1 - 10 Next
Actually, sort of. That poll was taken right after the dem convention, when everybody showed a bump for Obama. Let's wait to see what next week's fox poll shows. And yes, that fox poll shows an oversampling of democrats. To believe that poll, you'd have to assume that people are everybit as excited about Obama now as they were 4 years ago, and there has been a huge amount of polling to show that that just isn't going to be the case this year. Instead of a +7D year, we're probably looking at a +1D or +2D year. 2010 was even between R and D, but of course that was not a presidential election year. So, most folks figure somewhere between 2010 and 2008. If it's somewhere in the middle, Mitt looks real good.
Sure, Rasmussen has Mitt ahead by 3. There are others where Mitt is within one or two. The polls that show a 5 point lead or greater for Obama are either tracking polls that haven't gotten rid of the convention bounce yet, or are hack polls with ridiculous samples (dramatic oversampling of democrats). As for Hunstman, exactly where would he be getting his support? The left would be backing Obama, along with some in the middle. No way Huntsman attracts many on the right at all. Not enough votes left in the middle to beat Obama, that's for sure. Huntsman was a train wreck in the primaries, and he'd be worse in the general. Mitt is going to take this thing! He just took Obama's best shot, and he's still right there.
It's going to be very tough for Mitt to really gain a ton of momentum to stretch out to any sizable lead with the media doing everything it can to prop up Obama and tear down Mitt. And, it doesn't help when so many on the right are so quick to criticize and whine. What I'm hoping is that Mitt can prove staying power - that he'll at least keep it close - until Nov. 6, all of the anti-Obama, pro-GOP, pro-conservative movement, pro-Romney feeling in the country will cause a TON of our folks to get out to the polls, and to bring others with them. What we can't afford is for people to become discouraged, just like the media wants us to become. If we remain enthusiastic, it will be very difficult for Obama to beat us.
Everybody needs to learn how to listen better. Romney was very careful in what he said. He said there were parts of "health care reform" that he likes and would implement in his own plan. Everybody just assumed he was talking about Obamacare, but he said "health care reform". This is important, because the way Mitt plans to deal with pre-existing conditions has nothing at all to do with forcing insurance companies to take on people that wait until they are sick or injured before seeking health insurance. Mitt's plan is available for all to see, but most nay-sayers are more interested in blasting Mitt at any opportunity and aren't interested in what Mitt is actually saying.
Well, that's strange, since the ABC poll shows Mitt within one point of Obama, and winning independents by a ton. Maybe ABC doesn't believe their own polls, even though they grossly under-sampled republicans.
I didn't hear today's show, but yesterday Rush was trying to calm down all the doom-and-gloomers by pointing out that Obama's current lead is merely a bounce that will quickly wear off. Rush was adamant that we can't give up, and that we have no choice but to elect Romney. I really doubt Rush changed his tune all that much between yesterday and today, especially since there has been new polling data clearly showing that the bounce is indeed wearing off quickly.
There is absolutely nothing Mitt could do or say that will convince many on the right. Mitt's past sins are beyond forgiveness, apparently. Example: Mitt has promised every single day of his campaign that he will repeal Obamacare. Yet every time Mitt says anything at all about health care reform (meaning his own plan that he's had since the beginning of the campaign), all these "can't trust Mitt" types shout from the rooftops "See, he isn't going to repeal Obamacare!" They don't bother learning what's in Mitt's plan, and how it has NOTHING to do with anything like Obamacare, but is instead a plan full of personal liberty, competition, federalism, cost savings, and so forth, but instead assume he's trying to save Obamacare.
Romney will kill Obamacare dead, you can count on that. There are other, better ways to take care of the pre-existing condition issue, and I don't think it's such a big deal to allow families to buy insurance together. Check out Mitt's health care plan - makes a TON more sense than Obamacare: http://www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care
Romney's plan has nothing to do with Obamacare. Mitt does NOT force companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions that wait until they are sick or injured before seeking insurance. Mitt uses high-risk pools at the state level to handle issues like these, and the states can set their own policies. One aspect regarding pre-existing conditions that Mitt does take care of is the situation where someone with pre-existing conditions changes jobs, and therefore insurance plans. If that person has been continuously covered by insurance, that person won't be denied coverage due to the pre-existing condition. So, no, Mitt does not think you're an idiot, but you are ignorant as to Mitt's health care plan.
Here's a link to Mitt's health care plan: http://www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care Mitt has not flip-flopped AT ALL on any of these issues. He deals with pre-existing conditions, but does it in a way totally unrelated to anything in Obamacare. It does our cause no good at all to constantly rip on Mitt as a result of so few of us realizing that he actually has a health care proposal that has nothing to do with Obamacare, but that does accomplish a couple of the same goals that are very popular with the voting public. Read his plan, and then criticize the plan if you see stuff you truly don't like.
1 - 10 Next