Can the Democratic Psyops Boost Obama?
If it doesn't pass the smell test, it is probably not true. We keep being told that Obama is leading, that the race is close at best, that voters have accepted a 'new normal' for unemployment, that the economy is improving, that the price of gas means nothing, that Romney is making fatal gaffes. We were even told that the 9/11 attacks which left our ambassador to Libya dead made Romney look bad. Every week is a good week for Obama and a bad week for Romney according to the media. Now we're told that this week's polls are showing Obama creaming Romney in the swing states.
It smells fishy, and it is fishy. And yet it's getting Republicans depressed. The moaning and hand wringing is becoming an epidemic. How can our candidate be so weak? How can voters be so stupid? With the economy so bad, we should be winning by a landslide. Republican pundits like Peggy Noonan and Bill Kristol are turning on our candidate and savaging him for supposed gaffes.
Right - gaffes like saying our Cairo embassy's apology to the jihadi mob was a shameful error. Stop it, you idiots! Your fellow journalists are messing with your head as a campaign strategy, members all of the loyal Obama media. Use some common sense. It is Obama's performance which smells. Romney is doing well.
Keep a steely grip on this data point: the polls that show Obama with a four, six, eight or ten point lead have assumed there will be 8%-11% more Democrats voting than Republicans. The CBS/NYT poll weighted Democrats +11 in Virginia, where in 2008 Obama's exit polls were only Democrats +6. If we give the Democrat voters a more usual 1% lead, most of these polls actually show Romney winning by a landslide.
According to John McLaughlin most polls that favor Obama are based on random calls, not even registered voters, let alone likely voters. He accuses the Obama campaign of pressuring pollsters to produce false results, a tactic that almost won Gore the election in 2000:
The Democrats want to convince [these anti-Obama voters] falsely that Romney will lose to discourage them from voting. So they lobby the pollsters to weight their surveys to emulate the 2008 Democrat-heavy models. They are lobbying them now to affect early voting....Major pollsters have samples with Republican affiliation in the 20 to 30 percent range, at such low levels not seen since the 1960s in states like Virginia, Florida, North Carolina and which then place Obama ahead. The intended effect is to suppress Republican turnout through media polling bias.
The more reliable Gallup Poll, from September 11-17, shows Obama and Romney neck and neck in the swing states. But according to Karl Rove, this is awful news for Obama, because he is running six points behind his 2008 performance in those crucial states. The only explanation is that Obama's old supporters are not planning on voting for him again. The media can spin Obama's disastrous economic performance any way they like. The Gallup poll indicates that voters in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin are not buying it.
Rasmussen's latest shows Romney ahead:
When "leaners" are included, it's Romney 48% and Obama 46%. Leaners are those who are initially uncommitted to the two leading candidates but lean towards one of them when asked a follow-up question. Beginning October 1, Rasmussen Reports will be basing its daily updates solely upon the results including leaners.
Half the nation's voters now trust Mitt Romney more than President Obama when it comes to dealing with the troubled U.S. economy, the number one issue on their minds as they go to the polls. A mere forty-three percent (43%) trust the president more.
Jay Cost is one of my go-to experts on campaign trends and polls. He sees the current crop of Obama- is-winning polls as "impossible," based on their own break-down of voters. Cost points out that the poll averages that show Obama ahead 4%, also show Romney tied among independents.
Bottom line: You do not get a four-point lead overall with a tie among independents, unless you are squeezing substantially more votes out of your base than your opponent is. And more generally, you are not "winning" an election in any meaningful sense of the word when 3/5ths of unaffiliated voters are either undecided or against you.
How many ways there are to tweak the polls to favor Obama. These same pro-Democrat polls show Obama exceeding his 2008 vote among Democrats. Again, Jay Cost is a skeptic. Normally Republicans are more loyal to their party than Democrats, not less, and this year, even more so. Cost comments that even if Obama were to do as well among Democrats as in 2008, you'd have to shift two points of these skewed polls over to Romney.
An Obama win would defy history:
"Through 2004 every incumbent who was above 50 percent at this point won, and every incumbent who was under 50 percent at this point lost. As of today, Obama is under 50 percent."
This analysis agrees with Dick Morris, that if Romney and Obama are tied today, the safe bet is an almost 4 point landslide for Romney on Election Day.
On average, the margin moves by 3.7 percent in favor of the challenger between the mid-September Gallup registered voter poll and the Election Day results.
There are plenty of other indications - actual events, not polls - that Obama is in trouble, big trouble. At the Democrat nominating convention, they had to cancel the 74,000-seat Bank of America Stadium because he couldn't fill it. Obama had to downsize to a 20,000 seat arena. The loyal media accepted the Obama campaign spin that the change of venue was for fear of rain, even though the event had been advertised as rain or shine, and it was a gorgeous sunny day. They glossed over and buried this Obama embarrassment as non-news. But it was real. It happened. Mr. Charisma can no longer fill a stadium.
