US Presidential Election: Tuesday November 6th, 2012

Status
Not open for further replies.
Red Dreams said:
Just saw a Pew poll that has Romney up by 4. It is from Oct 4th to 7th right after the debate.

probably needs a week to see these polls settle.
Click to expand...

They had a segment with the Pew folks on NPR on the way home. Amongst registered voters its a tie BUT when it comes to likely voters Romney is 4% up. That kind of falls inline with the voter enthusiasm stuff they ran a few months ago.

If Romney and Ryan can build on last weeks debates this election could be blown wide open. The massive first time and young vote from 2008 haven't quite got the same hope and change feeling this time around. If Obam continues to look lackluster and the otehr two Muppets actually start looking like candidates it will get very interesting.
 
The debates affect a narrow sliver of the electorate.

The vast majority have already decided who they are voting for.

The movement in the polls towards Romney is imo the disappointed Republicans 'coming home'.

I will agree the republicans are probably more enthusiastic than democrats. But there are more democrats than republicans who will be voting.

Obama will win...and by an electoral landslide.

This is why many right wing pundits have been pushing the 'popular vote' method of electing a president...because increasingly each cycle the electoral map victory for the Republican party is getting harder.
 
saw this response to Romney's Foreign policy speech.

"I am sorry but Romney is right. Has anyone here looked at a map. Russia is like right next to Alaska. Some brilliant academic 4 years ago stated this and was laughed at, mocked in fact. She could see Russia from her house...her HOUSE! This is scary, no one is following up on this. Four years and not once has Mr. Obama said anything. Is Russia getting closer, is this some sort of sneak attack, is there a team of elite geologists in Alaska using the latest satellite readings and lasers (LASERS!) to measure whether Russia is encroaching upon us. Is anyone else here concerned that their recently reelected leader is part birdman and with tweaking could maybe spread his birdman genes throughout the military apparatus of the Russian Federation and then we could be inundated by Russian attacking birdmen. I live near the coast in So. California, and I looked and you cannot see China, yet they are supposedly some sort of threat. I just do not understand this, we are at war in Afghanistan and yet on the map they are really far, nowhere near Alaska. This is disturbing."
 
Red Dreams said:
The debates affect a narrow sliver of the electorate.

The vast majority have already decided who they are voting for.
.
Click to expand...

Normally I would agree with you but with the country still suffering from the recession and the feeling of hope and change waning I think the debates are more important this time around.


An Oct. 4-5 Gallup poll finds roughly two in three Americans reporting that they watched the Oct. 3 debate, similar to what Gallup measured for each of the three 2008 presidential debates. Those who viewed the debate overwhelmingly believe Romney did a better job than Obama, 72% to 20%.

Across all of the various debate-reaction polls Gallup has conducted, Romney's 52-point win is the largest Gallup has measured. The prior largest margin was 42 points for Bill Clinton over George H.W. Bush in the 1992 town hall debate.
 
Red Dreams said:
the numbers don't add up for a Romney win.
Click to expand...

Most of the numbers have a margin of error plus some are registered voter polls which might end up being 3-5% off. Romney and Ryan were unknowns to many a few weeks ago. If they continue to make people believe they are competent during the debates it could be a game changer.
 
That Pew poll doesn't make a bunch of sense... 12 point swing in a month? Will have to wait and see what other upcoming ones say, hope to feck it's an outlier.
 
Because, if you'll excuse the unfortunate phrasing, he is a massive drama queen.
 
Ubik said:
That Pew poll doesn't make a bunch of sense... 12 point swing in a month? Will have to wait and see what other upcoming ones say, hope to feck it's an outlier.
Click to expand...

The most convincing beat down(according to gallop) in the history of debates will do that to the polls.

As much as some love Obama is record is not impressive and the economy is still in the crapper. Most Americans are fairly conservative, and socialist polices are simply not appealing. Obama rode the wave in 2008 on the back of a clusterfeck of an incumbent and the worst recession in history.

This time around he needs to fight for it a little bit more. He should still win but it he needs to at least hold his own in the next debates.
 
mjs020294 said:
The most convincing beat down(according to gallop) in the history of debates will do that to the polls.
Click to expand...

