United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Obama campaign's portrayal of Romney is paying off
Source:
latimes
URL Source: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw ... liday-20120704,0,2551409.story
Published: Jul 4, 2012
Author: Michael A. Memoli and Christi Parsons
Post Date: 2012-07-04 10:06:47 by Ferret Mike
Keywords: None
Views: 3072
Comments: 21
Polls indicate voters are responding well to the Obama campaign's push to define Mitt Romney as an exporter of American jobs: The president is ahead in key states and moving up nationally. WASHINGTON — After a month in which some prominent Democrats openly questioned President Obama's campaign strategy, the mood at the White House has risen, with strategists believing their efforts to define Mitt Romney as a corporate outsourcing specialist are proving a success with swing voters. The shift can be seen in several recent polls that have shown Obama ahead in key states and moving upward nationally. In Gallup's daily tracking poll, for example, Obama has taken a 48%-44% lead over Romney, the first significant lead that either candidate has held since late April in Gallup's survey. The upward movement for the president, which has now been sustained for six days, began before the Supreme Court's decision upholding most of his signature healthcare law, so it does not reflect a reaction to that ruling. Democratic strategists credit their attacks on Romney's record at Bain Capital — the same record that Romney touts as proof of his ability to fix what's wrong with the economy. The shift comes as Obama prepares to set off on his first multi-day campaign swing this year, a two-day bus tour of Pennsylvania and Ohio beginning Thursday, complete with ice cream socials and events being billed as a "celebration of the American worker." Tougher times may be around the corner. Friday will bring the monthly jobs report, which could reflect continued weakness in the U.S. economy. The downturns in Europe and China have begun to affect American manufacturers, according to economic indicators released Monday. In addition, Romney and his allies continue to outpace Obama and the Democrats on fundraising. But Obama's team thinks his message about Romney is getting through to voters, and they plan to step up the intensity. Though Obama himself is expected to keep things genial on this tour, the television spots and surrogates in battleground states will be pushing the message that Romney was an outsourcing "pioneer." A new television advertisement argues that Romney's policies threaten the middle class. Obama fought to "save the auto industry," the ad asserts, and is fighting now to end tax breaks for companies that shift jobs overseas. The ad is airing in nine swing states, including Ohio, the nation's second-biggest producer of motor vehicles. The Obama strategy seemed to find support in the latest stream of polling data. A new CNN/Opinion Research poll showed Obama improving his numbers during the last month among key groups the campaign has targeted — by as much as 5 percentage points among women and 7 percentage points among minorities, for example. He gained 3 percentage points among lower-income voters and independents, respectively. Overall, that poll showed Obama with a 49%-46% lead over the presumptive GOP nominee. Polling in the states Obama will visit this week also favored the Democrat. Quinnipiac University data released last week had the president leading by 9 percentage points in Ohio and 6 percentage points in Pennsylvania. An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found that voters in battleground states — the ones most exposed to campaign ads — viewed Romney's business experience more negatively than voters nationwide or even voters in states that typically voted Democratic. "Everybody knows what they think about Barack Obama. But Mitt Romney is still hazy in voters' minds," said Peter A. Brown, who supervises the Quinnipiac survey. "The president has benefited from the fact that he was much more prevalent on television. You cannot underestimate that." It's an advantage that may not last through November, Brown noted. The Romney team predicts it won't. An email Tuesday from the campaign to supporters and journalists was pithy, containing simply a collection of headlines that spelled bad news for U.S. wages and manufacturing. A primary cause of the troubles, Romney aides say, is the healthcare law that survived Supreme Court review last week. "Instead of helping jump-start our economy," spokeswoman Andrea Saul said, "President Obama stifled job creation with his job-killing healthcare bill." michael.memoli@latimes.com christi.parsons@latimes.com Copyright © 2012, Los Angeles Times
President Obama, shown arriving in Miami last month, is leading Mitt Romney 48% to 44% – the first significant lead either candidate has held in Gallup polling since April. But he may find tougher times around the corner, beginning with Friday’s release of the monthly jobs report. (Jewel Samad, AFP/Getty Images / December 31, 1969)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Ferret Mike (#0)
You will vote for Obama. He will lose. Read it and weep. Poll: Romney leads in key swing states RSS Text Size Print Share This Home / news / national / govt politics / Poll: Romney leads in key swing states Romney says he should have stuck to economy in '08 Mitt Romney By: WNCT Staff | WNCT Published: July 03, 2012 » Comments | Post a Comment RALEIGH, N.C. - President Obama leads most national polls by a small margin, but it's a different story in key swing states. As with most presidential elections, Campaign 2012 will be won or lost in those key swing states. According to a new CNN poll Mitt Romney has an eight point lead in 15 states that are considered to be up for grabs. But, it's not all good news for Romney. Another key factor in winning national elections is voter enthusiasm. “I'm very excited for this election. I've been really pleased President Obama put his neck out on the line for students,” said Katherine Valde, Obama supporter. "I think our generation is less connected with this election than they were in 2008 primarily because in 2008 most of us were first time voters,” said Abhay Nadipuram, Iowa voter. The poll shows voter enthusiasm for Democrats has increased 13 percentage points in four months, while Republican enthusiasm has stayed virtually the same.
