Romney, Obama, Rasmussen - Page 2

MattusMaximus · 17th May 2012, 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by JoeTheJuggler

Let's also not forget that national polls like these don't take into account electoral votes. Obama has a pretty strong advantage. Based on RCP's electoral college map, Obama only needs to win 17 of the 115 toss up electoral votes, while Romney has to win 100 of them. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...llege_map.html

Yeah, this is pretty bad news for Romney and the GOP/Tea Party. The Republicans basically have to win nearly every single state in the toss-up category to win the White House, whereas President Obama wins so long as he takes only two of them (or one if he gets Ohio or Florida).

And those are some pretty long odds for Romney and the GOP/Tea Party. I suspect they have already done the math on this, which explains why so many on the right are starting to get desperate (i.e. bringing back Wright, etc) so early in the election cycle.

Puppycow · 17th May 2012, 08:09 PM

Originally Posted by JoeTheJuggler

Let's also not forget that national polls like these don't take into account electoral votes. Obama has a pretty strong advantage. Based on RCP's electoral college map, Obama only needs to win 17 of the 115 toss up electoral votes, while Romney has to win 100 of them. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...llege_map.html

Arizona is a tossup? Really?

MattusMaximus · 17th May 2012, 08:12 PM

Originally Posted by Puppycow

Arizona is a tossup? Really?

Personally, I think that one's a stretch (along with Missouri), but Arizona has an ever-growing younger Hispanic population along with an ever-shrinking older white population. If you do the math on those demographics, it isn't hard to see Arizona going blue within the next election cycle or two, just as New Mexico did. And the Republicans know it, which is why they're getting skittish on the immigration question. Too bad for the GOP establishment that the Tea Party will continue to push them hard to the right on the issue.

Mudcat · 17th May 2012, 08:23 PM

Originally Posted by MaGZ

More like a Gay Marriage blowout.

The stupidity of Biden, Obama, the Media, gays in the Democratic Party is amazing. In just one day they have made the number one issue on the ballot in November to be Gay Marriage instead of the economy.

You apparently don't get the genius of the move, so let me explain it to you:

Gay Marriage can only help promote a more healthy economy and Obama making this move now instead of after he secures his second term seems to only serve to give GOP something else to focus on apart from himself. He's very sly.

BenBurch · 18th May 2012, 07:44 AM

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

Personally, I think that one's a stretch (along with Missouri), but Arizona has an ever-growing younger Hispanic population along with an ever-shrinking older white population. If you do the math on those demographics, it isn't hard to see Arizona going blue within the next election cycle or two, just as New Mexico did. And the Republicans know it, which is why they're getting skittish on the immigration question. Too bad for the GOP establishment that the Tea Party will continue to push them hard to the right on the issue.

Voter suppression and voter turnout will determine AZ.

MaGZ · 18th May 2012, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

Yeah, this is pretty bad news for Romney and the GOP/Tea Party. The Republicans basically have to win nearly every single state in the toss-up category to win the White House, whereas President Obama wins so long as he takes only two of them (or one if he gets Ohio or Florida).

And those are some pretty long odds for Romney and the GOP/Tea Party. I suspect they have already done the math on this, which explains why so many on the right are starting to get desperate (i.e. bringing back Wright, etc) so early in the election cycle.

If you look at VP Biden’s recent antics, it seems Team Obama is the desperate one.

AlBell · 18th May 2012, 02:31 PM

Originally Posted by MaGZ

More like a Gay Marriage blowout.

The stupidity of Biden, Obama, the Media, gays in the Democratic Party is amazing. In just one day they have made the number one issue on the ballot in November to be Gay Marriage instead of the economy.

I geatly doubt that. I predict the economy will remain the major issue and that's what Republican Oct-Nov SuperPac ads will be about.

Dem ads will only continue to flog Romney in every way possible.

RandFan · 18th May 2012, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by AlBell

I geatly doubt that. I predict the economy will remain the major issue and that's what Republican Oct-Nov SuperPac ads will be about.

As if Romney could do anything to help the economy. 10 years of tax cuts aren't enough. We need to lower them further.

Quote:

Dem ads will only continue to flog Romney in every way possible.

Yeah, black and white thinking. Republicans will only do good and Democrats will only do bad. Democrats will talk about Mitts record which according to Romney is character assassination. I suppose focusing on all of Romney's flip flops will be to "flog" Romney.

Brainster · 18th May 2012, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by JoeTheJuggler

Let's also not forget that national polls like these don't take into account electoral votes. Obama has a pretty strong advantage. Based on RCP's electoral college map, Obama only needs to win 17 of the 115 toss up electoral votes, while Romney has to win 100 of them. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...llege_map.html

Since you posted that, things have changed. Obama now needs to win 27 of the 125 toss-up votes, while Romney needs 100. Wisconsin moved into the toss-up category. I also note that there are 82 electoral college votes in states that lean Obama, while there are only 39 in states that lean Romney, and 36 of those latter (Indiana, South Carolina and Georgia) seem pretty safe GOP havens to me. Of course, some of the "lean Obama" states seem secure for the Democrats: NJ, Michigan and Oregon are unlikely to turn red.

