Governor Mitt Romney‘s concession speech, in text and video at the New York Times.
President Barack Obama‘s victory speech, also via the NYT.
Michael Barone, author of the Almanac of American Politics and senior editor at The Washington Examiner, is forecasting a Romney win this Tuesday. I’ve waffled and haven’t wanted to make many predictions because the race has been so close at times and momentum has shifted at various junctures. Romney definitely seems to have had it the last several weeks – since the first debate, really – but may have plateaued at some point. The electoral college math is difficult for Romney-Ryan, no matter how you look at it.
Barone – who knows politics and elections like few others – actually says Romney wins the electoral college by a good margin, 315-223. He chalks up Indiana and North Carolina to the challenger (a safe bet for some time now) plus Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, Iowa and New Hampshire. The biggest surprise? He also includes Wisconsin and Pennsylvania in the list. The only swing states (which really have been Obama-leaning states for some time now in my view) he gives to the prez are Nevada, New Mexico, Michigan and Minnesota.
By this tabulation, Mitt Romney could still lose Pennsylvania (20), Wisconsin (10), Colorado (9) and New Hampshire (4) and still win the election. Encouraging. But as many others have noted, he’s got to win Ohio to take this thing.
Drudge links to Rasmussen Reports’ latest daily presidential tracking poll, which shows Mitt Romney and Barack Obama each earning 46% of the national electorate’s support. Romney actually has a 48-46 edge when undecided voters who are leaning one direction or another are included, and the president’s overall job approval continues to hover just below the critical 50% mark.
What counts, of course, is the Electoral College. There, Rasmussen credits the president with 237 votes versus the challenger’s 196, with 9 states totaling 105 votes up for grabs. Obama would only need 33 of those votes from toss-up states to reach 270 and seal the deal. That means Florida and only one other state, or a combination of several smaller states on the list including Colorado, Iowa, Missouri, New Hampshire, Nevada, Ohio, Virginia and Wisconsin.
Barack Obama won these battleground states in 2008, with one exception: Missouri delivered a narrow victory to John McCain that night, bucking its trend of picking – or at least predicting – the winner of every presidential contest since 1904 with only one exception (we went with Adlai Stevenson over Ike in ’56). So the Show-Me state is the only state Republicans carried last time around that is now in toss-up territory. Although, Rasmussen’s last polling here does indicate that Romney maintains a small advantage (48-45).
Senate hopeful Todd Akin has been blamed for jeopardizing the GOP’s presidential chances here, and no doubt that has played a role. Yet it shouldn’t be overlooked that that Democrats entered this season with strong top-of-the-ticket incumbent candidates in Governor Jay Nixon and Senator Claire McCaskill. At some point you also have to analyze how much impact the establishment’s abandonment of Akin is dragging on the ballot from top to bottom.
There’s little rallying behind the Senate candidate; gubernatorial candidate Dave Spence has a lot of dollars but entered the race without his own political resumé and team behind him to take on a strong governor; and the Romney campaign probably strategized early on that while some resources would be necessary to secure Missouri, it would substantially be able to count on the energy and organization generated by Missouri Republicans, for Missouri Republicans, to help carry the day here.
Judging from what’s played out publicly the last several weeks, the energy necessary to secure a Romney victory may largely rest with the enthusiasm to do just that. Is the establishment bet that that by helping Romney take Missouri, you also have a decent chance at maybe still picking up the Senate seat without actually having to tie one’s self to Akin? More on that to come…
The word is out. I have it on good authority that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) regularly hits his wife. He needs to come clean.
Now, if Harry Reid wants to settle this matter all he has to do is answer these allegations and provide evidence he doesn’t engage in domestic violence. Say, release Landra Reid‘s medical records for the last ten years. That would solve everything, then we can move on to solving the country’s problems.
Ideally, I’d be able to make this accusation from the Senate floor (leveraging the credibility of the world’s greatest deliberative body for personal political gain), but as it is I’ll have to settle for the blogosphere.
Once again, you heard it here (and I heard it elsewhere). Harry Reid regularly hits his wife.