I am not voting for Obama. But like Rupert Murdock said when he recently begged Willard to dump his personal buddies and amateurs from his campaign staff and to hire professionals who can take on President Obama's very tough staff who are much smarter about campaigning, he ls going toget eaten alive and lose unless he does so. An assessment I fully concur with.
Actually, you no doubt do not recall, but William Jefferson Clinton was very far behind GHW Bush at this point in the campaign year. He went on to beat Bush quite decisively. The same was true of him that year; his campaign was far superior in personal and organization than Bush's. No one has one this one yet, but if Willard doesn't do some systemic changes to his campaign, his chances of unseating Obama are none too good.
Is Ross Perot running this year?
Clinton would of won whether Perot ran or not. He would of gotten the bulk of the swing voters who went for the little guy that year had Perot not run.
That is speculation. I would have voted Bush instead of Perot. Bush would have won.
One of GHW Bush's key problems that year was it was the time when moderate Republicans were leaving the party in droves. Clinton won because his staff saw that and capitalized on campaign tactics that won the hearts and minds of these angry Republicans and independents angry at the rightward swing of the GOP. He would not had won had this alienation of moderates had not occurred or if his opeople had not been so good at capitalizing on this.
No Republicans supported Clinton. In fact after the election many D's became R's. Clinton sucked. The economy was relatively good during the nineties because we were still in the Reagan boom. We started slowing down after the effects of Clinton took place.
By the way, I don't like Clinton,and never voted for him. But that year I was a Democratic Precinct Committee person and worked on the Congressman Peter DeFasio campaign, which is the campaign I am doing grass roots work on this year as I did last election. And Iam still a member of the Pacific Green party which I joined after quiting the Democrats because I did not like Clinton.
Speaking of alienation. How many groups did your black messiah alienate so far?
I don't like Clinton either. But I think he was much better then Obama. Looking back I can respect him a tiny bit for his part in bringing the deficit down. He doesn't get all the credit as he was dragged there. But he did play a part.
President George H. W. Bush and Vice President Dan Quayle easily won renomination by the Republican Party. However, the success of the conservative opposition forced the moderate Bush to move further to the right than in 1988, and to incorporate many socially conservative planks in the party platform. Bush allowed Buchanan to give the keynote address at the Republican National Convention in Houston, Texas, and his culture war speech alienated many moderates." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1992 I remember that campaign year well, and the histories written on it agree with my take on it. Want a couple more quotes to show this?
You are pandering to your own wishful thinking. I don't believe in 'messiahs' of any kind, and never looked as President Obama that way.
That was one of the best political speeches of all time. Buchanan should have been president. He is a real American not some globalist pretender like every President has been since the great Ronald Reagan left office.
Bush inherited a great economy from Clinton and gutted it to ruin quite effectively. It was bad from the get go, then Obama spent way too much political capital passing health care neglecting the elements of the electorate wat had provided his winning margin losing the House and narrowing the margin of control of the Senate allowing the Republicans to work at every turn to keep the economy as stagnant as possible to try to create discontent with hin deep enough to throw him out this year. Obama's staff knows this and is moving quite effectively to give his campaign the momentum it needs to win in November. Unless Willard does something like people like Murdock suggests, his likelihood of prevailing is none too good.That candidate always has had high negatives in many areas. He was never the best candidate for the Republicans to chose to win back the WH.
