Reich writes: "...according to most polls, the Romney-Ryan ticket is falling further and further behind. How can this be?"

Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)

Why Romney and Ryan are Going Down

By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog

17 September 12

nemployment is still above 8 percent, job gains aren't even keeping up with population growth, the economy is barely moving forward. And yet, according to most polls, the Romney-Ryan ticket is falling further and further behind. How can this be?

Because Republicans are failing the central test of electability. Instead of putting together the largest possible coalition of voters, they're relying largely on one slice of America - middle-aged white men - and alienating just about everyone else.

Start with Hispanics, whose electoral heft keeps growing as they become an ever-larger portion of the electorate. Hispanics now favor President Obama over Romney-Ryan by a larger margin than they did six months ago.

Why? In last February's Republican primary debate Romney dubbed Arizona's controversial immigration policy - that authorized police to demand proof of citizenship from anyone looking Hispanic - a "model law" for the rest of the nation.

Romney then attacked GOP rival Texas Governor Rick Perry for supporting in-state tuition at the University of Texas for children of undocumented immigrants. And Romney advocates what he calls "self-deportation" - making life so difficult for undocumented immigrants and their families that they choose to leave.

As if all this weren't enough, the GOP has been pushing voter ID laws all over America, whose obvious aim is to intimidate Hispanic voters so they won't come to the polls. But they may be having the opposite effect - emboldening the vast majority of ethnic Hispanics, who are American citizens, to vote in even greater numbers and lend even more support to Obama and other Democrats.

Or consider women - whose political and economic impact in America continues to grow (women are fast becoming better educated than men and the major breadwinners in American homes). According to polls, the political gender gap is widening.

Why? It's not just GOP senatorial candidate Todd Akin's call to ban all abortions even in the case of "legitimate rape" (because he believes women's bodies somehow reject violent sperm). The GOP platform itself seeks to bar all abortions, with no exception for rape or incest. And on several occasions Paul Ryan has voted in favor of exactly such legislation.

Meanwhile, Republican legislators in Virginia, Pennsylvania, Idaho, and Alabama have pushed bills requiring women seeking abortions to undergo invasive vaginal ultrasound tests. All told, over 400 Republican bills are pending in state legislatures, attacking womens' reproductive rights.

Republicans have repeatedly voted against legislation giving women equal pay for the same work as men. Republicans in Wisconsin have even repealed a law designed to prevent employers from discriminating against women.

Or consider students - a significant and growing electoral force, who voted overwhelmingly for Obama in 2008. What are Republicans doing to woo them back?

Paul Ryan's budget plan - approved by almost every House Republican and enthusiastically endorsed by Mitt Romney - would have allowed rates on student loans to double, adding an average of $1,000 a year to student debt loads. (Under mounting political pressure, House Republicans came up with just enough money to keep the loan program going safely past Election Day by raiding a fund established for preventive care in the new health-care act.)

Now Romney wants to hand the federal student loan program over to the banks, which will charge even more. Earlier this year he argued subsidized student loans were bad because they encouraged colleges to raise their tuition, and suggested students ask their families for money.

Republicans have even managed to antagonize seniors by seeking to turn Medicare into vouchers whose value won't keep up with rising healthcare costs, and cutting $800 billion out of Medicaid (which many seniors rely on for nursing home care).

And, of course, they've come out against equal marriage rights for gay couples.

Romney, Ryan, and the GOP don't seem to know how to satisfy their middle-aged white male base without at the same time turning off everyone who's not white, male, straight, or middle-aged. Unfortunately for Romney and Ryan, the people they're turning off are the majority.

Comments

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

+148 # tswhiskers 2012-09-17 09:19

No, fortunately R/R don't know how to satisfy anyone but middle-aged white males. Now maybe with the election near it looks as if people are beginning to pay attention to the political chatter and are realizing that the Reps. don't have their best interests at heart. As for electability, what's that? The Dems know what it is, but the far, far, far (etc.) Right have apparently forgotten that they must appeal to more Americans than just the Tea Party. Actually I've really appreciated the sometime honesty of the Reps. When they are not actively running for office they can be quite honest about their goals: Mitch McConnell stating their intention to limit Obama to 1 term, Ryan's economic plan for the nation, the states' efforts to limit the right to vote, the GOP's oft stated tax and abortion policies, and the GOP's intention to kill Medicare and limit Soc. Sec. All this was stated loudly and clearly before Romney was nominated. The lies began once Romney began to campaign as the nominee. Fortunately the media and the Dems have longer memories that many of the public and have used these facts quite tellingly to the disadvantage of the Reps.

+39 # robniel 2012-09-17 11:26

Then there is the "birther" issue. When will we see "Mitt" Romney's birth certificate? Will he be listed on the ballot as "Mitt" Romney. Or will he use his pussy true name, Willard?

+55 # hbheinze 2012-09-17 14:10

Robniel, I don't like Mitt any more than you do, but he can't exactly be held responsible for the name his parents picked for him. Let's don't sink to "their" level by needless name-calling and crass language.

+6 # bmiluski 2012-09-18 08:22

I too thought the "p" word was unnecessary, however, mitt could have changed his name.

0 # CL38 2012-09-20 22:09

It's not only unnecessary, it's misogynistic to use a disparaging slang term for a woman's sexual anatomy.

Knock it off.

0 # natalierosen 2012-09-21 05:10

See your point but WHO CARES....Romney should not get within 10 inches of the oval office. I just care other like minded people think so.

+42 # RMDC 2012-09-18 02:46

Forget Romney's birth certificate. I want to see his tax returns. Why is the media not clamoring to see these, just as it did for Obama's birth certificate.

0 # Jim Young 2012-09-20 12:09

Quoting RMDC:

Forget Romney's birth certificate. I want to see his tax returns. Why is the media not clamoring to see these, just as it did for Obama's birth certificate.

Seems so very much more important to me.

Reagan started tax policies that began improving the gains of the top quintile more than any of the lower quintiles, and gave us the second increase in debt to GDP ratio after WWII. Ford was the first to try tax cuts and actual spending cuts, giving us a modest .2% increase in debt to GDP during his 3/5ths of a term. Every Republican president since has increased the debt to GDP ratio, though GHW Bush did start to reduce the rate of increase (perhaps by the tax increase that Grover Norquist destroyed him with).

Voters should remember that Clinton pretty much carried on GHW Bush's policies at first, then got tax rates that didn't stop improving the gains of the top quintile more than any others, while making us all 14.7% better off, and generating some surpluses.

