Skip to main content
Election Update: I broke down and watched the RNC on its final night, and had watched the previous night, truth be told. I won't comment but to say that this is not a bounce. The polls have shown a discernable shift toward Mr. Romney for weeks now, as he consolidates GOP support. He has the unflagging support of 90 percent of self-indentified Republicans. The media is playing up the remaining swing voters. 'Tis true, if they broke in large quantities (like 2/3 or 4/5) for the president, then he would win. But it's not happening. The electoral votes show the same thing; those states called toss-ups will have to all break for Obama. The opposite is occurring. We are looking at a trouncing in favor of the challenger. It's waiting to happen. The media, who are out of a job and out of a candidate by stating the obvious, will hide this. I'll write this here, because I'm bad luck on OFB, but this is 1980. Obama is Carter in more ways than one!

What you're going to see in the polls within the next 7-10 days is a bump up in support for Romney to between 49-51%. This is going to be the lead he won't give back. If the events on the trail move the needle, they'll simply reinforce the shape of the race. How well they are played determines whether the win is "convincing" or of "landslide" proportions. That's the part I don't know. Only a major foreign policy event that causes a rally around the president (like an attack on the nation) could change the race. I hope you like Mormons.

The voters are not going to telegraph what they are thinking, either. They won't tell pollsters now that they are voting against the first black president. The polls will be subtle enough to mask what is about to occur. The chattering classes will have plenty of fuel for denial, but it will be evident on the day.

As far as subjective indicators ("trail drama") go, they don't shift the race, they reveal momentum. Exceptionalism is such an ingrained American value that it is hardwired right into the race. The campaign that sounds shrill is the loser. It doesn't cause the loss; it shows you which campaign knows intuitively it's been defeated. Obama has sounded shrill since June; they made their big ad push in early summer, and barely held a lead against an unknown Romney, when most people weren't paying attention. It's like going out too fast in a marathon; the steady guy will catch you when you run out of gas.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Dear Alyse

 Today, you’re 35. Or at least you would be, in this place. You probably know this, but we’re OK. Not great, but OK. We know you wouldn’t want us moping around and weeping all the time. We try not to. Actually, I guess part of the problem is that you didn’t know how much we loved you. And that you didn’t know how to love yourself. I hope you have gotten to Love by now. Not a place, but fills everything in every way. I’m not Him, but he probably said, “Dear daughter/sister, you have been terribly hard on yourself. Rest now, and be at peace.” Anyway, teaching is going well, and I tell the kids all about you. They all say you are pretty. I usually can keep the boys from saying something gross for a few seconds. Mom and I are going to the game tonight. And like 6 more times, before I go back to South Carolina. I have seen Nicky twice, but I myself haven’t seen your younger kids. Bob took pictures of the day we said goodbye, and we did a family picture at the Abbey. I literally almost a...

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

My Thoughts On The Harrison Butker Commencement Speech

Update: I read the whole thing. I’m sorry, but what a weirdo. I thought you [Tom Darrow, of Denver, CO] made a trenchant case for why lockdowns are bad, and I definitely appreciated it. But a graduation speech is *not* the place for that. Secondly, this is an august event. It always is. I would never address the President of the United States in this manner. Never. Even the previous president, though he deserves it, if anyone does. Thirdly, the affirmations of Catholic identity should be more general. He has no authority to propound with specificity on all matters of great consequence. It has all the hallmarks of a culture war broadside, and again, a layman shouldn’t speak like this. The respect and reverence due the clergy is *always due,* even if they are weak, and outright wrong. We just don’t brush them aside like corrupt Mafia dons, to make a point. Fourthly, I don’t know where anyone gets the idea that the TLM is how God demands to be worshipped. The Church doesn’t teach that. ...