BenBurch · 18th May 2012, 02:45 PM

Originally Posted by Brainster

Since you posted that, things have changed. Obama now needs to win 27 of the 125 toss-up votes, while Romney needs 100. Wisconsin moved into the toss-up category. I also note that there are 82 electoral college votes in states that lean Obama, while there are only 39 in states that lean Romney, and 36 of those latter (Indiana, South Carolina and Georgia) seem pretty safe GOP havens to me. Of course, some of the "lean Obama" states seem secure for the Democrats: NJ, Michigan and Oregon are unlikely to turn red.

MI I am no longer sure of, but I still like the map as it is.

RandFan · 18th May 2012, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by Brainster

Since you posted that, things have changed. Obama now needs to win 27 of the 125 toss-up votes, while Romney needs 100. Wisconsin moved into the toss-up category. I also note that there are 82 electoral college votes in states that lean Obama, while there are only 39 in states that lean Romney, and 36 of those latter (Indiana, South Carolina and Georgia) seem pretty safe GOP havens to me. Of course, some of the "lean Obama" states seem secure for the Democrats: NJ, Michigan and Oregon are unlikely to turn red.

I'm not at all confident that it will be anything but a very close race. I think we will see the map tighten closer in the next few months.

BenBurch · 18th May 2012, 03:01 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

I'm not at all confident that it will be anything but a very close race. I think we will see the map tighten closer in the next few months.

Unless dirt on Romney surfaces, very close.

RandFan · 18th May 2012, 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

Unless dirt on Romney surfaces, very close.

One thing we must keep in mind is the incomprehensible amount of money that will be spent. Romney has powerful backers and these are people who do not like to lose.

BenBurch · 18th May 2012, 03:11 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

One thing we must keep in mind is the incomprehensible amount of money that will be spent. Romney has powerful backers and these are people who do not like to lose.

Yes, and the message that Obama needs to put out; "Romney is trying to BUY you like he bought the businesses he destroyed. And for the SAME REASON."

AlBell · 18th May 2012, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

Yes, and the message that Obama needs to put out; "Romney is trying to BUY you like he bought the businesses he destroyed. And for the SAME REASON."

UnHuh.

What do you foresee with 4 more yrs Obama other than decreasing liberties, higher taxes, and a larger debt?

Unabogie · 18th May 2012, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by AlBell

UnHuh.

What do you foresee with 4 more yrs Obama other than decreasing liberties, higher taxes, and a larger debt?

You're funny. Taxes are down, not up.

But they should go up. The Bush tax cuts are almost exclusively to blame for the the large deficits. This is not controversial.

But if taxes DO go up, then won't the debt go down? Isn't that the simplest math to figure out?

ETA: Evidence about taxes and debt.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_864812.html

This chart isn't new, but I realized that people will demand evidence! Evidence that 10 years of tax cuts for wealthy people will decrease revenue, since everyone know cutting rich people's taxes pays for itself.

RandFan · 18th May 2012, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by AlBell

UnHuh.

What do you foresee with 4 more yrs Obama other than decreasing liberties, higher taxes, and a larger debt?

Suborn facts: The debt as a percentage of GDP has gone down under Obama. Unlike the Bush administration the economy is improving.

What do you forsee with 4 years of Romney other than the same worthless policies of Bush? Lower taxes, larger debt, fewer jobs. Loss of rights for women? Loss of rights for gays and lesbians? Loss of rights for atheists and Muslims. More religion in government? More silly failed policies like abstinence only education? More forged scientific papers like under Bush? More wars and and infringements on speech? More erosion of rights for minorities?

AlBell · 18th May 2012, 05:10 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Stuborn facts: The debt as a percentage of GDP has gone down under Obama. Unlike the Bush administration the economy is improving.

And GDP growth of less than 2.5% remains anemic.

Quote:

What do you forsee with 4 years of Romney other than the same worthless policies of Bush? Lower taxes, larger debt, fewer jobs. Loss of rights for women? Loss of rights for gays and lesbians? Loss of rights for atheists and Muslims. More religion in government? More silly failed policies like abstinence only education? More forged scientific papers like under Bush? More wars and and infringements on speech? More erosion of rights for minorities?

Lower taxes? No. Just not a raise (other than Bush cuts expiring).

Loss of LGBT rights? I'd hope he defends DOMA.

Atheists/muslims? No idea.

More religion in govt? I think not.

Abstinence only? Unknown.

Forged papers? I doubt it.

Wars? I suspect Obama will crank up on Iran pre-election.

Speech infringements? I doubt it.

Minority rights? No change other than DOMA.

Repeal of Obamacare? I doubt it.

I suspect my crystal ball is not perfect though. I admit I don't care for Romney and hope he chooses a worthwhile VP. As you've mentioned in another thread I too see it as 50/50. Dammit!

