His key arguments for the 11th hour shifts in the battleground states are as follows
- Hurricane Sandy provided him with a boost.
- The last jobs report, by not being horrible, was good for him.
Let’s consider these arguments.
I can’t buy the argument that the jobs report, which had the unemployment go up, thus pointing it higher today than it was when Obama took office, was a net positive for Obama. A mixed jobs report isn’t likely to change any minds either way, in my opinion, and hardly changes the fundamentals: There are fewer people employed today than when Obama took office, people are making less money, and more people are on food stamps.
Now, the bigger point: Hurricane Sandy. While one could make the case that Romney’s momentum was halted for a few days, I find it harder to suggest a shift in momentum in Obama’s favor. Even after the first days when Obama benefited from positive coverage, the aftermath of Sandy’s wrath has once again exposed the flaws in the federal government’s disaster response… after Obama said everything was going well.
So, both of these arguments don’t provide a strong case for an 11th hour shift in Obama’s favor. Michael Barone argues that if you look at the fundamentals, there is potential for a Romney landslide. I don’t think it will be a landslide, but I think Romney can win decisively. A recent poll , and it took a D+11 poll for CNN to achieve a tie between Obama and Mitt, and Mitt was winning independents by 22 points. The candidate the wins independents wins. Plain and simple.
Polls show a tied race in the battleground, Pennsylvania in play, and plenty of evidence to suggest that the results of tomorrow’s election will largely be decided on the ground game and voter ethusiasm. Fred Barnes makes the case for this better than I can. Romney is attacting huge crowds, bigger than Obama, and taking all factors into the equation, makes me very confident Mitt Romney will win tomorrow.