…As you might guess, this is satire. Sen. Harry Reid has accused Mitt Romney of not paying taxes, suggesting criminal activity or at least some sort of major ethical (or un-American) malfeasance. Romney flatly denied the allegation.
Reid did this from the Senate floor, which is is supposed to be a place of serious debate, and where personal attacks are never supposed to be engaged in or tolerated. Harry Reid should be censured for his actions. That will never happen given his status as the body’s most powerful member, which makes this all the sadder.
Reid cited a single, unnamed private source, and says the onus is on Romney to disprove the allegations by releasing his tax returns, something Democrats have been pressuring the businessman and former Massachusetts governor to do for some time (Romney has released some but not as far back as the Obama campaign would like).
This is a low-ball tactic and should be roundly called-out by responsible journalists.
Harry Reid, it should be noted, does not release his own tax returns, according to a number of reports I’ve seen on this story.
I’m having flashbacks of Mr. Obama‘s “share the wealth” comment in 2008.
“Cause, if you got a business – that – you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” So says President Barack Obama, on the campaign trail in Roanoke, Virginia on Friday. The comment has gotten a lot of play and has come under fire from groups like the NFIB (National Federation of Independent Businesses).
I love these moments of transparency from the president. When he reveals who he really is. Even though I feel like I know the president’s politics, it still shocks me sometimes when I hear things like this. The man has a fundamentally and deeply ingrained collectivist worldview, which shows itself in a callous disregard – some might say contempt – for the entrepreneurial spirit.
I’d like to comment more on this later, because I think this story has legs for the fall, and it’s significant. Hopefully this, along with the campaign’s overreach on suggesting Mitt Romney is a possible felon for misrepresenting the timeline of his tenure at Bain, will help turn the momentum of the last several weeks back in Romney’s favor.
Democrats have unloaded opposition research profiles on three key potential Republican running-mates of presidential candidate Mitt Romney. The ABC News Blog reported the story yesterday morning, which shows up on the Drudge Report today.
The American Bridge 21st Century SuperPac – the official dirt-digging machine of the Democratic party – launched a website yesterday detailing the supposed dastardly deeds of Ohio Senator Rob Portman, former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, and Florida Senator Marco Rubio. VeepMistakes also casts Romney as the less-than-enthusiastic choice of Republicans, and reminds us all that Sarah Palin was on the ticket in 2008.
Wow. I’m underwhelmed.
Whats interesting, though, is the timing. It’s speculated Romney will announce a running-mate soon, possibly even this week. Those kinds of suggestions usually rely on a stray story here and there, but mainly all it takes is a look at the calendar to know that an announcement can’t be too far away. (For reference, in 2008 Obama announced Biden on August 22nd, McCain announced Palin August 29th. Four years before, Kerry announced Edwards on July 6th. In 2000, Bush announced Cheney on July 25th, Gore tapped Lieberman August 13th.)
It’s clear Democrats published these dossiers now to influence media coverage of the expected announcement. It’s also interesting that they put out the longest report for the potential pick with the shortest public record – Rubio. Either they really believe it’s going to be him, or he’s the candidate they most fear.
Ann Coulter trashes GOP presidential primary candidate Rick Santorum in her latest column, saying even when he takes the right position, he makes the wrong argument. I couldn’t agree more. It’s insane that Santorum is even in the game at this point. I’ve watched him in interviews from time to time in the last couple years and remember thinking, “This guy seriously wants to run for president?”
He has absolutely no presence, and at times seems slow on his feet. As I discussed in my last post, he also has difficulties communicating with constituencies who don’t reflect his own values. That’s problematic when you’re trying to win over a national electorate.
The former Pennsylvania senator has looked good on the stump a few times during this race, and has played the role of the tortoise admirably. He kept slogging on in Iowa for months on end, even when it looked like he had no chance of winning. And that’s paid off. Whether by luck or strength, he’s the last un-Romney standing. But enough of this, let’s get this thing over. Santorum shouldn’t be left standing, and it’s time to knock him out.
Republican primary voters, do your duty.