RandFan · 18th May 2012, 05:26 PM

Originally Posted by AlBell

And GDP growth of less than 2.5% remains anemic.

No kidding. We had 10 years of low tax rates and Bush policies. We had a bank meltdown. Europe had a recession and they are in a second recession while our economy is expanding.

Quote:

Lower taxes? No. Just not a raise (other than Bush cuts expiring).

Romney calls for 20 percent lower taxes; omits details on how to pay for them

Quote:

Loss of LGBT rights? I'd hope he defends DOMA.

Hope? I'm sorry, what was that thing about freedom?

Quote:

Atheists/muslims? No idea.

More religion in govt? I think not.

Abstinence only? Unknown.

Forged papers? I doubt it.

Wars? I suspect Obama will crank up on Iran pre-election.

Speech infringements? I doubt it.

Minority rights? No change other than DOMA.

Repeal of Obamacare? I doubt it.

I suspect my crystal ball is not perfect though. I admit I don't care for Romney and hope he chooses a worthwhile VP. As you've mentioned in another thread I too see it as 50/50. Dammit!

Look at what the GOP is doing right now. You can "doubt" until the cows come home but look at Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. Look at what the GOP has done in the last couple of years. Voter ID laws. Infringement on women's rights. You don't need a crystal ball. Just look at what has been done already.

applecorped · 18th May 2012, 07:18 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

look at Bush

Yay, BDS is alive!!!

RandFan · 18th May 2012, 07:24 PM

Originally Posted by applecorped

Yay, BDS is alive!!!

Oh, I understand how desperate people want everyone to forget the nightmare of Bush. The deficits, Katrina, lousy job market, lousy stock market. So, you engage in ad hominem. Nice.

But, there is a problem, how will Romney be different than Bush? If he won't then we can expect the same nightmare.

applecorped · 18th May 2012, 07:31 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Oh, I understand how desperate people want everyone to forget

True that.

RandFan · 18th May 2012, 07:41 PM

Not sure whether Romney remembers or forgets. On George W. Bush's Tax-Cuts

Originally Posted by Business Insider

source FLIP: “[R]omney spoke at the 10th annual legislative conference organized by U.S. Rep. Martin T. Meehan (D-Lowell) and met with the Massachusetts delegation. ... Congressional sources said that a point of contention arose when Romney refused to take a position on Bush’s massive, 10-year tax cut plan.” (Noelle Straub, “Romney Talks Policy With Bush Staffers, Mass. Delegation,” Boston Herald, 4/11/03)

FLOP: "McCain opposed President Bush’s tax cuts, Romney noted. ‘I supported them,’ the former governor said.” (Lee Bandy, “Romney Targeting McCain,” The State [SC], 2/4/07)

MattusMaximus · 19th May 2012, 04:44 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Oh, I understand how desperate people want everyone to forget the nightmare of Bush. The deficits, Katrina, lousy job market, lousy stock market. So, you engage in ad hominem. Nice.

But, there is a problem, how will Romney be different than Bush? If he won't then we can expect the same nightmare.

Yes, we should all be asking ourselves this very question, especially in light of the fact that a would-be president Romney would also likely be working with a Congress controlled by the Republicans (but now with a strong dose of the Tea Party!)

Food for thought, folks.

BenBurch · 19th May 2012, 06:58 AM

Bush really was the worst President of modern times, and most probably the worst in US History. And there was some real competition.

And actually, I cannot see Romney as being anything other than Bush Lite. Perhaps not as likely to start a disastrously managed and un-needed war. Perhaps not as likely to address the American people while obviously in his cups.

BenBurch · 19th May 2012, 07:17 AM

Looks like opposing gay rights hasn't worked out so well for Romney. He got a dead cat bounce for a few days, but now that is gone and people know him to be a bigot.

I think that there is significant room for organizing within the GBLT (GLBT? I never know the right order, though the poor trannies are always last) community.

ETA: In the OP topic, Rasmussen Obama +1 - given that they have a several point Red bias, the Reds are not doing well at all.

BenBurch · 21st May 2012, 08:18 AM

Rasmussen - Obama by 3. Ten point swing since the start of this thread...

(And it's way too early for it to mean anything.)

Biscuit · 21st May 2012, 09:39 AM

Originally Posted by AlBell

UnHuh.

What do you foresee with 4 more yrs Obama other than decreasing liberties, higher taxes, and a larger debt?

Hopefully more expansion of gun rights

Quote:

President Barack Obama approving a federal plan to allow guns in national parks

RandFan · 21st May 2012, 09:49 AM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

Hopefully more expansion of gun rights

It's part of Obama's strategy to get re-elected before he takes away everyone's guns.

Quote:

source A top official with the National Rifle Association said Friday that President Obama will move to "destroy" gun rights and "erase" the Second Amendment if he is re-elected in November.

While delivering one of the liveliest and best-received speeches at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said the president's low-key approach to gun rights during his first term was "a "conspiracy to ensure re-election by lulling gun owners to sleep."

BenBurch · 21st May 2012, 09:52 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

It's part of Obama's strategy to get re-elected before he takes away everyone's guns.

