is as inevitable as the sun rising.

How to tell when the Romney campaign is truely dead-when the national money switches away from the presidential campaign to senate and congressional races and when Romney starts abandoning his speeches, etc in some of the so-called battleground states.
This spiking the football at the 50 yard line talk pisses me off. It ain't over till it's over, and people better get their butts out there and vote.

Feel like were getting the old rope a dope going on here but, probably not because we all know that the librul media's pushing for Obama right.
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
16,191
3,831
136
This spiking the football at the 50 yard line talk pisses me off. It ain't over till it's over, and people better get their butts out there and vote.

Feel like were getting the old rope a dope going on here but, probably not because we all know that the librul media's pushing for Obama right.
yep. it's the old repub has no chance desperation move, keep the dems home thinking they have it in the bag and lo & behold, Romney squeaks out an upset.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
Thump533 says, "I absolutely guarantee there will be a flurry of articles in the next week or two about the Romney resurgence, it is as inevitable as the sun rising."

I got to question Thump.

1. Did that same metric work for McCain?

2. Even if the Ronmey campaign has to write the bulk of the articles on the Romney resurregence, as sure as the sun rises there may be 4 times as many articles about the Romney collapse if the polling data warrants it.

In short Thump, don't confuse a large volume of propaganda with facts. Remember the Paulbots are the reining experts on this forum.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,164
0
0
That could be my point. Which came first, chicken or the egg? The dead campaign or the obituary?
Your point begs the question of whether the McCain campaign did or did not make all the particular mistakes which were exposed in the media. Calling it an implosion or death knell isn't really the issue, so long as the media got the basic facts straight. Calling it an implosion wouldn't kill the campaign because it's just as likely to cause Obama voters to not bother voting as McCain voters. The only thing that matters is whether or not he did make the mistakes which the media alleged caused the campaign to implode. If he did in fact make said mistakes, then it's pretty lame to blame the death of his campaign on the media.
 

Screech

Golden Member
Oct 20, 2004
1,202
6
81
Proof that the second link is garbage:

The national press has devoted the better part of a week to the Romney video clip regarding the 47 percent. Romney misspoke.
Yeah, anyone believes that was simply a misstatement and did not reflect what he really thought is a moron.....especially when he basically confirmed what he said later on.

edit: That someone who says half of america is lazy and irresponsible should never, never, be seriously considered as a presidential candidate. That he is is, frankly, embarrassing.
 

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
25,608
1,162
126
Romney is a lying cheating scumsucking elitist inconsiderate noncaring asshole. His nomination was a very dark day for republicans. Sure, he does not come of as being stupid. But, I'd rather vote for stupid than evil.
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,649
0
76
www.facebook.com
I think there could be an october surprise so no one can write Romney off yet. I'd like to say no one can write anarchy off. However, I won't live to it no thanks to the fucking state!
That said, the huffington post article is kind of ridiculous because it doesn't just come out and tell the truth which is... it doesn't matter a damn bit whether obama or Romney becomes president. I have to admit that I truly regret saying that fraud was why dr. Paul lost the nomination... in other words, I didnt want to believe that the vast majority of people are incapable of the ability to reason, but I think that i believe it now. I mean, dr. Paul was like the only one who said he wasn't even going to means test social security and Medicare for fucks sake and he was willing to run up deficits so that younger people could opt out of it. We just need to forget about recessions and budget deficits and realize that the fucking govt is spending too fucking much. Obama's spending record isnt as bad as Bush's spending record, so the republicans attack him for the deficits because they assume people can't reason. The republicans are always okay with spending if they can pay for it and that doesn't matter how much power they hold. I admit that I fell for the deficit bullshit, but thanks to dr. Paul I realized it is a spending problem not a fiscal cliff as Michele bachmann's pro spending ass would want all of us to believe. I had to figure out why he was willing to reduce govt revenues, then it dawned on me that he is actually fine with deficits... after all, the creditors have no inherent right to be paid back by the taxpayer!
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY