Now they tell us

The suckers never get tired of being suckers. Per Matt O’Brien @obsoletedogma: “Romney’s last internal poll had Obama winning Ohio by 5 points.”

Per Tweet from the Atlantic’s Matt O’Brien @obsoletedogma:

Romney’s last internal poll had Obama winning Ohio by 5 points.

Machiavelli and Barnum were right: the suckers never get tired of being suckers.
I’d love to hear a reporter ask some Romney spinner about this tonight: “Why did you lie to everyone about how the campaign was going?

Author: Mark Kleiman

Professor of Public Policy at the NYU Marron Institute for Urban Management and editor of the Journal of Drug Policy Analysis. Teaches about the methods of policy analysis about drug abuse control and crime control policy, working out the implications of two principles: that swift and certain sanctions don't have to be severe to be effective, and that well-designed threats usually don't have to be carried out. Books: Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know (with Jonathan Caulkins and Angela Hawken) When Brute Force Fails: How to Have Less Crime and Less Punishment (Princeton, 2009; named one of the "books of the year" by The Economist Against Excess: Drug Policy for Results (Basic, 1993) Marijuana: Costs of Abuse, Costs of Control (Greenwood, 1989) UCLA Homepage Curriculum Vitae Contact:

5 thoughts on “Now they tell us”

  1. Still, the judge ruled that the last minute E.S.&S. software “patches” could remain on Ohio ballot counters/tabulators. So, GUARD! those paper ballots until we’re absolutely sure the tabulators haven’t stolen anything. Watch those ballot boxes like democracy-loving hawks until the all clear is sounded. No bathroom breaks during your watch!!.

  2. Look at the frabjous side of things Mark:

    After today we won’t ever have to watch Romney step to the podium with his rich man’s smirk, after some world crisis somewhere, and entertain questions as if he is the President of the United States.

    Crikey man!
    Play pretend ends tonight!
    Ain’t it good to be alive?

  3. Despite being a total goody two shoes (for those of you old enough to recognize that expression) I don’t see this the same way Mark does. Are the dozens of emails I’ve gotten from the Obama campaign and surrogates in the last couple of days exclaiming that the races is tied, TIED!, also lies?

    Even if you are losing a presidential campaign you have to keep your game face on. Looking like a loser is a self-fulfilling prophecy and, in addition, you owe it to the down-ticket races to keep the best face on things as possible. On the other hand, looking like you are crusing to a win can also suppress your own vote. So both sides will play like it’s a competetive race whether it is or not. I don’t see anything wrong with that. That part is a game and those are the rules.

    Besides, going overboard over such things makes it easier for people like Brett to trumpet their false equivalences in places where it really does matter.

    I followed someone’s comment link a while back to a WSJ editorial about all of Obama’s “lies”. It was cut from exactly that cloth. “Obama was for same-sex marriage before he was against it and now he’s for it again!” In the real world, Obama has been a staunch supporter of gay rights for a long time. He’s never wavered on that except by equivocating on one particular highly controversial issue even while making it clear his current position on that issue was not final. It appears to me that he made a political calculation that he might scuttle his chances to be president if he explicitly came out in support of gay marriage four years ago. As a gay person, I don’t fault him for that. I think we can only ask our leaders to get so far ahead of the rest of the country and running the country is about more than just me. Again, it’s been clear all along that he’s a strong supporter of equal rights for gay people. He’s done many concrete things as President to underscore that support–killing DADT, opening up some benefits, etc. Mitt Romney, on the other hand, when running in MA, claimed he would be “to the left of Ted Kennedy on gay rights”. That’s not what he’s telling his base today. Which one is true? How would you know? Romney apparently recently told the Log Cabin Republicans privately that he supports non-discrimination in employment–not that they could get him to support any specific legislation, of course. Where does he stand and what would he do as President? I’m guessing from his skimpy record in MA and the base he’ll be beholden to if he wins that it won’t be what he led the Log Cabin guys to beleive he would do but who can say for sure?

    To me, there’s a world of difference between what Obama has done and what Romney has done just as I think there’s a world of difference between lying about how well you are doing in the polls at the last minute and lying about major areas of policy.

    I also think it’s in the best interests of the Reality-Based Community to keep those differences in perspective.

  4. I’m with Doretta – saying you’re doing fine when your internal polls say you’re not is not really counted as a lie in politics. It’s keeping morale up, it’s avoiding the self-fulfilling prophecy etc – and ditto in reverse if you think you are doing well – don’t let people relax!

    Romney has a pack of lies to drag around him that would make Jacob Marley’s chains look like cobwebs, but I can’t weigh this one against him.

Comments are closed.