I haven't been to Freeperville lately but I am guessing they have said that already...

Tiktaalik · 21st May 2012, 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

It's part of Obama's strategy to get re-elected before he takes away everyone's guns.

Funny, since one of the first things Obama did was sign the Credit Card Reform Act, which had a rider on it that makes it legal to carry firearms in National Parks, which had been illegal since...Reagan.

BenBurch · 21st May 2012, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by Tiktaalik

Funny, since one of the first things Obama did was sign the Credit Card Reform Act, which had a rider on it that makes it legal to carry firearms in National Parks, which had been illegal since...Reagan.

Well, what do you expect? Ronald Reagan was a notorious Socialist after all.

JoeTheJuggler · 21st May 2012, 10:46 AM

Originally Posted by Brainster

Since you posted that, things have changed. Obama now needs to win 27 of the 125 toss-up votes, while Romney needs 100.

It's still a steeply uphill climb for Romney.

For Romney to win, he needs to win about 80% of the toss-up electoral votes. If he were able to do that, I suspect his numbers in national pools would show him polling pretty far ahead.

I suppose polls in these toss-up states would be more telling.

FWIW, McCain won Missouri by a razor thin margin. I think Obama could well win it. (If it's nasty weather on Election Day, I think Obama will take Missouri. And I'm not sure all those erstwhile Santorum supporters will turn out to vote for Romney even if the weather is nice.)

Biscuit · 21st May 2012, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

It's part of Obama's strategy to get re-elected before he takes away everyone's guns.

My god it can't get more idiotic.

I am gun owner and I recall before the 08 election my gun friends were organizing ammo buys on fb. Setting up events where they would all go to a different walmart once a month and buy ammo. Then when prices went up they all pointed and said, "See! He isn't even president yet and he raised the prices!!!"

I can assume I am probably in for more of the same this year. This gives me an excellent idea to troll my friends! Bwahahahaha!

Chaos · 21st May 2012, 01:30 PM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

My god it can't get more idiotic.

I am gun owner and I recall before the 08 election my gun friends were organizing ammo buys on fb. Setting up events where they would all go to a different walmart once a month and buy ammo. Then when prices went up they all pointed and said, "See! He isn't even president yet and he raised the prices!!!"

I can assume I am probably in for more of the same this year. This gives me an excellent idea to troll my friends! Bwahahahaha!

So now is the time to buy stocks of ammo manufacturers?

RandFan · 21st May 2012, 01:30 PM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

My god it can't get more idiotic.

I am gun owner and I recall before the 08 election my gun friends were organizing ammo buys on fb. Setting up events where they would all go to a different walmart once a month and buy ammo. Then when prices went up they all pointed and said, "See! He isn't even president yet and he raised the prices!!!"

I can assume I am probably in for more of the same this year. This gives me an excellent idea to troll my friends! Bwahahahaha!

I think you are missing the logic of the argument. Take for instance the fact that Obama has not yet acted to outlaw capitalism. Doesn't that raise all kinds of red flags? You gotta know that this closet radical socialist wants to take away our god given rights to sell transformer action figures. His inaction speaks volumes. And let me point out that he has yet to take a position on drowning puppies. The guy makes me so sick.

Cleon · 21st May 2012, 01:36 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

I think you are missing the logic of the argument. Take for instance the fact that Obama has not yet acted to outlaw capitalism. Doesn't that raise all kinds of red flags?

Actually, I'd think it doesn't raise any red flags, which is kinda the point.

BenBurch · 21st May 2012, 01:40 PM

I'm going to keep this thread alive through the election using the same source for polling data. It will make an interesting history I think.

RandFan · 21st May 2012, 01:43 PM

Originally Posted by Cleon

Actually, I'd think it doesn't raise any red flags, which is kinda the point.

Well, you are looking at this from a rational perspective. The world isn't rational my friend. The barbarians are at the gate and Obama is going to let them in. He will then apologize that it took so long. Your mockery and laughter is like Nero fiddling while Rome burned. ~~Wake up and smell the socialist coffee~~.

Mixed metaphors. Damn rules.

Puppycow · 21st May 2012, 08:19 PM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

Rasmussen - Obama by 3. Ten point swing since the start of this thread...

(And it's way too early for it to mean anything.)

A Fox News poll has Obama up by 7.