Compare that to GW Bush who took us all down 5%, converted a $5.6 trillion declining debt that could have been paid off entirely by 2012 (though they claimed they could give us a $5 trillion surplus by 2005, and only missed by about $10 trillion). Our real, sustainable, economy took its worst hit since the great depression under GW Bush.

Those crying about the tax rates should be asking to be thrown back into Clinton's briar patch.

+109 # maddave 2012-09-17 11:35

Naw, Tracey - It's a lot simpler than Dr. Reich realizes:

Regarding Romney. Ryan & Rove in 2012:
Maybe once or maybe even twice, but NOBODY - not Zig Zigler (the world's best salesman from Yazoo City Mississippi) and certainly not Karl Rove - NOBODY can continue to sell ill-fitting suits and too-loose shoes forever. Rove took his two best shots in 2000 & 2004 with Bush-Cheney but now it looks as if WE The People have gotten wise.

Go home Karl! The Texas Car-Title-and-P ayday-Loan industry always has room for another man of your talents.

+37 # in deo veritas 2012-09-17 13:41

Go home, Karl? Would that be Nazi germany or hell? Either would suit his "talents" for lies.

+18 # Robert B 2012-09-17 16:35

One of these days, I expect Karl Rove to come out of the closet, just like Ken Mehlman. Not that there's anything wrong with being gay, but there is something wrong with being dishonest and ruthless with those of your own kind. It makes you a Judas. You've really got to wonder about the sanity of these "Log Cabin Republicans." I wonder how many women there are, like maybe Laura Bush, who dutifully say what they're supposed to say, and then vote for the donkey when 'dubya' isn't looking. I don't know why even white men support the Republican Party. This is looking to me like another Donnybrook, a la Goldwater, Dole, G.H.W. Bush. At least I hope so.

0 # charsjcca 2012-09-21 17:48

Recall that G.H.W. Bush lost because when confronted by what William Jefferson Blythe had said about America, his vision, Bush was speechless. He uttered "I don't know about this vision stuff." He wanted to talk about his resume, not his feelings about the people of America. By the way, Bush owned 11 homes, Blythe had 1.

+35 # lexy677 2012-09-17 17:50

The Republicans always have their "fall back" solution: Massive, illegal and thuggish voter suppression, Massive election fraud with voting machines that register votes cast for Democrats as votes for the Republican candidate. (Bush v. Kerry in Ohio and Bush v. Gore in Florida).
This also happened to a certain in the 2010 mid-term elections. Democrats are either complicit or clueless or both. The point is don't count Romney out; he has a high probability of winning given the opportunities for fraud that these electronic voting machines present.

+2 # popeye47 2012-09-19 18:08

The middle aged white males is a dwindling minority. They know this but continue on down the road. It defies logical sense but who ever accused Republicans of that. Instead of the Republicans being ahead in the polls they are trailing. Why??? The best reason is that Romney's mouth is Obama's best asset.

0 # popeye47 2012-09-19 18:08

test

+194 # indian weaver 2012-09-17 09:59

I am white male middle aged and straight. Do I support ro-money and Paul Lyin'? NO, and a big bunch of guys just like me are also saying NO to these 2 horrible subhumans, and all of the Republican idiotic clones just like them. What percentage of us are supporting obama over ro-money? A lot of us, I'm guessing because everyone like me that I know also thinks like me.

+24 # BradFromSalem 2012-09-17 11:03

indian weaver

Any middle aged white guy that states we gotta get our country back, will vote for Willie and Paul the R&R Boys. (Their first album will be released just in time for Black Friday. I understand the working title is, "White Guys, I love You!". Although there has been some pushback from the White Guy's women folk.)

+118 # ER444 2012-09-17 11:34

Heh, you just took the words out of my mouth!! I am a 58 year old white male and wouldn't vote for these Republican clowns if Mickey Mouse was running against them. That said, the Dems have a lot to do to convince me they really are ready to get it done. So far they are acting like a bunch of wimps, and I for one am tired of voting for the "lesser of two evils". We can only pray thet Elizabeth Warren and Alan Grayson get elected. That is the kind of real progressive Democrat we need in Washington.

-23 # wantrealdemocracy 2012-09-17 12:07

The Dems are never going to 'get it done', if by this you mean oppose the Republican program. BOTH of the corporate political parties have the SAME AGENDA---serve the rich and screw the working people. Our only chance of getting a government that responds to the voice of the people is to never vote corporate. There are other candidates on the ballot. Don't have to vote for Mickey Mouse or the corporate duo.
I am voting for Rocky Anderson. Give him a google and maybe you will like what he says.

+9 # Observer 47 2012-09-17 13:48

You're getting the thumbs down marks, realdemocracy, because that's what happens every time someone is critical of the Dems on this forum. While I think that they might be a hair better than the Rethugs, the Dems are indeed bought and paid for, as you say. Wake up, people! Stop slamming those who are telling it like truly is.

+30 # pbbrodie 2012-09-17 22:00

When the election is over and the Republicans have lost, have at it all you want and you will get nothing but thumbs up from me but for now, you will get thumbs down. Why? Because we simply can't afford for the Republicans to win anything but especially the White House. There are potentially 4 Supreme Court seats that will be replaced over the next 4 years and if Romney were President, these would be 4 right wing nuts, like the 5 on the court now. If that were to happen, you would never, ever have any chance in hell of building a third party or reforming the Democratic Party.
You are the ones who need to wake up!

+7 # bmiluski 2012-09-18 08:27

No...you guys wake up. If you want a true independent then they need to start from the grass roots and EARN their way up. The tea-bags got in because they attached themselves to the repubs party.

+43 # JCM 2012-09-17 16:03

The overriding factor for this election is not completely about Romney or Obama, it is whether or not the Republicans will be able to maintain their influence and power over the Government, the Democrats and so many American people. Their ideology of less regulation and less taxes on the rich has been going on for at least thirty years. It is crippling our economy, our country and our greatness. It is the most profound fraud that so many people, against their own good, have fallen for: making wealthy people even wealthier so they will make jobs and shower us all with their wealth. Of course if that were true our economy would be soaring because the wealthy have never been so rich. We must stop the Republicans war against the 99% and the only realistic way, just months before the election, is to vote for Obama and every Democrat we can. Unfortunately, if we don’t get a real super majority, it will be business as usual.
Some people say the Democrats are just like the Republicans, and in some ways that’s true, but when it comes to making legislation, over all, they try to protect the interests and lives of the 99% and all Americans. The Republicans platform is now, “Donate to our campaign and we’ll make you wealthier.” Their ideology is “The Ideology of Greed”.
Our only chance to heal our country is to have a true Democratic super majority, until the Republicans regain their sanity.

