Romney is the perfect candidate to run against when the economy is collapsing because of the deregulated banking sector.
He's extremely easy to characterize as an aloof plutocrat.
Any candidate running against someone perceived as an aloof plutocrat-at a moment in time when the economy is in free fall-is going to win.
But conversely-the polling will be somewhat closer before September-because Hillary Clinton lacks Barack Obama's novelty and charisma.
She's still going to lead-because George Bush was extremely unpopular and she's the nominee of the other party.
But Romney's support might all but evaporate in September/October.
![]()
Hillary Clinton/Evan Bayh-Democratic: 360 EV 51.66%
Mitt Romney/Tim Pawlenty-Republican: 178 EV 46.50%
Turns out Bush only won Virginia by 8.20% in 2004 so it could still flip. Arkansas maybe too but I doubt it. Arizona wasn't Romney's home-state so he loses it.
How many senate seats do you think could be carried by the Dems in this scenario?
![]()
Hillary Clinton/Evan Bayh-Democratic: 360 EV 51.66%
Mitt Romney/Tim Pawlenty-Republican: 178 EV 46.50%
Turns out Bush only won Virginia by 8.20% in 2004 so it could still flip. Arkansas maybe too but I doubt it. Arizona wasn't Romney's home-state so he loses it.
Why did you switch the party's colors?
Clinton is a one term disaster
Clinton is a one term disaster
I'm pretty sure that Hillary, especially one with many Obama-esque accomplishments would be re-elected.
But I'd love to hear why you think that.