Read this blog post on Soros, Obama's mentor. It is getting big play on eLPee and other places.
Hi Mike. I don't follow this politics stuff like I used to. I see it as a rigged game. Sure I see the headlines and some of the details but I try not to get caught up in it. Mittens lost to McCain last time and McCain lost to Obama, therefore it is likely that O'Romney will lose to Obama. I like some of the plays on Rmoneys name. I hate to admit it but I didn't vote in the last primary for the first time in forever. I wasn't familiar with any of the local candidates and I would have voted Ron Paul but I just decided it wasn't worth it. I feel a bit guilty about it. Right now I see Obama the incumbent winning whether I like it or not. Romney has to stand for something rather than being solely anti-Obama IMO. Things might change and we'll see. Happy 4th to you!
You the same Fred. I am going out to do some horseback riding down by Mt. Piscah with some friends. My sister is visiting from Colorado and prefers them to bicycles. The route we are taking involves some climbing, which should be intereasting as I've never done that on a horse. Keep your fingers crossed I don't wind up falling with the nag I'll be on named Rambler on top of me. Happy Forth dude. Thanks for the ping. BTW, here is a link on Secritariat she showed me: I saw that news item about Secretariat. It only took them 39 years to correct the timing mistake...groan. I'm a Seattle Slew fan - super runner and super sire. I've got to run now. Be careful on the trail!
Reagan lost to Ford and then he lost to Carter right?
I don't know. I was involved in the Perot campaign in 92 and what I saw were lot's of disgruntled Republicans. Had Perot not run, I would have voted for the Libertarian Party candidate. It's really hard to tell what most of the other Perot supporters would have done. I suspect that more than a few of them would have stayed home on election day.
#2. To: A K A Stone (#1)
#3. To: A K A Stone (#1)
"You will vote for Obama. He will lose. Read it and weep. Poll: Romney leads in key swing states"
#4. To: Ferret Mike (#3)
#5. To: A K A Stone (#4)
#6. To: Ferret Mike (#5)
(Edited)
#7. To: A K A Stone (#4)
(Edited)
#8. To: Ferret Mike (#7)
#9. To: A K A Stone (#6)
#10. To: Ferret Mike (#7)
#11. To: Ferret Mike (#9)
#12. To: A K A Stone (#8)
"Conservative journalist Pat Buchanan was the primary opponent of President Bush. However, Buchanan's best showing was in the New Hampshire primary on February 18, 1992—where Bush won by a 53–38% margin. President Bush won 73% of all primary votes, with 9,199,463 votes. Buchanan won 2,899,488 votes; unpledged delegates won 287,383 votes, and David Duke, a former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan and later leader of the National Association for the Advancement of White People group won 119,115 votes. Just over 100,000 votes were cast for all other candidates, half of which were write-in votes for H. Ross Perot[1]
#13. To: A K A Stone (#10)
"Speaking of alienation. How many groups did your black messiah alienate so far?"
#14. To: Ferret Mike (#12)
Bush allowed Buchanan to give the keynote address at the Republican National Convention in Houston, Texas, and his culture war speech alienated many moderates."
#15. To: A K A Stone (#11)
(Edited)
"Looking back I can respect him a tiny bit for his part in bringing the deficit down. He doesn't get all the credit as he was dragged there. But he did play a part."
#16. To: A K A Stone (#14)
http://noiri.blogspot.com/2012/07/george-soros-obama-puppeteer-and-evil.html
#17. To: Ferret Mike (#15)
#18. To: Fred Mertz (#17)
#19. To: Ferret Mike (#18)
#20. To: Fred Mertz (#17)
Mittens lost to McCain last time and McCain lost to Obama, therefore it is likely that O'Romney will lose to Obama.
#21. To: Ferret Mike (#5)
Clinton would of won whether Perot ran or not. He would of gotten the bulk of the swing voters who went for the little guy that year had Perot not run.
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom (A.K.A. minnigold)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]