-10 # indian weaver 2012-09-18 05:49

I agree that Rocky Anderson is our best candidate for president. He is now on many states' ballots for the presidential election. I've been supporting him for almost a year now. He's way behind in polls, most folks are clueless as to who he is, the corporate media give him almost no airtime. I will write him in if he doesn't get on the Colorado ballot. Yes google him to learn about an honest decent human like most of us. Does an honest decent human have a chance to run my country anymore...? I supported obama originally, but he's turned out to be a dubya jr. with his OK of NDAA and an incredible number of similarly fascist terrorist legislation passed under his regime. I don't think obama has the guts or insight to be a leader, now or ever.

+10 # bmiluski 2012-09-18 08:32

WAKE UP.........No one knows Rocky because Rocky doesn't have $$$. Thanks to the republican run supreme court, that's what you have to have to be heard. Remember......" Money Talks"......

+6 # bmiluski 2012-09-18 08:38

Why do I get the feeling that someone is paying you to rant against President Obama?

+3 # BlueReview 2012-09-18 18:01

Quoting indian weaver:

I supported obama originally, but he's turned out to be a dubya jr. with his OK of NDAA and an incredible number of similarly fascist terrorist legislation passed under his regime. I don't think obama has the guts or insight to be a leader, now or ever.

Please remember--a LOT of Congresspersons voted for this unConstitutiona l "indefinite detention" clause, otherwise it wouldn't have gotten to Obama's desk. YES, he should have vetoed the NDAA because of it; NO he is not solely responsible for it.

0 # CL38 2012-09-20 22:05

Sherrod Brown in Ohio also needs our support. He's terrific, has supported working people first as Congressman, then as Senator.

Rove is targeting him with huge amounts of money for ads. Please help if you can.

-31 # rmccormack 2012-09-17 12:02

And when was it that you were committed?

+21 # in deo veritas 2012-09-17 13:44

BRAVO! ME TOO! Somehow the idiots got the idea I am Republican. I have never been one or voted for one and never will. Despite my desire to write to them or call them out on it I won't. The more money they spend on their garbage mail for me to put in the trash the better! Hopefully many, many others are doing the same. Make em spend it all!

+61 # BradFromSalem 2012-09-17 10:12

To paraphrase the Reverend Wright of Chicago,
"Republican chickens have come home to roost!"
The Republicans have continued to slice off slivers of support all throughout the Primaries. Romney needed to solidify the party base, whose modus operendi over the past 30 years has been to divide and conquer.
The D&C strategy worked fine when it was dividing Democrats into smaller factions that Republicans could co-opt with sweet talk and flowers into voting for the "adult" party. Then Romney comes along, the only sane candidate in the pack that was smart enough to target his appeal to the D&C folks. Unfortunately for him, that meant to prove his loyalty to the D&C cause, he had to slice up his natural constituency. The process has been messy and inexact. But is left is a party sliced up into warring factions. A candidate incapable or unwilling to grab strands from each slice and build a coalition to stitch them back together.
What this all means in the General Election is that even persons that don't start paying attention until they finish their last beer on Labor Day can sense the lack of direction in the Republican candidate. He is ill at ease, since the positions he is being forced to take, that is starting to sputter and babble incoherently. Their campaign is left with nothing more than invoking boogey men and scary lies because they were so busy dividing, they forgot that the "C" also can mean convince. And they are convincing no one.

+116 # Barbara K 2012-09-17 10:18

They are against about everybody. They lie about everything they say. They have no integrity or compulsion to be honest. They have no ideas that would be good for us, only what they can do TO us. They want to take away our medical care and livelihoods and tax us more, and tax the wealthy less. They are not what we want in a President. They are just a couple of hands to hold a pen and sign a paper.

+19 # Barbara K 2012-09-17 15:48

Here is a real eye opener to see what Romney really feels about us. Hope it won't make you puke:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/secret-video-romney-private-fundraiser

+12 # X Dane 2012-09-17 19:53

Yep Barbara, I was out today and when I came home and turned on the TV......I could not believe my ears and eyes....Romney has tightened the noose around his neck to the point that I am surprised he can still breathe.

What a king size IDIOT. You would think that ALL politicians at THIS POINT understood that there is ALWAYS somebody near with a recorder or camera.

I think Obama learned that the HARD way in San Francisco in 08, when he talked about people hanging on to their guns and was it religion???

I am glad Romney is too stupid to understand, for he is revealing what he REALLY think about a lot of the voters. And I sure hope the voters will return the favor.

+7 # BradFromSalem 2012-09-18 04:14

BarbaraK,

What I found interesting about the video, was the way Romney carried himself. He was relaxed, and actually came off as natural. It was a glimpse of the Real Romney. This video was not leaked, there are a lot of people that will agree with the sentiments he expressed.

+13 # bmiluski 2012-09-18 08:36

What typical hypocrisy. Romney deriding people who do not pay taxes. And where is his tax return?

+1 # Jim Young 2012-09-20 12:34

Quoting bmiluski:

What typical hypocrisy. Romney deriding people who do not pay taxes. And where is his tax return?

But then we might see that he is one of those who didn't pay any INCOME tax.

+101 # Nell H 2012-09-17 10:28

Romney strongly supports lower taxes for the billionaires that are pouring their money into his Super-PACs. The question is whether money out-votes people.

+8 # X Dane 2012-09-17 19:58

Nell H.
This time I think not...at least I hope not.
Romney has stepped in it to the point, that too many voters can see what he REALLY THINKS ABOUT THEM. He is an IDIOT

-115 # Milarepa 2012-09-17 10:32

Thanks, Mr Reich, this appears to be good news on the face of it, even if we know the Republicans are not above cheating their way into office, with help from the Supreme Court. The lesser of two evils, Mr. Obama, may well be elected. Given his record abroad during the first four years of his tenure, this could be a disaster in disguise. Already, Iran, Yemen and Pakistan appear to be on his hit list. What looked like good news may turn out terrible on the ground. If Romney loses we'll never know how bad he would have been. If Obama wins we may finally find out how bad he can really be. Thereafter all we'll be able to do is wish Romney had won. I just love America!

-62 # indian weaver 2012-09-17 11:30

I agree that obama is the same horrible torturer and assassin as dubya, and that he's no good as a human or president. how different is he from romney? just read the latest article published by Chris Hedges on obama's support of NDAA, and fighting to keep it a law in the face of multiple judicial challenges. both romney and obama are hateful organisms, neither plant nor animal because both of those lifeform genera are far superior in every way to both of these inhuman stupid cowardly killers and liars.

