Broccoli

[Tupac Shakur]

To be fair, Obama has a fairly comfortable lead in nearly all the "battleground" states over Romney as of last week. Now, caveats apply, it is seven months until Election Day, etc etc etc

Obama's approval rating is hovering around 46%, likely too low for him to expect a "comfortable" win in November, especially given the weak economy.

[Tupac Shakur]

Single payer would be much preferable. As would a true free market solution + safety net. Instead we're combining the worst of both worlds.

QFT

[DaShi]

Aeson's post is simply un-American. We have two parties specifically so they'll argue and argue until they're left with a compromise that's worse than what either side proposed.

[Guynemer]

Obama's approval rating is hovering around 46%, likely too low for him to expect a "comfortable" win in November, especially given the weak economy.

Whereas Romney's approval rating is south of 40%.

Like I said, too early to draw conclusions, but a easy Dem victory is certainly not out of the realm of possibility.

Even Rasmussen, which trends pro-R, has Obama up by eight in states like OH, PA, and VA.

Romney has a lot of work to do to win moderates to his side.

[Tupac Shakur]

Whereas Romney's approval rating is south of 40%.

I could be wrong on this, but it's my understand that approval ratings for presidential challengers are pretty much meaningless for predicting electoral outcomes because presidential elections are treated as a referendum on the incumbent's performance.

Like I said, too early to draw conclusions, but a easy Dem victory is certainly not out of the realm of possibility.

It's obviously possible, but it doesn't seem likely based on what we know. Most models seem to be indicating a tight race.

Romney has a lot of work to do to win moderates to his side.

Depends on what happens in the next 7 months. If the economy takes a turn for the worst, Romney doesn't have to do anything other than not be Obama.

[Jon Miller]

Single payer would be much preferable. As would a true free market solution + safety net. Instead we're combining the worst of both worlds.

Yep.

JM

[kentonio]

Depends on what happens in the next 7 months. If the economy takes a turn for the worst, Romney doesn't have to do anything other than not be Obama.

Theres been too much collateral damage from the primary for the repubs to do nothing, they desperately need to start repairing their favourables with women. I suppose if you could get the entire party to stfu for the next 6 months AND the economy went downhill then they might have a chance in a low turnout election, but the religious right have the bit between their teeth and its going to take a miracle to stop them completely trashing the GOP's election prospects. We're talking 18 points amongst women in the battleground states thanks to the war on women.

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/20...+%28TPMNews%29

[regexcellent]

Republicans haven't really lost favor with women over social issues; that meme is a blatant lie.

[kentonio]

Republicans haven't really lost favor with women over social issues; that meme is a blatant lie.

Please explain how polling data now constitutes a 'meme'. Women genuinely do not like men trying to control what they do with their bodies. This was only a shock to the GOP it seems.

Here's the data direct from Gallup.

http://thequeue.gallup.com/

[The Mad Monk]

I don't think Al has posted in this thread once. Is he disinerested in this, or does he just fear broccoli that much?

[Jon Miller]

I don't even think it was particularly 'telling women what to do with their bodies'.

By that definition, nothing has changed (and probably is the reason why there is a general democrat/republican gap).

What has changed is the language, denunciations, and by the republican commentators, which have been very anti-women (I think).

I would imagine this has pushed people away, who might otherwise find the Republicans palatable.

JM

[kentonio]

I don't even think it was particularly 'telling women what to do with their bodies'.

Really? Trying to reduce access to affordable contraception isn't a blatent attempt to control the sexual activities of women? Removing Planned Parenthood funding so women can't get abortions (or cancer screening, or the rest of the 97% of non-abortion services they provide) doesn't have an impact on womens bodies?

[Jon Miller]

It isn't correlated with women going to the Dems at this point, it probably is correlated to women going to the Dems 20 years ago.

JM

[kentonio]

It isn't correlated with women going to the Dems at this point, it probably is correlated to women going to the Dems 20 years ago.

JM

Well done, you join Reg in the group of people who not only disregard polling data but also don't bother listening to what women are actually saying.

The war on women is not just words, its a raft of legislation intended to reduce womens rights in society. Are we really supposed to imagine that the backlash from women has nothing to do with the legislation and is purely about the nasty words?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Really? Trying to reduce access to affordable contraception isn't a blatent attempt to control the sexual activities of women? Removing Planned Parenthood funding so women can't get abortions (or cancer screening, or the rest of the 97% of non-abortion services they provide) doesn't have an impact on womens bodies?

Well, as Jon was saying... this isn't exactly new.