Romney's redeployment of assets from NC seems like a reasonable calculation, given his needs elsewhere and apparent strength here1. My (entirely unscientific) analysis of the Mittenization of our state includes: Residual energy and organization among conservatives after the May primary vote on Amendment 1, and possible erosion of enthusiasm for a newly pro-gay-marriage Obama among black voters in the wake of same; stubbornly high unemployment; a gubernatorial race in which GOP candidate Pat McCrory seems a near-inevitable winner2; the slow and to a meaningful degree self-inflicted death of the old Democratic machine; and frustration among Democrats who see the new GOP-drawn voting maps creating insurmountable odds.
1Obama's ground game made the difference here in 2008, but by the thinnest of margins. If his team can repeat the feat this year, someone should write another case study.
2I'd guess that a lot of Democrats are pretty comfortable with the assumption that McCrory, a sensible Guilford County native, will govern more like he did as Mayor of Charlotte and less as the hard-liner he's pretended to be on the campaign trail. Ditto for Romney, for that matter.
I suppose also that many people are upset that Obama did in fact govern as the hard liner that he is in contrast to the candidate he was in 2008.
Posted by: Spag | Oct 19, 2012 at 12:03 PM
I think a lot of people who voted for Obama are disappointed in his Bush Lite presidency and dismayed with his watered-down approaches to Wall Street, health care, Gitmo, etc., and that these Hey Wait Where's That Liberal We Elected? factors might contribute to some lack of enthusiasm for his campaign.
Posted by: Ed Cone | Oct 19, 2012 at 12:34 PM
And of course there's always the fact that few people I know in NC are better off than they were four years ago.
People are fatigued. Gas prices have doubled. Food prices have risen. They're tired of hearing about the 1%. They're tired of hearing that Bush is to blame. Obama has made Bush's irresponsible spending look modest by comparison.
People look at Romney and they see a competent, forthright, forceful leader.
Posted by: formerly gt | Oct 19, 2012 at 01:03 PM
That anyone believes Obama was Bush light says more of their latent extremism than it does of any lack thereof on Obama's part.
Posted by: polifrog | Oct 19, 2012 at 02:34 PM
Actually, I think a lot of Obama's problem is the result of independents asking "hey, where is the moderate we thought we elected?".
Anyone who believes that a modern president will lose an election for not being liberal enough is fooling themselves.
Posted by: Spag | Oct 19, 2012 at 02:54 PM
It turns out that Obama is "not optimal"
Posted by: formerly gt | Oct 19, 2012 at 04:11 PM
"Anyone who believes that a modern president will lose an election for not being liberal enough is fooling themselves.'
It's called "whistling past the graveyard", and no one does it better than the blahg host and his kindred spirits.
Posted by: bubba | Oct 19, 2012 at 08:50 PM
No, I think Ed got this one right, and bubba and company don't see it. Liberal idealism was thrown under the bus again and again in search for that middle ground we could all agree on. But alas, that was not forthcoming from a Republican Party that had decided that defeating Obama trumped governance.
In our lifetime we've not seen an entire party so united in their determination to stand still.
Posted by: Bill Yaner | Oct 20, 2012 at 01:28 AM
"But alas, that was not forthcoming from a Republican Party that had decided that defeating Obama trumped governance."
You nailed it. The dem meme that is.
The fact is we saw a party united against the largest assault on liberty by a president.
in May his budget proposal was defeated *unanimously* by *BOTH* the senate and house. and where was/is his immigration bill? did he put forth a single payer system?
and unless you forget Bill, the dems controlled congress for Obama's 1st two years. that situation didn't stop Reagan - did it?
he's not the man you thought he was. he's not the man i hoped he'd be. he's failed. and it's time for us to move on.
Posted by: formerly gt | Oct 20, 2012 at 08:56 AM
Reagan and Tip O'Neal sitting together with a bottle of scotch - and no press around for photo opps is governance at work to move us forward. And no, gt (formerly), Obama is no Reagan.
However, while we're nailing memes, you got that Republican one down perfectly , didn't you, about Obama having his way in Congress for the first two years. But thanks to that lovely Senate rule called filibuster where you don't even have to get up and talk any more (that was so taxing), that Obama friendly Congress never in fact existed.
Posted by: Bill Yaner | Oct 20, 2012 at 09:50 AM
"But thanks to that lovely Senate rule called filibuster....."
.....which happened how many times (exactly) during that period?
Posted by: bubba | Oct 20, 2012 at 11:57 AM
You're right, bubba. Without the votes to break a filibuster the bill doesn't even get to the floor.
Posted by: Bill Yaner | Oct 20, 2012 at 12:59 PM
^The fact that there is "no middle ground" is not the result of Republican construct. It's the result of the "elections have consequences" arrogance and obstinance of the Obama cabal.
We have a chance to drive a stake through the heart of that meme in less than three weeks. Let's see if we (the American people) are smart enough to do so.
Posted by: bubba | Oct 20, 2012 at 05:41 PM
If a cabal is a secret political group of insiders, how did you discover it bubba?
Posted by: Bill Yaner | Oct 20, 2012 at 06:24 PM
Like if Romney wins and the reps take the senate, the dems will not filibuster. And if Romney wins and the dems keep the senate, reid will bring every Romney proposal to the floor.
Wonder what the meme will be then? saving the country from the extreme right wing who wants to starve grandma, pollute our water, and deny medical coverage to the poor?
Posted by: formerly gt | Oct 21, 2012 at 12:21 PM