The top reason for supporting Romney? He's not Obama. (43%)

17th May 2012, 08:04 PM	#41
MattusMaximus Intellectual Gladiator Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the midst of a vast, beautiful & uncaring universe Posts: 14,204	Originally Posted by JoeTheJuggler Let's also not forget that national polls like these don't take into account electoral votes. Obama has a pretty strong advantage. Based on RCP's electoral college map, Obama only needs to win 17 of the 115 toss up electoral votes, while Romney has to win 100 of them. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...llege_map.html Yeah, this is pretty bad news for Romney and the GOP/Tea Party. The Republicans basically have to win nearly every single state in the toss-up category to win the White House, whereas President Obama wins so long as he takes only two of them (or one if he gets Ohio or Florida). And those are some pretty long odds for Romney and the GOP/Tea Party. I suspect they have already done the math on this, which explains why so many on the right are starting to get desperate (i.e. bringing back Wright, etc) so early in the election cycle.
	__________________ Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher The Times They Are A-Changin'

17th May 2012, 08:09 PM	#42
Puppycow Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Japan Posts: 16,014	Originally Posted by JoeTheJuggler Let's also not forget that national polls like these don't take into account electoral votes. Obama has a pretty strong advantage. Based on RCP's electoral college map, Obama only needs to win 17 of the 115 toss up electoral votes, while Romney has to win 100 of them. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...llege_map.html Arizona is a tossup? Really?
	__________________ “Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them. With Major Major it had been all three.” ― Joseph Heller, Catch-22

17th May 2012, 08:12 PM	#43
MattusMaximus Intellectual Gladiator Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the midst of a vast, beautiful & uncaring universe Posts: 14,204	Originally Posted by Puppycow Arizona is a tossup? Really? Personally, I think that one's a stretch (along with Missouri), but Arizona has an ever-growing younger Hispanic population along with an ever-shrinking older white population. If you do the math on those demographics, it isn't hard to see Arizona going blue within the next election cycle or two, just as New Mexico did. And the Republicans know it, which is why they're getting skittish on the immigration question. Too bad for the GOP establishment that the Tea Party will continue to push them hard to the right on the issue.
	__________________ Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher The Times They Are A-Changin'

17th May 2012, 08:23 PM	#44
Mudcat Man of a Thousand Memes Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 3,764	Originally Posted by MaGZ More like a Gay Marriage blowout. The stupidity of Biden, Obama, the Media, gays in the Democratic Party is amazing. In just one day they have made the number one issue on the ballot in November to be Gay Marriage instead of the economy. You apparently don't get the genius of the move, so let me explain it to you: Gay Marriage can only help promote a more healthy economy and Obama making this move now instead of after he secures his second term seems to only serve to give GOP something else to focus on apart from himself. He's very sly.
	__________________ The major problem with Ocham's Razor is that while the simplest answer may be the best answer that doesn't make it the only answer or the right one. Kopji: A perfect utopia where everyone follows the rules is more like a hell than a heaven.

18th May 2012, 07:44 AM	#45
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,488	Originally Posted by MattusMaximus Personally, I think that one's a stretch (along with Missouri), but Arizona has an ever-growing younger Hispanic population along with an ever-shrinking older white population. If you do the math on those demographics, it isn't hard to see Arizona going blue within the next election cycle or two, just as New Mexico did. And the Republicans know it, which is why they're getting skittish on the immigration question. Too bad for the GOP establishment that the Tea Party will continue to push them hard to the right on the issue. Voter suppression and voter turnout will determine AZ.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

18th May 2012, 02:02 PM	#46
MaGZ Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 6,335	Originally Posted by MattusMaximus Yeah, this is pretty bad news for Romney and the GOP/Tea Party. The Republicans basically have to win nearly every single state in the toss-up category to win the White House, whereas President Obama wins so long as he takes only two of them (or one if he gets Ohio or Florida). And those are some pretty long odds for Romney and the GOP/Tea Party. I suspect they have already done the math on this, which explains why so many on the right are starting to get desperate (i.e. bringing back Wright, etc) so early in the election cycle. If you look at VP Biden’s recent antics, it seems Team Obama is the desperate one.
MaGZ Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 6,335

18th May 2012, 02:31 PM	#47
AlBell Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,562	Originally Posted by MaGZ More like a Gay Marriage blowout. The stupidity of Biden, Obama, the Media, gays in the Democratic Party is amazing. In just one day they have made the number one issue on the ballot in November to be Gay Marriage instead of the economy. I geatly doubt that. I predict the economy will remain the major issue and that's what Republican Oct-Nov SuperPac ads will be about. Dem ads will only continue to flog Romney in every way possible.
AlBell Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,562	__________________ "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." M. Thatcher, Economics: Share The Wealth. Obamanomics: Share The Pain. Important things in life–beauty, grace, redemption, compassion, loyalty, love–are beyond the reach of reason. Which doesn’t make them any less real.

18th May 2012, 02:38 PM	#48
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,912	Originally Posted by AlBell I geatly doubt that. I predict the economy will remain the major issue and that's what Republican Oct-Nov SuperPac ads will be about. As if Romney could do anything to help the economy. 10 years of tax cuts aren't enough. We need to lower them further. Quote: Dem ads will only continue to flog Romney in every way possible. Yeah, black and white thinking. Republicans will only do good and Democrats will only do bad. Democrats will talk about Mitts record which according to Romney is character assassination. I suppose focusing on all of Romney's flip flops will be to "flog" Romney.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

