It's not just that Obama leads Romney by 5 to 7 points in the vital battlegrounds--as they're still stubbornly called--of Florida, Virginia and Ohio, according to new NBC/WSJ/Marist polling; and it's not only that the polling reflects likely, not just registered, voters; and it's not merely that a meager 5 percent remain undecided--meaning that Romney must now persuade all of them just to tie Obama; and, it's not even that Obama could lose all three states and still realistically reach 270 electoral votes, whereas Romney desperately needs at least two of the states to even compete in the big electoral college game.
Naturally all those factors bring a comprehending smile to one's face. But what causes one to riotously double up as Romney doubles down is this observation from Marist's polling director, as paraphrased by First Read: "Obama’s leads are not 'insurmountable,' especially as the two candidates prepare for their first presidential debate on Oct. 3 in Colorado."
The past, as they say, is prologue, and the best indicator of a man's performance tomorrow is however he did the damn thing yesterday, and so on--all these cliches came not out of thin air (see, there's another true one). And all the empirical evidence shows that Mitt Romney is unalterably fixed on a linear, unbendable trajectory of magnificently infinite self-destruction.
Over the last two months, or give him four, or allow him even six, has Romney improved, as a politician, one iota? Does he seem more thoughtful? More personable? More relaxed? Better informed? More confident? Self-assured? In short, does he strike you as a man who, contrary to all past conduct, is suddenly, impressively capable of emerging on stage, roughly only two weeks from now, as a warm, engaging, inspiring competitor? A leader?
He'll move the numbers all right. In Obama's direction. And this isn't bias talking. It's history.