Have you seen some of those anti-Romney, mud-slinging TV spots? If so, you’ll be glad to know that Barack Obama’s attack ads are not only falling short of their goal of tearing down Romney’s character, but according to one survey are actually energizing Republican enthusiasm to vote against Obama.
The survey just released by Evolving Strategies (ES) shows that Obama’s mud-slinging has driven Republican enthusiasm to a stunning 42 points higher than it was in 2008. Unfortunately, ES doesn’t mention which baseline of enthusiasm for each candidate they used for comparison, so we can only guess which numbers to use. In October 2008, Gallup reported that 70% of Democrats and 51% of Republicans were very enthusiastic to vote. That 19 point spread gave Obama a near landslide victory with a 7% popular vote margin.
Since ES reports a 42% Republican enthusiasm edge for Romney and “Obama’s ads did not boost Democratic enthusiasm for the president,” using Gallup’s numbers means a stunning 93% Republican enthusiasm level.
If ES’s numbers are even near accurate (and “near accurate” is not an unreasonable level), than we are watching the makings of a huge wave election that could easily surpass the results of the 2010 election.
ES’s accompanying message opines that the differences between polls of “registered” voters and “likely” voters occur because of enthusiasm. This begs the question: how can any of these polls show Barack Obama even close to Mitt Romney? With 8 points as the smallest enthusiasm edge for Romney that can be found, and a number of surveys showing 15 or 16 point margins, the use of 2008’s turnout numbers of 31 Republicans, 38 Democrats, and 31 Independents as a turnout model for 2012 are totally indefensible.
When asked whether Obama would be able to close this enthusiasm gap before November 6, the ES spokesman said, “I don’t know if there is enough time for Obama’s ads to work,” which translates to “No” in real people speak.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.