18th May 2012, 02:44 PM	#49
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 10,539	Originally Posted by JoeTheJuggler Let's also not forget that national polls like these don't take into account electoral votes. Obama has a pretty strong advantage. Based on RCP's electoral college map, Obama only needs to win 17 of the 115 toss up electoral votes, while Romney has to win 100 of them. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...llege_map.html Since you posted that, things have changed. Obama now needs to win 27 of the 125 toss-up votes, while Romney needs 100. Wisconsin moved into the toss-up category. I also note that there are 82 electoral college votes in states that lean Obama, while there are only 39 in states that lean Romney, and 36 of those latter (Indiana, South Carolina and Georgia) seem pretty safe GOP havens to me. Of course, some of the "lean Obama" states seem secure for the Democrats: NJ, Michigan and Oregon are unlikely to turn red.
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

18th May 2012, 02:45 PM	#50
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,488	Originally Posted by Brainster Since you posted that, things have changed. Obama now needs to win 27 of the 125 toss-up votes, while Romney needs 100. Wisconsin moved into the toss-up category. I also note that there are 82 electoral college votes in states that lean Obama, while there are only 39 in states that lean Romney, and 36 of those latter (Indiana, South Carolina and Georgia) seem pretty safe GOP havens to me. Of course, some of the "lean Obama" states seem secure for the Democrats: NJ, Michigan and Oregon are unlikely to turn red. MI I am no longer sure of, but I still like the map as it is.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

18th May 2012, 02:53 PM	#51
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,912	Originally Posted by Brainster Since you posted that, things have changed. Obama now needs to win 27 of the 125 toss-up votes, while Romney needs 100. Wisconsin moved into the toss-up category. I also note that there are 82 electoral college votes in states that lean Obama, while there are only 39 in states that lean Romney, and 36 of those latter (Indiana, South Carolina and Georgia) seem pretty safe GOP havens to me. Of course, some of the "lean Obama" states seem secure for the Democrats: NJ, Michigan and Oregon are unlikely to turn red. I'm not at all confident that it will be anything but a very close race. I think we will see the map tighten closer in the next few months.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

18th May 2012, 03:01 PM	#52
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,488	Originally Posted by RandFan I'm not at all confident that it will be anything but a very close race. I think we will see the map tighten closer in the next few months. Unless dirt on Romney surfaces, very close.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

18th May 2012, 03:07 PM	#53
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,912	Originally Posted by BenBurch Unless dirt on Romney surfaces, very close. One thing we must keep in mind is the incomprehensible amount of money that will be spent. Romney has powerful backers and these are people who do not like to lose.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

18th May 2012, 03:11 PM	#54
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,488	Originally Posted by RandFan One thing we must keep in mind is the incomprehensible amount of money that will be spent. Romney has powerful backers and these are people who do not like to lose. Yes, and the message that Obama needs to put out; "Romney is trying to BUY you like he bought the businesses he destroyed. And for the SAME REASON."
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

18th May 2012, 03:20 PM	#55
AlBell Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,562	Originally Posted by BenBurch Yes, and the message that Obama needs to put out; "Romney is trying to BUY you like he bought the businesses he destroyed. And for the SAME REASON." UnHuh. What do you foresee with 4 more yrs Obama other than decreasing liberties, higher taxes, and a larger debt?
AlBell Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,562	__________________ "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." M. Thatcher, Economics: Share The Wealth. Obamanomics: Share The Pain. Important things in life–beauty, grace, redemption, compassion, loyalty, love–are beyond the reach of reason. Which doesn’t make them any less real.

18th May 2012, 03:34 PM	#56
Unabogie Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 5,915	Originally Posted by AlBell UnHuh. What do you foresee with 4 more yrs Obama other than decreasing liberties, higher taxes, and a larger debt? You're funny. Taxes are down, not up. But they should go up. The Bush tax cuts are almost exclusively to blame for the the large deficits. This is not controversial. But if taxes DO go up, then won't the debt go down? Isn't that the simplest math to figure out? ETA: Evidence about taxes and debt. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_864812.html This chart isn't new, but I realized that people will demand evidence! Evidence that 10 years of tax cuts for wealthy people will decrease revenue, since everyone know cutting rich people's taxes pays for itself.
	Last edited by Unabogie; 18th May 2012 at 03:37 PM.

18th May 2012, 03:38 PM	#57
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,912	Originally Posted by AlBell UnHuh. What do you foresee with 4 more yrs Obama other than decreasing liberties, higher taxes, and a larger debt? Suborn facts: The debt as a percentage of GDP has gone down under Obama. Unlike the Bush administration the economy is improving. What do you forsee with 4 years of Romney other than the same worthless policies of Bush? Lower taxes, larger debt, fewer jobs. Loss of rights for women? Loss of rights for gays and lesbians? Loss of rights for atheists and Muslims. More religion in government? More silly failed policies like abstinence only education? More forged scientific papers like under Bush? More wars and and infringements on speech? More erosion of rights for minorities?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