+33 # rmccormack 2012-09-17 12:05

Indian Weaver - You need to either go back on your meds or have them adjusted. Ad hominem attacks are no substitute for rational thought.

+5 # David Starr 2012-09-18 08:44

@indian weaver: They are ideologically the same, but with different tactics. It's pathetic that, and it "kills" me to admit this, the "lesser of two evil" thing is still a tactic. But the Repubs have clearly shown, especially recently, that they are out of thier minds. They're a relic of a distant past, given their agenda.

+30 # James Smith 2012-09-17 11:34

"oO Obama's hit list?" WHat is your evidence of that? It might the Rethugnican's hit list as well as on the defense contractor's wish list. But your remark has all the credibility of Romney and Ryan on their worst days.

+57 # carneyva 2012-09-17 11:45

And who was President when we suffered the worst terrorist attack ever effected on American soil?

+19 # Atia 2012-09-17 14:40

Certainly NOT Dubya, based on even the latest by brother Jeb at the RNC! George kept us safe!
His "regime" started right after 9/11, didn't you know?

+1 # Jim Young 2012-09-20 13:03

My favorite is 7;10 into http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeMuDN9Ewyc when Shawn Hannity told Jesse Ventura that Bush kept us safe.

Besides Enron, the thing that set me off against Bush was the 7 minute delayed reaction to news of a second plane striking the other tower. Having worked in missile warning, where we had to notify the President within 2 minutes, and typically had a decision within 10 to 12 seconds, I have a very low opinion of his efforts to keep us safe. Then he made many more enemies out of friends and otherwise neutral people with the Iraq fiasco. I think very many others could have done a much better job before and after the attacks, but we "supported" him anyway. I hope we never again have our trust so badly misused.

+3 # X Dane 2012-09-17 20:00

Georgy porgy

+2 # David Starr 2012-09-18 08:40

@Milarepa: We should by now have a damn good idea what Romney would be like. He's in the GOP-Grossly Obese Party-and considering how the Repubs have been behaving, it's more than common sense that Romney would be worse, if slightly. At this point I can say the Repubs are certifiably insane with their 19th/12th century mentality. And Romney will go along with the Repubs tradition, especially recently, reflecting an old, imperial foreign policy that especially emerged within the world in the late 19th century, prodded by Manifest Destiny doctrine. If you don't think the Bush regime's war based on lies against Iraq was a typical example, then you need a history lesson about the Repubs from the 1890s up to the present day. The Dems are not totally innocent. I'm afraid that Obama may likely continue the traditional imperialism, but with a more hesitant posture, compared to the Repubs who especially now are "intoxicated" with ultranationalis m. (Although they would call it "Freedom and Democracy" which has been used mainly as a hollow slogan for years, and is frankly bullshit. The Repubs tend to be war mongering than the Dems. But both are guilty, one more than the other. And you can bet that the Repubs will gladly go along with another invade, occupy, bomb disaster with Obama at the helm. Check out the history.

+55 # medusa 2012-09-17 10:34

The proposed Medicare vouchers should be compared to ordinary dollars. A voucher is a ticket that can only be exchanged in one place and is otherwise worthless. Why do people who oppose food stamps endorse vouchers? It's hard to find any purchase in the debate on this one.

+88 # ganymede 2012-09-17 10:36

It's hard to believe that we're actually watching the Republican Party self-destruct.W e may be heading into a situation where we will have a one party state for the next four years which, I suspect, will divide into two parties - one composed of liberals and progressives and the other made up of 'blue dog' Democrats and moderate Republicans. Yes, there are some decent, intelligent Republicans who are starting to come out of the woodwork. There will also be a small party made up of the unreconstructed Tea Party types who will eventually, one hopes, fade away. I've always wished for this, but never thought it would happen. Obama was dealt a terrible hand and has played it brilliantly.

+20 # Doll 2012-09-17 12:39

The conservatives have already destroyed two political parties: The Federalists and the Whigs.

Liberals are still staying with the party of Jefferson.

+31 # ProfessorJack 2012-09-17 10:41

Well said. And now we hear thunder on the right saying, "See! This is what happens when we nominate insufficiently conservative candidates!" Big winner: Sarah Palin.

-45 # charsjcca 2012-09-17 12:05

I like the Libertarian philosophy. I was influenced by the thinking of former Governor Walter J. Hickel (twice) of Alaska and Secretary of the Interior. Hickel had a great influence on Sister Sarah Palin and she awaits 2016. The contest might be between Palin and Michelle Obama (did I say that?). Anyway the mittpaul ticket can not get out of the starting blocks because it does not have the will to engage the people. That is not Sister Sarah Palin's problem.

+5 # David Starr 2012-09-18 08:56

@charsjcca: Libertarianism, at least today's version in the U.S., is perhaps a more "hip" form of cutthroat capitalism but still shares the same nature as the traditional version. I'm certainly opposed to Right-wing Libertarianism. That's tragic about Palin's political education. No wonder she comes off as an empty-headed amateur with a fake facade of being "rebellious," which is quite the contrary since under the "hip" facade she supports a relic of an agenda that may be taking its' last gasps. Hurry up and die already. Humankind needs the favor.

+76 # David Starr 2012-09-17 10:59

If Romney/Ryan are going down, it's about time, and hopefully with the rest of the Righties joining them. Thier general mentality has shown that their collective heads are up thier asses, repeatedly. At least they're consistent.

+45 # MidwestTom 2012-09-17 11:08

The view from the cornfields is that Romney's blind support of Israel will lead us into another war; and O'Bama will not commit us to defend Israel if they are the aggressor. Since over 70% of the people are against another war, O'Bama wins.

+4 # Billy Bob 2012-09-18 20:25

Is O'Bama Irish?

0 # Barbara K 2012-09-20 14:43

Billy Bob: Yes, on his mother's side, he is of Irish ancestry. He still has relatives in Ireland who welcomed him enthusiasticall y a couple of years ago.

-9 # edge 2012-09-17 11:16

I LOVE THIS!

AFTER THE 2008 ELECTIONS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WAS DEAD...

KEEP UP THE DRUMBEAT BOBBY!

-39 # edge 2012-09-17 14:18

Cool, the first time I ever had a positive rating!

Just goes to show that folks don't really read the posts!!!

For those of you that can read, the Republicans are not dead and they took control of the House and will take the Senate too, this time.

