.

The Sunday Political Brunch – Oct. 21, 2012

My weekly political observations!


(Providence, Rhode Island) – I am now home after covering the second Presidential Debate at Hofstra University in New York (see photo). One more debate to go and lots of polling as we are just over two weeks away from the election. Here are my weekly observations:

Still a Toss Up – Despite all the fanfare for this poll, or that poll, this race is still very much up for grabs. The latest Real Clear Politics average of all recent polls has it 47.0 percent for President Obama, to 47.0 percent for Governor Romney. Assuming that 3 percent will go to third-party candidates, it looks like there are about 3 percent undecided out there who will decide this race.

Trending Romney – The Electoral College map lists nine battleground states that are very close right now. If you simply total all the states, based on who is ahead in the average polling of each, you get Obama 278 to Romney 260. Prior to the debates, Romney had 206 Electoral votes safely in his column. Only one-of-nine battleground states favored him - that being North Carolina. He has now pulled ahead in Florida, Colorado, New Hampshire, and Virginia.

On, Wisconsin? – Let’s assume the Obama 278 to Romney 260 estimate is correct. Right now Wisconsin and its 10 Electoral Votes are in the Obama column, but it is close. If the Badge State flips to Romney, he wins the Electoral College 270 to 268. Is Wisconsin “the” state this time around, as Florida was in 2000 and Ohio in 2004? Stay tuned!

Broken Record? – By the way, my Electoral College math in “On Wisconsin?” assumes that Romney loses Ohio. So, yes, it is now possible from Romney to lose Ohio, but still wins the Election. No Republican in modern history has ever won the White House, without winning Ohio. This may break the streak.

Debate 3 – I bet Libya dominates at least half the final debate. I knew when I left Hofstra University and the second debate the other night that the Libya controversy was not over and had not been addressed sufficiently by either candidate. They could spend at least 20 or 30 minutes on this foreign issue alone and maybe even longer.  

Put Me In Coach! – If I were coaching President Obama, I would remind people, (and do it more that once in this debate), that the world is a safer place now that Osama bin Laden was killed. I also think the President needs to acknowledge that mistakes were made by his administration in Libya. The public is much more forgiving that we think. If you acknowledge the mistakes and promise to investigate and correct them, it’s better that letting the story change as many times as it already has. If I were coaching Governor Romney, I would say he must hammer the President relentlessly on Libya. He needs to do it in a timeline, explaining “who said what” in the days after the attack. Romney missed the opportunity in the last debate, because he was too fixated on just the President’s remarks the day following the attack. He needs to connect the dots. Now, my advice to both candidates is to make these points in the first half-hour of the debate, because then viewers tune out. The quarter-hour between 9:15 and 9:30 EDT has consistently had the highest number of viewers in the debates thus far.

It’s Still the Economy, Stupid! – Bill Clinton’s old line still rings true. Yes, I know this supposed to be a foreign policy debate, but each candidate must show how foreign policy affects our economy. This can’t be a professorial lecture on the intricacies of foreign affairs. They need to talk about how foreign policy affects prices at the gas pump; the trade imbalance that prevents us from exporting more goods and leads to job layoffs in the U.S.; and how selling our debt to foreign countries makes us less secure economically. Unless each man can connect foreign policy to your purse or wallet, the debate could fall on deaf ears.

As always, I welcome your comments, questions and quibbles! Click the comment button on www.MarkCurtisMedia.com.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Rags 1 October 22, 2012 at 07:54 PM
Two wars, one strictly about OIL-Iraq, Perscription Plan D, overspending by an 8 year Republican Congress which took a 500 billion surplus left by the Democrates and spent it on these wars and plans and reduced taxes to boot running up a deficit of 5 trillion dollars--then take those same people and blame Obama. Typical hypocritical Congress, and we are going to get them back--that is stupidity squared.
Naome Lixes October 22, 2012 at 10:32 PM
Let's not get too excited about the "Clinton Surplus" it merely serviced the debt, rather than pay down the principal. It would appear that this surplus was an Enron-style accounting ploy, wherein Social Security funds invested in T-Bills were considered revenue, rather than a self-funding trust. "Both Democrats and Republicans are all running this year and next and saying surplus, surplus. Look what we have done. It is false. The actual figures show that from the beginning of the fiscal year until now we had to borrow $127,800,000,000. - Democratic Senator Ernest Hollings, October 28, 1999" http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/craigsteiner/2011/08/22/the_clinton_surplus_myth/page/full/ We've been kicking this can down the street since Reagan, and with the retirement roles growing, the bills are past due. There's really only one way to pay for this - "means" testing for Medicare and giving Congress back the budget authority to declare wars. Bush put a great deal of unnecessary expenditures on the Federal credit card, to be sure, but neither side is talking about substantive cuts and tax rises. They haven't got the spine for it.
Novan for Life October 29, 2012 at 02:23 PM
naome i respectfully disagree with you the president has offered cuts but rejected by congress
Naome Lixes October 29, 2012 at 02:50 PM
Given how large the incoming cohort of Medicare recipients will be (estimates are 10,000 per DAY over the next decade) it's not sustainable. I haven't read anything like means testing or the sort of patient-weighting choices as used in other State-Funded programs. I'm all for expanding services to the young and healthy, to make for a larger population of healthy older people. Too much of Medicare goes to chronic conditions like adult onset diabetes. I believe the looming 'fiscal cliff' is an easy way for both sides to claim the opposition stonewalled meaningful discussions, such that necessary measures will be forced on the spending side. There's certainly no discussion of raising revenues - before the election. We all know what's coming - less service and higher expenses. Not one candidate that's up for election mentions this.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »