Inthemiddle
Rookie
- Oct 4, 2011
- 6,354
- 675
- 0
- Banned
- #1
The campaign has been going on for a while now, and I've been up in the air with whom I thought might come out on top. But at this point, I'm feeling like there's now little doubt in my mind that Obama is going to win re-election. There's alot of things that have brought me to this conclusion, but mainly it's my assessment of each person's skills as a candidate and how they've fared up to this point. So far, Obama seems to have the edge in a tight race. This is, in my opinion, a kiss of death of Romney. Obama has a great many things on which he could be attacked, but Romney has failed to capitalize and failed to attack well. As has been said by many for some time, it's Romney's election to lose. And he's failed to make a strong showing at any point in the campaign.
At this point, there's only one major event left before the election, and that's the debates. This is going to seal the deal for Obama. Romney is not a charismatic debater. Obama, on the other hand, is very charismatic. Romney does not understand that when debating in a campaign it's not enough to simply make people agree with you. You have to move people. And Obama has the ability to move people. Obama will come out of the debates with a clear lead, and Romney has not demonstrated the ability to actually build his candidacy up. The most he's ever been able to do is try to hole Obama down. He doesn't strive to win, he strives to not lose, and there is a huge, and fatal, difference.
Some people here like to think that the incumbent rule will cause an eleventh hour bump in Romney's favor. I discount this possibility. As a matter of human nature the incumbent rule tends to not apply to lop level executive offices. In 2004, voters showed that they preferred the devil they did know instead of the devil they didn't know. That same year Parliament elections in Canada reflected the same thing, when Prime Minister Paul Martin's unpopular liberal party maintained control and came out better than polling would have suggested. The overall trend in modern American Presidential politics is to favor incumbents, even weak incumbents, unless they are faced with a substantially powerful candidate. Thus, it took a Bill Clinton to defeat President Bush. It took a Ronald Reagan to defeat President Carter, etc. The incumbent rule will not benefit Romney.
Romney has become the GOP's version of John Kerry, and his Presidential aspirations will be no more successful. While I would have hoped that the GOP would have learned from 2004 that the "anybody but ...." campaign strategy is not effective, and I expect to see that demonstrated in November.
At this point, there's only one major event left before the election, and that's the debates. This is going to seal the deal for Obama. Romney is not a charismatic debater. Obama, on the other hand, is very charismatic. Romney does not understand that when debating in a campaign it's not enough to simply make people agree with you. You have to move people. And Obama has the ability to move people. Obama will come out of the debates with a clear lead, and Romney has not demonstrated the ability to actually build his candidacy up. The most he's ever been able to do is try to hole Obama down. He doesn't strive to win, he strives to not lose, and there is a huge, and fatal, difference.
Some people here like to think that the incumbent rule will cause an eleventh hour bump in Romney's favor. I discount this possibility. As a matter of human nature the incumbent rule tends to not apply to lop level executive offices. In 2004, voters showed that they preferred the devil they did know instead of the devil they didn't know. That same year Parliament elections in Canada reflected the same thing, when Prime Minister Paul Martin's unpopular liberal party maintained control and came out better than polling would have suggested. The overall trend in modern American Presidential politics is to favor incumbents, even weak incumbents, unless they are faced with a substantially powerful candidate. Thus, it took a Bill Clinton to defeat President Bush. It took a Ronald Reagan to defeat President Carter, etc. The incumbent rule will not benefit Romney.
Romney has become the GOP's version of John Kerry, and his Presidential aspirations will be no more successful. While I would have hoped that the GOP would have learned from 2004 that the "anybody but ...." campaign strategy is not effective, and I expect to see that demonstrated in November.