0 # Ray Kondrasuk 2012-09-17 16:07

It pains me to say this, edge, but your prognostication has some traction here in Wisconsin... Tommy Thompson is polling ahead of Tammy Baldwin for the senate seat of retiring Herb Kohl.

+4 # bmiluski 2012-09-18 08:42

Sister Palin wore out her credibility long before election day 2008. I know several long-time republicans who voted for Obama because of her.

+6 # bmiluski 2012-09-18 08:44

Unfortunately, you are right. The republican money is now supporting anyone running for Congress. If they can't stop Obama from being re-elected, then they want to control both House and Senate and REALLY mess up anything he wants to do. Even if it's good for the country.

+6 # bmiluski 2012-09-18 08:47

I've asked several of my republican friends but none have been able to answer so I ask you EDGE.....You know that Romney if elected will give the upper 1% a tax break that you the 99% will have to pay off. Claiming that it will "trickle down" and create jobs. Since this has never worked (and you know that)....WHY DO YOU STILL SUPPORT HIM?

+1 # David Starr 2012-09-18 09:03

@edge; You displayed the typical characteristics of a politically disabled, and Orwellian-like Repub. Thanks for further proof of those among the Right being professional weasels. You're so excited for your ONE (so far) thumbs up. Yeah, you really had everyone fooled here, alright. Now, you should take that thumbs up, shove it up your ass, and rotate. Then you can get a better thrill from it.

+3 # Billy Bob 2012-09-18 20:25

Thanks for reminding us how important it is to vote for Democrats and to re-elect President Obama!

+72 # tuandon 2012-09-17 11:25

I am 65, white, straight, male and despise Mittens and The Twerp.

+19 # CC1951 2012-09-17 13:57

Mittens and the 'Twerp'---that is precious!

+5 # Lolanne 2012-09-19 06:28

Twit and Twerp, the Boobsey Twins -- gotta love it!

+44 # jcadams 2012-09-17 11:36

You have it correctly --- the great GOP juggernaut has managed to alienate enough voter segments to leave them with a just a core minority comprised of older close-minded white people. And all they have as to offer as a POTUS candidate is a hideous, empty-suit charlatan with posh credentials who made his money in a very dirty way ripping off shareholders and investors while destroying little pieces of the economy one company at a time! But the most despicable aspect of the Romney campaign is that it has been using that vile GOP "Southern Strategy" undertone of racism with constant dog whistle references and reminders to the fact that president Obama is of African-America n descent. Unfortunately this will leave the GOP in shambles for 2016. Not that I care because I'm a liberal Democrat. But this is a problem because our current political dynamic still depends on a workable two-party system.

+7 # wantrealdemocracy 2012-09-17 12:20

No! Our political system DOES NOT DEPEND ON A TWO PARTY SYSTEM!! Why do we have to limit our selves to two? Especially when the two have nearly completely melded into one corporate party. And don't fee too confident that your (as a liberal Democrat) candidate will win. The battle states all have Republican Governors and Republicans as Secretary of State that manage the elections. Next week of so the 'news' may tell us that Romney is pulling up. Then the next week the 'news' will tell us that Romney is coming up in the polls. Then, election day, Romney wins!!! We all know some strange things can happen with computer voting machines. Bush never did win either election. The fix was in, and it still is. Not that there is much difference between the the Ds and the Rs. I will not vote for either of these corrupt parties. Can't you see what happens as long as we vote for the lesser of two evils? It gets MORE EVIL!! Vote for 'third' or 'minor' parties and independents. No D, no R. and no B, no M.

+12 # angelfish 2012-09-17 17:38

Quoting wantrealdemocracy:

Why do we have to limit our selves to two?

Until the system changes we MUST deal with the one we've got! Throwing your vote away is as big a sin as NOT voting or voting for the MORE Evil of the two! WHY cut off your nose to spite your face? At the very least, with a man like President Obama in the Oval Office we already KNOW what we're dealing with. With the Twit and the Twerp we'll be ruled by the Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson! Never, EVER vote ReTHUGlican!

-4 # dbriz 2012-09-18 17:02

A "sin"? From where did you get your theology degree?

Let's get this straight people, if you choose to vote for anyone other than angelfish's choice you are a "sinner".

Well angelfish, please tell us, is it a venial sin or a mortal sin? The anxiety ridden among us need to know.

For the uh, less religious among us, suggest a nice glass of wine, perhaps a Xanax (only by prescription please), then go ahead and vote however you want to.

It is the best cure for hyperbolic "true believer syndrome".

+4 # indian weaver 2012-09-18 05:57

In discussions with europeans, I find they know that a 2 party system is not democratic nor can it be. european systems of democracy are parliamentary, meaning supporting multiple parties / individuals. I find it enlightening to discuss this american mess with those living in european democratic governments. We all need to get out of our borders for awhile and look back in from outside, for a realistic perspective on this collapse of democracy in the usa.

+9 # Robert B 2012-09-17 16:52

People lamenting the decline of the two-party system seem to assume that the Republican Party needs to be included somehow. Baloney. The morally bankrupt GOP needs to be put to sleep. A second party will emerge, don't worry. Hopefully, one that is sane, intelligent and compassionate. The Republican Party is none of those things anymore. It's an institution that has truly gone mad.

+38 # natalierosen 2012-09-17 11:42

The Republicans have done it to themselves. Everyone knows who considers themselves members of a base as I do being a life long ardent progressive Democrat that it is IMPOSSIBLE or nearly so to elect especially in the presidential anyone who runs extremist anything. Barry Goldwater proved it, Ralph Nader proved it from the left, Ross Perot proved it from the right and now Mitt Romney somehow managed to convince this wingnut right wing base that he is "severely conservative" will be proving it in November. He will NOT be elected.

Most realize he did that ONLY to espouse anything that shows him a path to the oval office. He comes across as an empty shell, unprincipled, inhumane man because he pretty much is one. He does not care. If the party believed in chicken soup to cure cancer he would tout that. The party is extremist BUT the nation is not. It is in the middle perhaps tending now slightly to the left.

While I am not thrilled our nation does not see that progressives most often tell the truth, know what they are talking about and are generally humane I accept it is so and play the ball where it lies. I try to select a candidate who most closely resembles what I believe even IF he does not do it all.

-16 # mgwmgw 2012-09-17 11:51

What worries me more is that if the Republicans do not provide electable candidates, and if most people refuse to consider Green Party or Libertarian Party candidates, the Democrats will do things that they would not do if they thought that there was a viable alternative.

I will repeat, again, that if you live in a state where the presidential election is already known, PLEASE vote for a third party candidate in the presidential race. I do not that much care which one, but we MUST strengthen the alternatives to D & R so that if the Republicans do self destruct there is an alternative.

