Romney Campaign: CO, NV, OH and VA will decide General Election

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

If he is going to have the focus be on NV and CO if this is close at the end, then that means the etch a sketch will be worn out to win 40% of Hispanic voters.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Did the latest polling lead them to lower the importance of NH? It is far easier to get then CO or NV.

OH, VA, FL, NC are four crucial states Romney will need to win. A win in NV and NH would help too.

Those four states are 4 electoral votes shy of victory (assuming FL and IN) vote Republican. He needs one of NH, NV, CO or IA to win at that point. New Hampshire is the easiest to get, no hispanics, has a slight GOP trend (Now has more registered Republicans then Democrats for the first time since probably before 2006), and the GOP did very well there in 2010. Romney was leading there for months until the primaries got ugly.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Corbett stepped in it with woman recently. Not a good place to double down on considering Romney has his own issues there.

He has other issues as well.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You don't. The main goal is to remove it as a "Michigan disqualifier" (as in disqualifies Romney from winning the state if the nationwide numbers are favorable towards him winning it), and emphaisizing his strength in the process, economic credentials.

Romney's case would be he examined the situation and came up with the best solution (in November 2008) while Obama played politics, ran away from potential popularity pitfalls and put himself first and the economy, the auto companies and tax payers second. Once you establish that both would have saved the auto industry (though through different means), it becames a refrendum not only on the results acheived but the decisions made and why. That is why I expect to see a lot of "This Mittens guy wanted you to go drop dead" from the Democrats with regards to Michigan.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The key that you guys (excluding Torie) is missing, is "the plan". By which I mean the plan to restructure the companies and get them financially solvent and profitable. That is the goal of any bankruptcy. The plan is the key to restructuring a company, not the money. The money is just the enabler. The only reason that companies are liquidated, barring some outside force (credit crunch, see below), would be if no viable plan could be created. The plan is the key. Unless you create a restructuring plan, the companies would have been doomed, even with the entire treasury propping them up as zombie companies. The only reason GM is not currently so, is because Obama finally did put them into bankruptcy and forced them to accept a flawed, but financially "viable" plan. The "bailout" Romney said would doom them, was the bailout the owners requested in November 2008 (remember when Mitt wrote that article), which was cash to preserve the insolvent status quo, the bailout that Bush and Obama gave them for seven months.

In a prepackaged bankrupcty you get the plan drawn up first, before you go to a judge. Then you go to a judge and he reviews the plan to see if it is viable or not and then if it is he approves it. All that could have been done in a weeks time. You get the unions and Execs into a room, lock it TR style and force them to make a deal. If they refuse and the goverment has to provide "temporary cash to them", you make clear to them the price for such emergency funding is the job of every GM executive. In one night you have a plan, the paper pushers draw up the details and in few days you can go to the judge as described above. Of course Bush was President at the time, meaning the new President would have had to work with the out going President to implement this. I can imagine Romney fully willing to do just that, Obama not so much.

As for the Credit Crunch, that is where the Federal roles comes into play. You guarrentee the warrantees and offer 100% gov't backing to any potential creditors (no risk, absolute chance of reward) ahead of going to court. If no one ponies up the cash, then and only then do you offer the companies direct gov't loans.

You go to the judge with the plan and the cash in hand. Chances of liquidation are less then zero. The companies are on the road to recovery and it ain't even New Years. Not a dime of tax paper's money has been spent to prop up a failed company, only to implement a viable restructuring plan. The Markets applaud the action of the out-going and in-going President working to provide stability, at a time when such was desperately needed.  

That is what Romney had called for in November 2008. The Bloomberg article, the Economist, and even the stupid Michigan Governor himself (Who hasn't actually been made of aware of what Romney exactly called for because "He wants to focus on the future and not the past", as he said on "Meet the Press" a few weeks ago.) are ignoring key elements of "the Romney Proposal", which is what allows them to run headlines like "Holes in Romney's Plan","Romney's plan risked disaster" etc etc etc

And of course, don't you think a business consultant and venture capitalist would know how to put a company through bankrcupty and avoid its liquidation?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

At least he's been saddled with an unfortunate headline "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt" which puts him out of the running of making MI competitive.

I wouldn't rest on that if that is your plan to "disqualify" Romney as a competitor in Michigan.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Lets talk about the Michigan Governor for a minute. Mike Snyder a is in fact a moderate hero and he is in some measure throwing Mittens under the bus on this issue to try and create a national image as a "Solutions Governor" focused on the future and not the past and working to get things done, in the hopes that it will filter back to Michigan, revive his poll numbers, and allow him to get reelected.


He is in fact completely ignorant on this issue (on purpose I might add) and Romney should have barred him as a surrogate after the Meet the Press interview.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It appears that we (or I at least) have poor communication skills, because we are just not making any headway here Senator North Carolina Yankee. Ditto on the ludicrously inane Buffet Rule. The House is so divided, that folks on either side sadly seem to have stopped listening to each other (and/or find my text incomprehensible).

That is why I expect to see a lot of "This Mittens guy wanted you to go drop dead" from the Democrats with regards to Michigan.

Also the problem is that any small post can't encompass all the details, kind of like those stupid articles and therefore you get the, "Oh but he wouldn't have assured this or risked that omg omg omg...". Any long post that does will get a tl;dr response.