Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman
|
The parts you quoted do note indicate a very well thought through position.
Quote:
The “Chuck Todd theory of American politics”: “The idea that there is this informed, engaged American population that is watching these political events and watching their elected leaders and assessing their behavior and making a judgment.”
“And it is just not true.”
|
Okay, I'm with you, I think this is a reality that is not talked about enough... let's see what's next.
Quote:
|
There are just simply more Democrats in much of the country, and if they are activated by a belief that, say, the Republican presidential nominee is a heartless plutocrat who thinks 47 percent of the population can be written off as grifters and that corporations are people, and the Democrat gets just a handful of those true independents, then it becomes impossible for Republicans to win.
|
You've... you've just explained Obama's victory in Ohio in 2012 by returning to the very same "Chuck Todd" theory you said you didn't believe in! The Republican base in Ohio simply did not have any reason to believe that Romney would do anything for them in their day to day lives. Meanwhile, Obama was popular - from September onwards in 2012, his approval rating never dropped below 48 according to gallup, was generally in the low 50s and peaked at 57.
No, Obama did not win Ohio because of some gotcha comment Romney made in a blurry video that dominated CNN for a few days. Attributing the victory to that sort of event is missing the point entirely,
yet again.