+17 # jmcg 2012-09-17 13:12

Again, I must ask, are you capable of doing simple arithmetic? A vote for a third party candidate instead of Obama is a vote for Romney. If enough voters participate in "strategic" voting or protest voting, those states that are assumed to be certain victories for the Democrats could quickly become wins for the Republicans.

Truly strategic voting would be electing third party candidates at the local and state level, where they can start to build support and actually have a chance at winning national office. But today, in 2012, voting for a third party presidential candidate is voting for Romney, and that could swing the results in the most secure states.

+3 # bmiluski 2012-09-18 08:51

Thank you....You are so right. I wish these people whinning about a 3rd party would WAKE UP.

+57 # walt 2012-09-17 11:54

In a nutshell, the Republicans have been taken over by right wing nuts and cannot get out of it. This is no longer the GOP of Eisenhower, Teddy Roosevelt or Lincoln.

They clearly stand solidly for only one portion of the country--the 1%.

+33 # natalierosen 2012-09-17 12:52

And most of them who stand solidly behind the 1% are NOT even part of the 1% themselves. Forgive them for they know not what they do!

-54 # rmccormack 2012-09-17 11:59

Mr. Reich - I have some, er, disturbing news for you. Romney/Ryan are not only not going down (see Rasmussen Poll, 9/17/12), but they are leading the Anointed One and his faithful sidekick, Joe Bite-Me, and are going to soon be pulling away even farther when Obama's ineptitude in the Middle East is more fully revealed by the media as likely to lead the US into WW III. You are "whistling past the graveyard" Mr. Reich!

+15 # CC1951 2012-09-17 14:00

I'm sorry, but your views, to me, really suck!!!

+4 # Ray Kondrasuk 2012-09-17 16:15

rmccormack speaks discomforting words... I DO worry about the proverbial "October surprise", and the Middle East is the most likely place for springing it.

+5 # bmiluski 2012-09-18 08:53

Please explain to me why you would vote for someone who is going to give tax cuts to his very, very, very, rich friends while adding more tax burdens on you? I just can't understand it. Can you?

+17 # fredboy 2012-09-17 12:00

Romney and Ryan, is Igor, share zip reality. How dumb to ask us if we are better off today than we were during a GOP-driven economic collapse. Duh...

And they share zero international understanding. What's Romney going to do, gang-attack the entire Arab world with scissors?

+3 # bmiluski 2012-09-18 08:54

I think we should be asking mitt if he's better off now then he was 4 years ago. I betcha it's a OH YEAH!!!

+31 # FarMor 2012-09-17 12:38

The two key concerns are appointments to the Supreme Court and election reform, including a Constitutional amendment to overturn Citizen's United. With a democratic president and a strong showing for democrats in the House and Senate, we might, just might have a chance of accomplishing these goals.

+17 # ansleypk@aol.com 2012-09-17 12:39

I want to see Romney's MARRIAGE LICENSES and I want to know how many wives he has!

-14 # rmccormack 2012-09-18 08:09

"I want t see Romney's MARRIAGE LICENSES and I want to know how many wives he has!
Romney has fewer wives than Obama's Muslim father had, not that your anti-Mormon comment deserves an answer.

+29 # Archie1954 2012-09-17 12:39

I think only a masochist would vote for the Romney ticket.

+45 # dkonstruction 2012-09-17 12:44

Unfortunately, i don't think the election will come down to how many middle-aged white men vote for Romney/Ryan but rather how many minority votes the republicans are able to throw off the voting rolls and prevent from ever voting in the first place (this plus those pesky electronic voting machines that counted backwards -- for Gore -- in Florida in 2000 and may have been involved in giving "W" the election in 2004 as well. How we allow privately made voting machines for which no one can even examine the computer code that runs them is truly beyond the pale.

+2 # natalierosen 2012-09-18 03:05

I am SO worried about that too and have written scalding emails to the Democratic National Committee because they KNEW in MARCH and maybe before these Republican JERKS would pull this. After 2010 debacle when an entire Republican state governments were taken over and governorships were as well they should have KNOWN this immoral refuse would think to do something like this!

+29 # DakotaKid 2012-09-17 13:04

Okay, but let's be honest. It's not only middle-aged white males who support Romney and Ryan (a generalization that makes not a few who fall into that category wince), but also many devout Roman Catholics, Bible-thumbing Protestants, Texans (a key state), Floridians (another key state), rednecks, Dixieland dicks and chicks, the super rich, plus a fair number of just plain folks who just plain don't get it and, face it, never will. The likes of Romney and Ryan can't possibly when in a rationale world where elections are fair and voting turnout is high. The problem is that elections in this country are not fair (ask Al Gore), the Republican are pulling out all the stops to prevent people from voting, and the Supreme Court says it's okay for billionaires to buy elections and bribe politicians. Moral: we've got a good shot at beating these guys this year, but let's not be complacent.

-36 # phantomww 2012-09-17 13:49

I should not say this because it is better for it to unknown by libs but I will anyway. why is Romney going down in the polls? Easy answer is that the polls are wrong because they oversample democrats and undersample republicans and independants. A lot of the polling organizations are using the 2008 voting data to use as the sample. They are basically ignoring the fact that the 2010 elections even happened where dems got their butts kicked. But keep oversampling cuz it will be even a bigger surprise in Nov and all of the libs can complain about the voting machines and how repubs "stole" the election. lol

+2 # David Starr 2012-09-18 09:12

@phantomww: Hey joyboy, I think I smell something here and the odor is familiar: Another Rightie talking through his ass. Yeah, that's quite a story about Romney's decline. Maybe Karl Rove gave you the idea. But it does make me convinced that the Repubs are creative; They concoct some entertaining fables. Rah, rah, to your "victory" chump. Still, if by chance Romney wins, and I wouldn't doubt if voting fraud played its' role, the Repubs, given their political insanity, may be in for a big surprise. So keep up with that 19th/12th century agenda. I sense a grand irony.

-5 # phantomww 2012-09-18 16:03

romney's decline? Not sure what you are talking about. While I think most polls are out to lunch (they need to create news now) it seems that a week ago in Gallup Obama was up 7pts but in the just released poll he is up only 1 (a loss of 6 pts in a week is really bad). In Rasmussen Obama was up 5 pts but now he trails by 2 (a loss of 7 pts in a week). And if I am correct about polls oversampling dems vs repubs and indep then the numbers would appear even worse for Obama. I think they are so bad that is why they released the hidden video about the 47%. They (dems) have had that video for awhile but just released it now, why? Why not wait until late Oct for the normal Dem slam Oct surprise? Maybe because they needed it now? Just guessing, I admit.

