Ah how the Romneyites believed that with the struggling global economy and anemic recovery in the US, they had the perfect slogan for victory: "Are you better off than you were four years ago?" It's straight from the Reagan playbook, like their tax cuts and defense increases. It worked in 1980 so why isn't it working now? Sargent claims vindication. Brownstein explains:
That question divides likely voters almost exactly in thirds: in the poll, 31 percent say they are better off than four years ago, while 34 percent say they are worse off and 34 percent say they are about the same. Romney, predictably, wins more than four-fifths of voters who say they are worse off; the president, equally unsurprisingly, attracts almost nine in 10 of those who consider themselves better off.
Crucially, though, Obama holds a commanding 57 percent to 34 percent advantage among those who say their finances are unchanged. One reason for that critical tilt in his direction: Voters who say their finances are unchanged also say, by a resounding 53 percent to 33 percent margin, that they believe the country has been better off over these past four years because Obama, rather than another candidate, won in 2008. Overall, 48 percent say they believe the country is better off because Obama won in 2008, while 41 percent say the nation would be in a stronger position today if another candidate had won.
The Reagan question may help Obama a smidgen. If that's the core argument of Romney, it's no wonder he's losing. And if he just gives us more platitudes in the debate about one guy loving government and Europe and one guy loving freedom and America, well he really doesn't think he can convince us, can he?
The Dish 