STORY #1: Buck you
I would like everyone who reads this to post a comment with their answer to this question: Without doing any research, which state is the biggest indicator of a presidential candidate’s performance? Everyone who answers correctly will avoid my contempt, which is as good as a prize. Anyway, former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) is currently leading President Obama there by three points, which isn’t surprising for a blue-collar swing state. That, and he probably has the most potent political weapon of the two: Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH).
I didn’t mention this when I made my case for Portman as Romney’s running mate – and I credit Brian from Massachusetts for reminding me – but a partner from this state could put it squarely in red territory. I say could because it’s not a guarantee; as of February, Portman was less popular than fellow Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH). However, much of that was due to his poor name recognition, and this would be the biggest profile-booster he could get. So it’s still a pretty safe bet.
STORY #2: Love us more
The Democratic establishment is finally starting to acknowledge that things aren’t looking good for their man – so not good, in fact, that he might actually not win!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!111!!!!!! (As you can see, I’m trying to contain my terror.) So what’s their solution? Look critically at the political situation and rework proposed new policies to suit it a little better? Nope. The solution is to get the people who are already going to vote for them to send them more money.
That, apparently, is why the Obama campaign wasted so much time on that Sarah Jessica Parker/Anna Wintour campaign. They know the magic is gone when it comes to Independents, liberal Republicans and new voters. Now they have to hang on even tighter to the people who were hanging on to them. That they’re giving up in public just goes to show how badly they’ve screwed up.
STORY #3: But not that badly
However, on a somewhat brighter note, Americans still say former President George W. Bush is more to blame for their economic woes than Obama. The spread isn’t nearly as great as it was in 2008 – then 80 percent Bush/32 percent Obama, now 65 percent Bush/52 percent Obama (see link for methodology). If Obama wants to use this, he can’t frame it as “I’m still trying to clean up this guy’s mess,” but “Romney will make this guy’s mess even worse.” Given who Romney has surrounded himself with, that might not be much of a stretch.
