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

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...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...

What I Should Have Said

 I was functionally fired from my teaching job in November, 2024, after an unjust administrative "process" initiated by HR , and triggered by false accusations the content of which I was never told. My "defense" therefore could have no reasonable basis or direction. I won't say the name of the Local Education Agency, but the town where I lived and worked was Cheraw, South Carolina. I think that once I was on administrative leave, they could use nearly any indiscretion of mine as the final straw to remove me. I did connect with students on social media in protest, and I did express hope that I would quickly be returned to the classroom. The principal of the high school where I worked--a true lackey of the bureaucracy, and fully committed to educational ideas, methods, and solutions that don't work--also allowed his personal dislike of me to take the form of a belief that I was a substandard teacher. He gave me an unsatisfactory review on October 12, and we ha...