So I got two immediate responses to my post on Wednesday about Romney’s All-Lying-All-The-Time strategy, and how it is working to give him a chance to win the election. The first reaction was from a friend who sent me an IM that said, “I shouldn’t have read your blog this morning. The thought of a Romney victory was not a good way to start the day.” The second was from my boss (and friend) who told me I was over-reacting.
So for the two camps (“OMG Wiesman says Romney might win we’re all gonna die!” and “LOL Wiesman is an idiot he thinks Romney can win.”) let me clarify what I meant when I said, “Romney might win this thing.” Here’s what I meant: Romney might win this thing. Yes, I think Obama is favored. Nate Silver has proven himself to be a reliable prognosticator and he currently is projecting Obama with a 72% chance of winning. Sounds about right.
But 28% is 28%. I see things happen all the time that only had a 28% or less chance of happening. So it’s about a 3-to-1 shot for Obama. Great. My point was that it shouldn’t even be that close.
Mitt Romney is a terrible terrible candidate. He’s… well, he’s weird. I mean, he’s really odd. And he lies. All the time. About everything. About things that are easy to verify. And he changes his “deeply-held convictions” at the drop of a hat. All the time.
This should be considered newsworthy. A major political party’s nominee for the highest office in the land is a serial liar. This should be discussed at length on all the major network newscasts. It’s not. They don’t dare.
Look at what happened with those two ads that were released, that I talked about on Wednesday. Romney’s ad was a blatant lie, verifiably false, and approved by the candidate. Obama’s SuperPAC ad was factually correct, at worst misleading in that it didn’t make clear that 5 years had passed. The “liberal media” proclaimed them both to be the same thing, examples of equivalency in the never-ending kabuki number called “both sides do it.”
That’s why Obama is only at 72%. It shouldn’t be close, but the punditocracy isn’t interested in an Obama landslide, or a Romney landslide for that matter. No, what they want, what they really need in fact, is a close race. And Romney is canny enough that he realizes that no one is ever going to hold him to account for telling those blatant lies, and that anyone who does will be labeled as biased anyway. (Like me, except, well, yeah, I am biased.) And if he can get away with telling enough lies he might be able to hang around and keep it close enough to win if something bad happens in October. You never know.
Anyway, that was the point of writing “Romney might win this thing.”
I started writing all that above this morning, but couldn’t get back to it until tonight. I’m leaving to take a two-week vacation with the wife and kids in Florida tomorrow, and today was hectic. While I was trying to finish this post, the news broke that Mitt Romney is going to choose Paul Ryan as his running mate. This prompted me to fire up the ol’ anagram generator and come up with this:
Anyway, if this turns out to be true, and it is looking pretty solid, I’ll be delighted. If you want to know the effect of Paul Ryan being on the ticket, take a look at the New York 26th Congressional District special election in 2011. That’s the Paul Ryan gift that will keep on giving to Democrats. The House is in play. I have no idea what the GOP is thinking.
Aside from the electoral prospects for Democrats, I think this turns the election into a battle of two competing visions for the country. Do you believe in Social Security? Do you like Medicare? That’s what is at stake here. One side thinks these things are a small step from communism. The other side might finally stand up and defend them.
As I said, we’re leaving to go to Florida for two weeks, and I’m not sure how much I’ll be posting. Don’t worry though. We are getting out of there just before the GOP convention begins so the kids should be safe.