+2 # Billy Bob 2012-09-18 20:21

phantom,

Sorry to be the bearer of good news but check this out:

www.electoral-vote.com

All your doubts about the polls can be answered pretty clearly if you bother to look. You won't like it though.

I agree about the "oversampling" of Democrats, if by that you mean "asking people who they like better" rather than "asking upper class twits who they plan to vote for". We both know very well the repug party is afraid of democracy in action, so it MUST enact laws specifically intended to keep poor people from getting to vote.

Of course Rasmussen already takes that into account. According to Rasmussen (the conservative friendly poll) Obama is still OVERWHELMINGLY favored to win. In fact, look at Rasmussen's latest polls in Florida, Virginia, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Do you think Mittens can win without any of those states?

So yeah, ROMNEY'S DECLINE is a good way of puting it.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Graphs/wisconsin.html

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Graphs/florida.html

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Graphs/ohio.html

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Graphs/virginia.html

If you want any more details feel free to ask...

+1 # David Starr 2012-09-19 11:25

@phantomww:So you're saying now the polls are accurate?

Quoting: "Easy answer is that the polls are wrong because they oversample democrats and undersample republicans and independants."

Which is it?

0 # phantomww 2012-09-19 18:38

Actually, I think the polls are inaccurate but I do find it interesting that in both Rasmussen and Gallup that the trend is down for Obama and up for romney when EVERYONE is saying the election is over.
So IF I am correct and the polls do over sample dem and undersample repubs/independ ants and they still show Obama falling then that would mean it is even worse for Obama than what the polls say.
ANY poll that is using the ratio of dems to repub that turned out in 2008 election is going to be wrong. It would be better to use the most recent election ratio (2010) than 2008.
Regardless, we will all find out in Nov if the polls are right or not.
So it is kind of a moot point IMO.

0 # David Starr 2012-09-20 07:55

@phantomww: While polls can somewhat differentiate, I don't think there would be that much of a backwards contrast regarding your Rasmussen/Gallo p claim. Having that much of a difference between many polls and just two I find far-fetched. Regarding the over/under sampling, I'm curious if you have something to clarify this to post. It sounds like the the 2008 ratio is used because this is a presidential election, so it makes sense to use that as a gauge rather than Congressional elections' ratio of 2010. If we are strictly referring to the presidential elections themselves, which should be the case given the current election, that sounds more credible.

-1 # phantomww 2012-09-20 08:06

David,
That is why the polling is using the 2008 ratios because it is the last presidential election. I fully understand why they are doing that. It does make sense instead of using the 2010 congresional elections. However, my point is that the 2008 election was an aberration in that is was an "historical" election regardless of what anyone thinks about Obama. Since it was historical there were many things that happened then that I just don't think will happen again. Ex, the voter turnout amoung college students was really high (which helped Obama) and I don't see the interest as being as high. Also, many blacks voted for Obama BECAUSE he was black, even conservative blacks who didn't like his politics. They will not be voting for him this time. Yes he will still get between 90-95% of the black vote but it will be less than in 2008. So the voter turnout was much higher because of the historical nature of 2008 which benefited Obama. I just do not believe (I can be wrong) that the turnout will be as high. Other polls show the Repbu base is more energized than the Dem base. that was not the case in 2008 but was the case in 2010.
Once again, I could be wrong and we will all find out in a couple of months. But remember that Kerry was ahead in the polls and in fact thought he had won when the early exit polls came out.

0 # David Starr 2012-09-20 12:04

@phantomww: Given the particularly recent erractic behavior of the Repubs, Romney didn't exactly "light the fire" of the general public. I get the feeling that many will turnout, mainly out of necessity to not allow an entity to win that has one of the most regressive agendas, in prioritizing the privileged and scapegoating the powerless, in recent history. Given this, the odds may be in favor of a large turnout. However, there's the matter of potential disinfranchisem ent which certainly could lower numbers, certainly not on the up-and-up. While Obama's election was historic, I don't think it would be a case of a "rare event" happening again more than not supporting those who are fond of pulling an Akin, and thus show potential disqualificatio ns that make them not fit to be in office. And I can say that whites of the Repub base would also vote, among other reasons, for Romney because he's WHITE. This has happened quite routinely in U.S. history, given its' origins that can be compared to eugenics. But why bring up the 2010 elections as a gauge if it makes sense not to use it? You mention other polls showing an energized Repub base but can you trust them, given your intial assertion? And if the Repub base is energized, even after the "antics" of Romney, I kinda fear that they are more potentially dangerous than Romney himself, since they want to push him to be more a traditional reactionary. I'm doubting that the Dem base is "luke warm, given the conventions.

0 # phantomww 2012-09-21 08:03

David,
I don't know if the polls are correct regarding which side is energized more. What I do know is that in the most recent election 2010, the conservative base was much more energized than the liberal base, thus the results of 2010. So now the question is, what has happened in the last 2 years to de-energize the conservative base (ie, is the economy better? is unemployment lower, have they accepted Obamacare? are they happy with immigration issues? etc). Now, what has happened to bring the energy level up from the 2010 low for libs. Has Obama gotten us out of Afghanistan (70% of all deaths there are on his watch not Bush's), where is the anti-war movement? Has he closed GITMO as promised? What about his support of NDAA? Did he support the workers in WI and where was he in Chicago teachers strike? Are students who voted for him in 2008 happy now that they have graduated with crushing loans debt and have no job?
I don't know the answer. Are libs afraid of Romney win? yes, but is it enough to turn out as many "independents" as that happened in 2008? All questions that I don't have answers to.
But, I do know that polls now are used to make news and not just report it so that is another reason why I don't trust them this early. The real answer will happen is Nov. Simple as that.

0 # David Starr 2012-09-22 12:48

@phantomww: So it's uncertain then that the polls may or may not be correct regarding "energy."

While I do have criticism of Obama, especially with that "art of compromise i.e., surrender, the engergized Repub base is acting upon reflexively what they've usually have acted on. Briefly, being Right for the wrong reasons. Repubs have actually been more of the warmongers than the Dems. I'd like to count the ways, but can't at this moment. BUT. While the Dems are sometimes politically spineless, the Repubs have shown to be certifiably insane, including those within the base.
They're ultranationlist kind of patriots, support 19th century-like economics, 12th century-like religious fanaticism, whether friendly or hostile.