In Milwaukee this Saturday, Obama didn't quite fill a 5,000 indoor arena. The media falsely reported that he spoke in a park to 18,000 people, giving the impression Obama is his old 2008 self. The media doesn't raise the real question: why does Obama have to waste precious campaign time in liberal Wisconsin? The down-sized Obama is real.
Everyone knows the under 30 set is not going to be voting as they did in 2008. Gallup shows the under 30 voters who plan to vote has dropped by 20%. In the demographic battle, the youth vote is still heavily for Obama, but only by a margin of 53%, not the 66% of 2008. Again, reality knocks. Jobs, not hope, is the number one issue for college grads, and with 53% of recent grads unemployed, Obama's hopes cannot be pinned on a landslide of young heads full of mush.
John Hinderaker asks if Obama has lost his mojo with the young, based on a tweet making the rounds among his daughter's fellow 10th graders. The tweet goes:
Obama says, 'Oh I created 4 million jobs' yeah well you lost 5 million do the math retard.
Among seniors, Romney is leading by 20%, the same edge Republicans had in their 2010 blowout. This is very significant. Obamacare lost the Democrats one of their sure-fire vote getters, the lie that Republicans are a threat to Medicare. Seniors are well informed, and they know that Obama cut Medicare by half a trillion dollars to pay for insurance for young people in Obamacare. They don't like it. Seniors vote. In fact, more are telling Gallup they will vote than in 2008.
Battleground Watch turns the Democrat 'demography is destiny' argument upside down in another voter demographic, race. The Democrat media is full that bravado that whites are becoming a minority of voters, and that their party has the black/Hispanic/Asian vote sewed up. The percentage of registered white male voters in 2008 was at a historic low, over a percentage point down what it should have been. White men are not staying home this year, and Romney's registration drive is exceeding McCain's by significant numbers. Obama beat McCain in Florida by 200,000 votes. Republican voter registration in that state is up 240,000 this year:
On top of registration, voter contacts from the Romney campaign surpassed 26 million eligible voters across the battleground states to date. This is as much as 10-15x as much as the McCain 2008 campaign. ... Obama ... is no longer battling an unarmed opponent.
In Ohio, the Romney operation has made more than 3 million volunteer voter contacts so far this year and knocked on 28 times as many doors in Ohio as John McCain's campaign did in 2008.
Some of the people commenting on my AT articles mentioned they weren't seeing any Obama yard signs this year, in Florida and Virginia. I did an informal survey of my supermarket parking lot, in a county evenly split Democrat and Republican. I found one Obama bumper sticker. A friend in central California reported seeing only a few, and the same from Berkeley. It was not like that in 2008.
When we start pulling our hair out and moaning how can the American people vote for this loser who has harmed our economy, thrown tens of millions of people out of work, doubled the price of gas, it is time to do a reality check. They won't.
The media has enormous power to promote their beloved Obama, and their cover-up on his behalf is an enormous advantage to him. As a result of our unethical media, the general public still does not know who Obama is. They do not know he has harmed America on purpose. They haven't been given a chance to make an informed decision. The Republican establishment made a decision early on to let it ride. Wise or not, that's the way it is.
In any case, core Democrat voters choose not to know that Obama is a radical, no matter how much evidence is thrust before them. The harsh reality is that the Democrat base will vote for the Nanny state, no matter how disastrous it is for the country. Most of them are voting their pocket books when they support Obama - the trial lawyers, the crony capitalists, the unions, the greens, the chronically poor. The rest are willfully uninformed, because for liberals, it is all about their identity as the party of the good and caring and cool. Obama will never fall below a basement of 40-45% approval.
No matter - ordinary voters do know what gas costs, that the Middle East is burning, that 20 million people are out of work, that their homes are underwater. The black community knows they are hurting. Hispanics know Obama lied to them about passing immigration reform. Seniors know Obama gutted Medicare to the tune of half a trillion dollars. The white youth vote - who are 62% of the 18-29 voters - are still brainwashed that abortion and gay rights are the most important issues facing voters, but they're not so full of cheerful enthusiasm about voting now that so many of them are unemployed. The media cannot hide that. Some of these people still support Obama in theory, but will not be voting. Others have quietly decided to vote for Romney.
Romney doesn't need to get Democrats to change their minds in order to win by a landslide. He does need to motivate and register his own voters. The Democrat media hype is designed to sabotage our morale and sap Republican energy for getting out the vote. They are succeeding, aided by our own pundits. It is nonsense. Romney is doing very well at this point, better than Reagan, better than Bush. It's time to cut the moaning and get to work.
The author was a Peace Corps Volunteer who served in Senegal, a clinical social worker and psychotherapist, and a mystery author whose novels highlighted the wildlife and peoples of Kenya. She currently writes for American Thinker.