18th May 2012, 05:10 PM	#58
AlBell Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,562	Originally Posted by RandFan Stuborn facts: The debt as a percentage of GDP has gone down under Obama. Unlike the Bush administration the economy is improving. And GDP growth of less than 2.5% remains anemic. Quote: What do you forsee with 4 years of Romney other than the same worthless policies of Bush? Lower taxes, larger debt, fewer jobs. Loss of rights for women? Loss of rights for gays and lesbians? Loss of rights for atheists and Muslims. More religion in government? More silly failed policies like abstinence only education? More forged scientific papers like under Bush? More wars and and infringements on speech? More erosion of rights for minorities? Lower taxes? No. Just not a raise (other than Bush cuts expiring). Loss of LGBT rights? I'd hope he defends DOMA. Atheists/muslims? No idea. More religion in govt? I think not. Abstinence only? Unknown. Forged papers? I doubt it. Wars? I suspect Obama will crank up on Iran pre-election. Speech infringements? I doubt it. Minority rights? No change other than DOMA. Repeal of Obamacare? I doubt it. I suspect my crystal ball is not perfect though. I admit I don't care for Romney and hope he chooses a worthwhile VP. As you've mentioned in another thread I too see it as 50/50. Dammit!
AlBell Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,562	__________________ "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." M. Thatcher, Economics: Share The Wealth. Obamanomics: Share The Pain. Important things in life–beauty, grace, redemption, compassion, loyalty, love–are beyond the reach of reason. Which doesn’t make them any less real.

18th May 2012, 05:26 PM	#59
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,912	Originally Posted by AlBell And GDP growth of less than 2.5% remains anemic. No kidding. We had 10 years of low tax rates and Bush policies. We had a bank meltdown. Europe had a recession and they are in a second recession while our economy is expanding. Quote: Lower taxes? No. Just not a raise (other than Bush cuts expiring). Romney calls for 20 percent lower taxes; omits details on how to pay for them Quote: Loss of LGBT rights? I'd hope he defends DOMA. Hope? I'm sorry, what was that thing about freedom? Quote: Atheists/muslims? No idea. More religion in govt? I think not. Abstinence only? Unknown. Forged papers? I doubt it. Wars? I suspect Obama will crank up on Iran pre-election. Speech infringements? I doubt it. Minority rights? No change other than DOMA. Repeal of Obamacare? I doubt it. I suspect my crystal ball is not perfect though. I admit I don't care for Romney and hope he chooses a worthwhile VP. As you've mentioned in another thread I too see it as 50/50. Dammit! Look at what the GOP is doing right now. You can "doubt" until the cows come home but look at Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. Look at what the GOP has done in the last couple of years. Voter ID laws. Infringement on women's rights. You don't need a crystal ball. Just look at what has been done already.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

18th May 2012, 07:18 PM	#60
applecorped Rotten to the Core Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 10,825	Originally Posted by RandFan look at Bush Yay, BDS is alive!!!
	__________________ All You Need Is Love.

18th May 2012, 07:24 PM	#61
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,912	Originally Posted by applecorped Yay, BDS is alive!!! Oh, I understand how desperate people want everyone to forget the nightmare of Bush. The deficits, Katrina, lousy job market, lousy stock market. So, you engage in ad hominem. Nice. But, there is a problem, how will Romney be different than Bush? If he won't then we can expect the same nightmare.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

18th May 2012, 07:31 PM	#62
applecorped Rotten to the Core Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 10,825	Originally Posted by RandFan Oh, I understand how desperate people want everyone to forget True that.
	__________________ All You Need Is Love.

18th May 2012, 07:41 PM	#63
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,912	Not sure whether Romney remembers or forgets. On George W. Bush's Tax-Cuts Originally Posted by Business Insider source FLIP: “[R]omney spoke at the 10th annual legislative conference organized by U.S. Rep. Martin T. Meehan (D-Lowell) and met with the Massachusetts delegation. ... Congressional sources said that a point of contention arose when Romney refused to take a position on Bush’s massive, 10-year tax cut plan.” (Noelle Straub, “Romney Talks Policy With Bush Staffers, Mass. Delegation,” Boston Herald, 4/11/03) FLOP: "McCain opposed President Bush’s tax cuts, Romney noted. ‘I supported them,’ the former governor said.” (Lee Bandy, “Romney Targeting McCain,” The State [SC], 2/4/07)
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

19th May 2012, 04:44 AM	#64
MattusMaximus Intellectual Gladiator Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the midst of a vast, beautiful & uncaring universe Posts: 14,204	Originally Posted by RandFan Oh, I understand how desperate people want everyone to forget the nightmare of Bush. The deficits, Katrina, lousy job market, lousy stock market. So, you engage in ad hominem. Nice. But, there is a problem, how will Romney be different than Bush? If he won't then we can expect the same nightmare. Yes, we should all be asking ourselves this very question, especially in light of the fact that a would-be president Romney would also likely be working with a Congress controlled by the Republicans (but now with a strong dose of the Tea Party!) Food for thought, folks.
	__________________ Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher The Times They Are A-Changin' Last edited by MattusMaximus; 19th May 2012 at 04:46 AM.