+22 # sofi12 2012-09-17 13:53

I am waiting for the "pro-choice" movement to challenge the "pro-life" people on their use of the term "pro-life." It should be "pro-birth." A nun on Bill Moyers' program q few years ago came up with this . Really, she is right. A rape victim is "life." A woman trying to plan her family is "life." Or a man. The religious right has some strange idea that all available souls must be brought into this world. I have no idea where they came up with this. They are really "pro-birth."

+13 # Patch 2012-09-17 15:30

Sofi12 - They are really pro-child abuse. They want to force children to be born to a woman who doesn't want it. The result for this unwanted person is a life of abuse whether it's "just" neglect or not receiving the love it deserves, or actual physical, mental and/or sexual abuse. An unwanted child is an abused child.

+13 # CC1951 2012-09-17 14:11

'Thank you to Mr. Reich for allowing us to think and share different views. That is what a Democracy is all about. I am a Democrat and I still have FAITH!!!
Love to you all,
LadyDem

+15 # Patch 2012-09-17 14:30

I do hope that the R & R Team don't win because it will be an absolute disaster. However, unless President Obama gets a backbone and begins to actually do something to curb our glutonous financial industry his tenure will be a disaster also. The USA is going down the drain and it's ready to crash unless something drastic is done.

As for a third, or fourth, or however many parties other than the top two...it can't work under the present system. The counting/voting system has to be changed first to allow other parties a real voice. Voting for one now is essentially giving the worst of two evils the vote.

How anyone who is not wealthy can vote for R&R is beyond me. It's comparable to the chickens voting the fox in to be in charge of their house. So vote for Obama and other Democrats. Most of them aren't great but they are better than the opposition.

+1 # brux 2012-09-17 16:38

I wonder sometimes if what will drive real change is to see ABSOLUTELY what the Republicans bring about ... we seem to have a need to relive the history of 100 years ago to relearn our lessons or let the badguys have another chance at world domination.

If the Democrats get the "ball" they have to make the case for change, but the groundwork for that change does not exist yet and the trust of the people for the Democrats is not really any better.

So, to bring about real change we need either a carte-blanche from a total hatred of Republicans, or a very intellectual argument that will receive total attacks in the media by Republicans.

In other words, the American peolpe are paralyzed, they do not know how to do more than switch the ball back and forth and have no idea what past an election to do?

+3 # mjc 2012-09-18 07:06

You may have it right, brux, but I don't know if this planet, much less this country, can afford to find out. I am not 100% behind Barack Obama, just think our chances for growth is with him...certainly not Romney. It IS beginning to look as if Romney has opened his mouth one too many times...on the 47% he feels are on the dole of the government and his talk of Latinos helping him. But what scares me is his references to Russia as our number one foe and his contempt for China! This man knows from nothing.

0 # brux 2012-09-18 12:52

I don't think most of these things about Romney are that important. I don't support Romney and never will, but most of this stuff is left-wing spin.

Russia is a big foe. They could be helping us against China or cooperating with us in the Middle East, but they are still hegemonic too and so they thwart everything we try to do. That is a large scale problem, meaning Russia could be construed as our biggest enemy.

Romney is not stupid, he is just very focused on on him and his class's problems, and that does worry me because for many reasons we must maintain our humanity. I don't think it is right to keep undercutting our economy and people because many of our largest capitalists are globalists and want to escape the laws and responsibilitie s of America - we are unsustainable if we try to do that.

+6 # brux 2012-09-17 16:33

These articles of telling the bad guys what they are doing wrong is one of those typical Democratic things that should be dropped.

Studies in neuroscience are pretty conclusive that by sending out a message of gloating or condescending superiority you an tip some people into a kind of reverse-contemp t and lose support.

This is one of the core trickeries of guerilla marketing ... you know, it would be so much much simpler and life would be so much better if people really were rational.

We spend so much time assaulting/insu lting people in our society into irrationality, and a contempt for logical thought, because the whole world does not seem logical to them, that this is now the way elections and mass media movements are engineered.

Compared to what our Founders thought Democracy/Repub lic was, modern systems theory and human irrationality throws it all on its ear!

Democrats need to stay on message, and they need to further develop their message because getting the White House (back) is just one - very small part - of fixing the problems with our country.

+1 # natalierosen 2012-09-18 03:06

You have a point but seething with anger in view of what the disloyal opposition does sometimes just cannot be helped!

+6 # tclose 2012-09-17 17:19

It is unusual that I disagree with Prof. Reich, but I do not think it is a given that Romney and Ryan are "going down". Although R&R align mainly with middle-aged white men, that may be enough for them to win if the various other constituents are not truly energized and do not get out the vote. And that is why the Repubs are doing everything in their power to disenfranchise these voter segments.

It's also why the Obama contingent has to everything in their power to get the vote out for Obama. To all: DO NOT TAKE AN OBAMA WIN FOR GRANTED. Stay energized and focused on getting out the vote!

+2 # Rick Levy 2012-09-17 18:47

To paraphrase the old commercial for milk, the Republicans have nothing for everybody.

+1 # tigerlille 2012-09-18 13:52

I have wondered for some time if the Republican party deliberately selected an unelectable candidate to ensure Obama's reelection.
But a number of credible sources seem to think that Romney can literally buy the election. Who knows? But Romney as a presidential candidate just seems too crazy not to be purposeful.

+2 # dbriz 2012-09-19 13:44

tigerlille...th e current Republican Party is represented by three broadly coalesced groups.

1. Corporate banking and financial interests who control the keys to the kingdom.

2. Neoconservative s who control the foreign policy of the GOP lock, stock and barrel and therefore have de facto control over:

3. The Religious Right. A group consisting largely of "born again" Christians who were brought in by Bush the Elder consigliore, the late Lee Atwater.

This group has become totally dominant within the party, which means they control much of the social agenda to the eternal regret of brother Atwater as well as many in group 1.

The Likudniks of course are perfectly content to stir up the RR desire for Armegeddan anytime it suits their purpose, again to the chagrin of group 1.

Group one has therefore decided that Romney will be the sacrificial lamb put up to lose decisively in order to facilitate group one in a final purging of groups 2 and 3.

It just may work.

If it does, the GOP and our nation will benefit, because no matter how partisan one may be, in the final matter, a healthy, honest opposition party based on legitimate differences of opinion is best for all of us.

+1 # cherylpetro 2012-09-19 06:12

The Republicans are dirty, sneaky, hate the American people, say insane, insulting things about us, and they think we should vote for them? THEY ARE AS DELUSIONAL AS THEY ARE MEAN!

Refresh comments list
RSS feed for comments to this post

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.