US Presidential Election: Tuesday November 6th, 2012

Status
Not open for further replies.
Some very good polling for Obama. He's only *** on PPP(D) in North Carolina. So I'm more sure than ever that Romney will pick this state up, baring disastrous debates.

Ohio and New Mexico +5. New Mexico closer than I thought, Ohio less close than I thought. Still in the bounce season, but is it sticky?
 
Meh, it's anyone's guess what's happening until the post-convention data's been left behind.

All you can say with certainty, I think, is that Romney is running out of game-changing moments. Neither the VP pick nor the convention seem to have closed the gap much. It's hard to see him winning big in the debates, so it looks like his money advantage or an October surprise are all he has left.

Still, I'm pretty sure we'll see next week that the gap remains very small. If the jobs report had been any good then maybe it would have been Obama's to lose, but it was crap again.
 
I guess that's what happens when you get Rahm on the case, calling in favours and then Clinton gives a speech.

Still, Romney already has more cash than he can easily spend. Jon Chait likened it to Brewster's Millions!
 
I wonder if Rahm is looking at 2016. He'll have a lot of experience by then and would be a natural successor to the Obama Chicago organization. His Israel sympathies could never be questioned!
 
I wonder if Rahm is looking at 2016. He'll have a lot of experience by then and would be a natural successor to the Obama Chicago organization. His Israel sympathies could never be questioned!

Reminds me of the folks who in 2004 who said Kerry could never be labeled weak on defense/foreign policy. You forget that the GOP no longer has anything resembling shame, e.g. "we will not allow fact-checkers to dictate our campaign."

All there needs to be is the slightest sliver of difference in the positions (or, failing that, the rhetoric) of Emanuel and the most rabid, frothingly mad right-wing Ultra-Orthodox Israel politician, rabbi, or street lunatic, and the GOP will be all over him with "Another Obama-esque Israel hater."
 
*shudders*

But yeah, you'd think that actually serving in the IDF would put the Republican Israel hawks somewhat on the defensive. But then, you'd think getting three purple hearts would make the Republicans reluctant to hammer you on your war record...

EDIT: great minds, Excal.
 
Meh, it's anyone's guess what's happening until the post-convention data's been left behind.

All you can say with certainty, I think, is that Romney is running out of game-changing moments. Neither the VP pick nor the convention seem to have closed the gap much. It's hard to see him winning big in the debates, so it looks like his money advantage or an October surprise are all he has left.

Still, I'm pretty sure we'll see next week that the gap remains very small. If the jobs report had been any good then maybe it would have been Obama's to lose, but it was crap again.

Yes...I think we are going to see a lot of increasingly desperate moves from the Romney campaign now. The trouble is Mitt is not the best candidate when you are looking for somebody to get all fired up and go into attack mode....think Dennis Skinner's dead sheep comment.
 
I wonder if Rahm is looking at 2016. He'll have a lot of experience by then and would be a natural successor to the Obama Chicago organization. His Israel sympathies could never be questioned!

So who is/are the favourite(s) to get the democrat nod for 2016?
 
A politician who probably had potential to go really far, but fecked it up for himself cause he couldn't keep it in his pants, was Anthony Weiner...

If he wasn't of the ethnicity he is, or married the person he did, he would have very much had a shout for Presidency few years from now...But maybe he leans too left for the U.S.
 
A politician who probably had potential to go really far, but fecked it up for himself cause he couldn't keep it in his pants, was Anthony Weiner...

If he wasn't of the ethnicity he is, or married the person he did, he would have very much had a shout for Presidency few years from now...But maybe he leans too left for the U.S.

Spitzer too.
 
She's a year younger than Romney is.

Yes, but she has been on the national scene since 1992 and engenders strong feelings in people. Romney has been a fleeting national figure over the last 5 years or so. He also dyes his hair and can get away with just wearing a nice suit.

I think Hillary would make a great POTUS but it would be hard getting the youth vote, I fear.
 
She's a year younger than Romney is.


But remember we are talking 4 years from now, not right now. If she runs and wins on the day she has her first inauguration she would be the 2nd oldest person to have been elected President. Reagan would have that record but only by a 200 or so days.

And let's face it age was an issue for some people in prior elections, so it could be a factor that works against her also.