19th May 2012, 06:58 AM	#65
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,488	Bush really was the worst President of modern times, and most probably the worst in US History. And there was some real competition. And actually, I cannot see Romney as being anything other than Bush Lite. Perhaps not as likely to start a disastrously managed and un-needed war. Perhaps not as likely to address the American people while obviously in his cups.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

21st May 2012, 09:39 AM	#68
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,907	Originally Posted by AlBell UnHuh. What do you foresee with 4 more yrs Obama other than decreasing liberties, higher taxes, and a larger debt? Hopefully more expansion of gun rights Quote: President Barack Obama approving a federal plan to allow guns in national parks
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,907	__________________ “... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

21st May 2012, 09:49 AM	#69
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,912	Originally Posted by Biscuit Hopefully more expansion of gun rights It's part of Obama's strategy to get re-elected before he takes away everyone's guns. Quote: source A top official with the National Rifle Association said Friday that President Obama will move to "destroy" gun rights and "erase" the Second Amendment if he is re-elected in November. While delivering one of the liveliest and best-received speeches at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said the president's low-key approach to gun rights during his first term was "a "conspiracy to ensure re-election by lulling gun owners to sleep."
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

21st May 2012, 09:52 AM	#70
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,488	Originally Posted by RandFan It's part of Obama's strategy to get re-elected before he takes away everyone's guns. I haven't been to Freeperville lately but I am guessing they have said that already...
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

21st May 2012, 10:37 AM	#71
Tiktaalik Half True Scotsperson Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Colorado Posts: 2,033	Originally Posted by RandFan It's part of Obama's strategy to get re-elected before he takes away everyone's guns. Funny, since one of the first things Obama did was sign the Credit Card Reform Act, which had a rider on it that makes it legal to carry firearms in National Parks, which had been illegal since...Reagan.

21st May 2012, 10:43 AM	#72
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,488	Originally Posted by Tiktaalik Funny, since one of the first things Obama did was sign the Credit Card Reform Act, which had a rider on it that makes it legal to carry firearms in National Parks, which had been illegal since...Reagan. Well, what do you expect? Ronald Reagan was a notorious Socialist after all.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

21st May 2012, 10:46 AM	#73
JoeTheJuggler Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: St. Louis Posts: 27,158	Originally Posted by Brainster Since you posted that, things have changed. Obama now needs to win 27 of the 125 toss-up votes, while Romney needs 100. It's still a steeply uphill climb for Romney. For Romney to win, he needs to win about 80% of the toss-up electoral votes. If he were able to do that, I suspect his numbers in national pools would show him polling pretty far ahead. I suppose polls in these toss-up states would be more telling. FWIW, McCain won Missouri by a razor thin margin. I think Obama could well win it. (If it's nasty weather on Election Day, I think Obama will take Missouri. And I'm not sure all those erstwhile Santorum supporters will turn out to vote for Romney even if the weather is nice.)
	__________________ "That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons

21st May 2012, 01:23 PM	#74
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,907	Originally Posted by RandFan It's part of Obama's strategy to get re-elected before he takes away everyone's guns. My god it can't get more idiotic. I am gun owner and I recall before the 08 election my gun friends were organizing ammo buys on fb. Setting up events where they would all go to a different walmart once a month and buy ammo. Then when prices went up they all pointed and said, "See! He isn't even president yet and he raised the prices!!!" I can assume I am probably in for more of the same this year. This gives me an excellent idea to troll my friends! Bwahahahaha!
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,907	__________________ “... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

21st May 2012, 01:30 PM	#75
Chaos TAM Chocolate Dispenser Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: The Heart of Old Europe Posts: 9,808	Originally Posted by Biscuit My god it can't get more idiotic. I am gun owner and I recall before the 08 election my gun friends were organizing ammo buys on fb. Setting up events where they would all go to a different walmart once a month and buy ammo. Then when prices went up they all pointed and said, "See! He isn't even president yet and he raised the prices!!!" I can assume I am probably in for more of the same this year. This gives me an excellent idea to troll my friends! Bwahahahaha! So now is the time to buy stocks of ammo manufacturers?
	__________________ Grand Master, Knights of the Question Mark Illusion: too good to be true - Reality: too true to be good Authors build castles in the sky, readers live in them and publishers collect the rent. - Maxim Gorki Folks enjoy a witch-hunt as long as they are on the blunt end of the pitchfork. - Suezoled You can't use logic to talk a man out of a position that he didn't use logic to get himself into - passed down by Nyarlathotep Kids these days are better than their parents since they constitute the newest edition, the beta version of our societies - Cleopatra YouÂ´ll have to accept the fact that some people are just plain nuts. - Paul C. Anagnostopolous

21st May 2012, 01:36 PM	#77
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,608	Originally Posted by RandFan I think you are missing the logic of the argument. Take for instance the fact that Obama has not yet acted to outlaw capitalism. Doesn't that raise all kinds of red flags? Actually, I'd think it doesn't raise any red flags, which is kinda the point.
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

21st May 2012, 01:40 PM	#78
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,488	I'm going to keep this thread alive through the election using the same source for polling data. It will make an interesting history I think.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!