While I give Mark Halperin points for at least not pretending he wrote this article in May about how Obama for America was (insanely) complacent about winning the election, this followup is still a little… Well. It’s certainly something:
After I wrote my piece in May, some conservative writers suggested I was being hopelessly naive, bluffed by a blustering White House with little chance of victory and blind to the realities around it. Perhaps that is true, although I’ve known many of my sources, on both sides, for years. Their dueling hypotheses these past three months have not wavered: the Romney folks have made a solid case of why they will win, but the Obama people don’t seem to believe they can lose.
Being one of those conservative writers – I didn’t say “hopelessly naive,” but I’ll cop to it – I’ll agree that this is what both sides in the election think. I just don’t understand why Mark Halperin isn’t laughing in Obama for America’s collective face. And here’s why:
Below are screenshots for the RCP polling average for May 7, 2012 (when Halperin’s article is dated), and 11 AM, August 28, 2012 (today). May:
Obama +1. Compare to today:
Coincidence? Very possibly. That certainly is one way to put it. Another is: Barack Obama has spent millions of dollars over the last three months to try to sink his opponent once and for all, and it has had no practical effect at all. I cannot make myself believe that this was the plan, and I think that it may even do a disservice to the Democrats to take their spin at face value.
Not that I care about that; but I suspect that the Media in general might.