Not saying she will be some run down old lady 4 years from now, but the reality is that she will be just short of 70 by time the inauguration day in 2017 rolls around.

If she runs she will be a factor, but her age AT THAT TIME, could play against her.
 
There goes mjs' enthusiasm gap.

How enthusiastic would you say you are about voting for president in November -- extremely enthusiastic, very enthusiastic, somewhat enthusiastic, not too enthusiastic, or not at all enthusiastic?

Democrats:

Extremely Enthusiastic: 30%
Very Enthusiastic: 29%
Somewhat Enthusiastic: 23%
Not Too Enthusiastic: 13%
Not At All Enthusiastic: 6%

Republicans:

Extremely Enthusiastic: 32%
Very Enthusiastic: 25%
Somewhat Enthusiastic: 19%
Not Too Enthusiastic: 17%
Not At All Enthusiastic: 7%

So that's 59% of Democrats Extremely or Very Enthusiastic vs 57% of Republicans, and only 19% of Democrats unenthusiastic, vs 24% of Republicans.
 
I don't see Obama doing much in the way of campaigning for Hillary either. She missed her shot and was unlucky to come up against a candidate like Obama in the primary.
 
I agree that Hillary has to be considered too old to run in 4 years time. You need to consider how old the person would be after potentially 8 years in office... that's 12 years from now.
 
I remember there being concern over McCain's age in 08, but wasn't that more to do with his VP choice being batshit?
 
I remember there being concern over McCain's age in 08, but wasn't that more to do with his VP choice being batshit?

His age looked bad against the youth and vitality of Obama. Imagine Hillary running against Rubio! Although the repubs might be dumb enough to get that fat feck to waddle for Prez.
 
I just remembered that I asked the 2016 question earlier in this thread, almost a year ago exactly. Responses were - Hillary, Brian Schweitzer, Tim Kaine, [someone] Webb, Andrew Cuomo.

How many of those are still thought about? Thinking about it, when was Obama first really seen as a contender? I remember reading something about him in 06ish I think, but I'm guessing it was before that to those that were paying attention.

Brian also mentioned Chuck Schumer but I thought I'd leave that out cause everyone laughed at him.
 
If the economy's firing in 2016 and the Dems are in power, then Hillary's age might not matter. The other plausible scenario for her is if Romney's presidency was a disaster... in that case people might want a safe pair of hands. She's divisive in the sense that the extreme right can't abide her, but she's also really popular overall.

I think both could make a return. Spitzer would be my preferred pick of the two.

Spitzer is a class act. I never really liked Weiner, he always had something of the sending people photos of his cock type about him. He's also another one who's nutty on Israel, though it's hard to find many that aren't.

Although the repubs might be dumb enough to get that fat feck to waddle for Prez.

:lol:
 
Yes, Spitzer is the real deal. Weiner is kind of a yappy little dog and I don't see anybody voting for a "President Weiner"....the dick jokes would just be endless.

It's more than likely that some surprise candidate will emerge from somewhere anyway...a governor or big town mayor. Senators and congressmen don't typically make good candidates.
 
I think both could make a return. Spitzer would be my preferred pick of the two.

They both will. As Maher says, if you do something people don't like in America, you have to go away for a while, and then you can come back.
 
They both will. As Maher says, if you do something people don't like in America, you have to go away for a while, and then you can come back.

Yes...just look at how popular Bill Clinton is right now. He'd walk back into the Oval Office if it were allowed.
 
What about Janet Napolitano? She has a good reputation, though I've never heard her speak, and now I come to look at her she's no beauty. In fact, stick a beard on her, and she's Krugman:

35k4k8x.jpg
Dr-Paul-Krugman-001.jpg
 
If the economy's firing in 2016 and the Dems are in power, then Hillary's age might not matter. The other plausible scenario for her is if Romney's presidency was a disaster... in that case people might want a safe pair of hands. She's divisive in the sense that the extreme right can't abide her, but she's also really popular overall.



Spitzer is a class act. I never really liked Weiner, he always had something of the sending people photos of his cock type about him. He's also another one who's nutty on Israel, though it's hard to find many that aren't.



:lol:

She's actually got one of the highest approval ratings in the country for the last 3 years, and the highest in the cabinet. I don't think she will run, she does look tired, and frankly, she will retain respect more if she takes a back-role like Bill.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.