If Romney pulls out, what happens ?

[AlpsStranger]

And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. - Genesis 38:9 King James Bible

Not unless the economy somehow turns upwards in the next couple of months. If it keeps getting worse the message could get to be 'anyone but Barack' by the time November rolls around.

I don't think you can really distill this election down to just the economy as much as Romney's supporters want to. Still, I suppose it could overwhelm the other factors in the end.

Maybe I read too much fivethirtyeight and Nate is biased or something but I'm not sure I buy it.

I definitely want Obama to win, but I also actually think he is going to win.

Personal hopes aside I think it will be interesting to follow as pure politics.

EDIT: Mobboss was too quick for me so I edited the stuff I deleted back in

 

[MobBoss]

Maybe I read too much fivethirtyeight and Nate is biased or something but I'm not sure I buy it.

I definitely want Obama to win, but I also actually think he is going to win.

Well, historical record is working against his odds. If he does win, he will pull off something never before seen in the history of our nation with the economy being like it is.

 

[AlpsStranger]

Well, historical record is working against his odds. If he does win, he will pull off something never before seen in the history of our nation with the economy being like it is.

 

[BvBPL]

If Romney pulls out then there will be fewer little Romneys running around.

That's the idea of it, anyway.

 

[caketastydelish]

Well, historical record is working against his odds. If he does win, he will pull off something never before seen in the history of our nation with the economy being like it is.

The economy was crap during the great depression, yet FDR kept getting re-elected throughout it.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

One.

You're a bad man.

 

[MobBoss]

I'll give you one. Two in the same admin? Dont get your hopes up. 'Magic Negro' aside, people are pissed about the economy, and try as he might, its going to be hard to blame anyone else but him for it.

The economy was crap during the great depression, yet FDR kept getting re-elected throughout it.

Well, he got elected once prior to the beginning of WWII.

 

[AlpsStranger]

I'll give you one. Two in the same admin? Dont get your hopes up. 'Magic Negro' aside, people are pissed about the economy, and try as he might, its going to be hard to blame anyone else but him for it.

All we can do is wait and see I guess

EDIT: Not directly related to my response, but just for fun


Link to video.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Dont get your hopes up. 'Magic Negro' aside, people are pissed about the economy, and try as he might, its going to be hard to blame anyone else but him for it.

It's incredibly easy.

 

[Cutlass]

Well, he got elected once prior to the beginning of WWII.

FDR was elected 3 times prior to US entry in WWII.

 

[Murky]

I wouldn't worry about Romney bowing out at this point. Had a big scandal been revealed during the primary, he might have dropped out. Then again, the right-wing crowd is very forgiving when it comes things like avoiding taxes. They see that sort of selfishness as a heroic stand against the redistribution of wealth. They view progressive taxation as theft. Unfortunately, they don't take into account the theft involved in obtaining wealth. Not all forms of thievery is illegal.

 

[peter grimes]

If Bush can get re-elected then anything can happen.
Unpopular encumbent president vs very rich and uncharismatic opponent.

Don't forget - Bush didn't get elected the first time. He was appointed by the Supreme Court. Your second sentence, I assume, is a direct reference to the 2004 race, right?

people are pissed about the economy, and try as he might, its going to be hard to blame anyone else but him for it.

I know you're not kidding, so for the sake of our non-US forum readers, I'd like to point out the most Americans understand that the economy would likely be in far better shape today if the Republicans in Congress had not established a policy of obstructionism from Day 1.

Ooops. Looks like I'm wrong:

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/polls/232719-poll-most-americans-blame-bush-for-poor-economy

68% said Bush is responsible for a great deal or a moderate amount of the economy’s troubles, while only 52% said the same about Obama. Gallup has been tracking the “blame assessment” question since 6 months after Obama took office. At the time it was 80% for Bush and 32% for Obama, but those numbers quickly settled into the present range and there has been no significant movement in the poll since mid-2010.

Not surprisingly, the poll found Republicans are more likely to blame Obama, with 83% blaming Obama but 49% still saying Bush was responsible. 90% of Democrats in the poll blamed Bush, compared to only 19% who blamed Obama.

 

[Cutlass]

I think Romney's too dull to have a big scandal in his baggage. Just the little scandals that we know of that prove he has no human empathy and is entirely self serving.

 

[Puck Nutty]

Would it be fair to say that if Romney pulls out that would leave Santorum?

Only if he pulls out through the back door.

 

[Antilogic]

Well, historical record is working against his odds. If he does win, he will pull off something never before seen in the history of our nation with the economy being like it is.

I'm not sold on this (summary from 538):

Carter and George H. W. Bush's approval ratings, from June to August of the re-election year, were between 38 on the high side and 29 on the low. Obama, by contrast, is hovering around 45-48 and beating them by 10 points. (Using Gallup's applet.)

I'm not saying Obama has an easy re-election, but the economy is nowhere near as bad now as it was in 1980. And his approval ratings are significantly higher than the two presidents who didn't win their re-election bids in recent memory.

 

[JollyRoger]

Well, he got elected once prior to the beginning of WWII.

He was elected in 1932. Elected a second time in 1936 in an economy worse than the current one and before WWII. Elected a third time in 1940 prior to U.S. involvement in World War II.

 

[Murky]

I'll give you one. Two in the same admin? Dont get your hopes up. 'Magic Negro' aside, people are pissed about the economy, and try as he might, its going to be hard to blame anyone else but him for it.

So how is it going to help to elect someone who has shown little concern for the jobless in his career such as is the case with Romney?

 

[Lord Gay]

You're a bad man.

Just don't send me to the cornfield Ziggy.

 

[MobBoss]

FDR was elected 3 times prior to US entry in WWII.

He used the war in his politcal campaign of 1940. One of his campaign promises was "you boys are not going to be sent into any foreign war." Yeah, he kept that one didnt he?

He was elected in 1932. Elected a second time in 1936 in an economy worse than the current one and before WWII. Elected a third time in 1940 prior to U.S. involvement in World War II.

Sorry, I meant to say re-elected once, prior to the start of WWII. The ongoing violence in Europe was a main poltical theme of him getting his third term.

 

[KMRblue1027]

He used the war in his politcal campaign of 1940. One of his campaign promises was "you boys are not going to be sent into any foreign war." Yeah, he kept that one didnt he?

We were attacked! Why you could possibly use the entry into WWII as something against FDR is beyond me. What did you want him to do, wave it off and let the Japanese walk into US territories?

Sorry, I meant to say re-elected once, prior to the start of WWII. The ongoing violence in Europe was a main poltical theme of him getting his third term.

The war was largely irrelevant to FDR's reelection in 1940. He was already so popular due to his superb handling to the Depression there was no way he could loose.