If that was the case I'd have expected it to happen to a few other polls as well.

mjs020294 said:
he needs to at least hold his own in the next debates.
Click to expand...

Agree there, you can't let your opponent tell that many blatant lies and get away with it.
 
Ubik said:
Agree there, you can't let your opponent tell that many blatant lies and get away with it.
Click to expand...

They are both fairly guilty of telling a few porkies.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/

Obama's problem is he is relying on GW's poor performance to make his own term seem better. He needs to get HIS message out and tell people what he will do the next term.

Romney just needs to project himself as a half competent candidate. The lies and half truths don't really matter to the average voter.

I was on a cruise last week and did anytime dining which forced us to sit with different people at dinner. It was rather enlightening discussing the elections and candidates with people from different backgrounds. I actually didn't find another Obama supporter but there were plenty of haters. And some of the bad information they were basing their views on was staggering.
 
Romney's "porkies" involved seemingly changing the majority of his policies that he'd been campaigning on for up to 6 years.

Hmm, that site did teach me though that there's an Illinois Democrat called David Gill. Moonlighting?
 
Ubik said:
Romney's "porkies" involved seemingly changing the majority of his policies that he'd been campaigning on for up to 6 years.
Click to expand...

It only seems that way because of the media you're listening to. Romney is an egotistical turd that will do anything to become POTUS but he isn't any worse than most politicians. In some ways his ability to change his stance on issues and work with others is a good quality, I think :confused:.

As for politifact they are pretty impartial. In fact both parties have complained about them which is generally a good thing. NPR and and a few other decent media sources use them a lot.
 
No it isn't, it's because Romney voiced positions that were different to his actual policies on a number of occasions during the debate, to make them sound more moderate. He hasn't changed the policies, it's just the Etch-a-Sketch in action. "I don't have a $5tn tax-cut", "My healthcare plan covers pre-existing conditions", "I love teachers", etc.

Wasn't questioning politifact.
 
You're getting tiresome with your false equivalence nonsense, mjs. If you have a boner for the lying, unprincipled, dishonest, racist twats that make up today's GOP then just come out and say so.
 
Ubik said:
"I don't have a $5tn tax-cut", "My healthcare plan covers pre-existing conditions", "I love teachers", etc.
Click to expand...

Well the $5 trillion claim from Obama was only half true, so Romney's is half right denying it. ;)

As for teachers this is EXACTLY what was said:

"Well, first, I love great schools," Romney replied. "Massachusetts, our schools are ranked No. 1 of all 50 states. And the key to great schools, great teachers. So I reject the idea that I don't believe in great teachers or more teachers. Every school district, every state should make that decision on their own."

Actually a great answer to the questioning. He got facts in, and the last sentence will ring a cord with eh vast majority of Americans.
 
The problem with the $5t number is that it's only half true because Romney won't lay out the details (because they don't exist or if they are revealed he'll turn away voters as they will see him as the snake he is). However, simple math according to what little Romney has revealed reflects there must be massive tax changes that will negatively affect all but the wealthy. Oh, and PBS will be cut too.
 
It's not half true at all, the tax-cuts cost that amount of money. The whole Obama argument, spelled out by both Obama himself and Clinton as well, is that Romney won't detail which deductions and exemptions that he says, once removed, will make it "revenue neutral".
 
Exactly, it's not "half-true". Lowering the rates to the degree Romney has laid out in his plan amounts to ~$5trill.
 
Interesting tidbits on Romney's state educational rankings. Turns out the state has the second highest average teaching salary - better teachers flock to better pay. Having seen first hand the drop in class from attending a large school in a relatively wealthy area (southwest Fort Worth, TX) to a small, rural school in farmland USA (central Texas, just east of Waco), it's very evident the better educators flock to the bigger metropolitan areas where higher pay and other needs exist.

The article below says Maryland is actually the top ranked state. I wouldn't argue test scores prove anything though. I could pass a standard science test today but that doesn't prove anything about my scientific knowledge - just that I can select the best answer from multiple choice (or best guess) and most likely get a passing score.

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/stat..._romney_right_about_top_ranking_for_mass.html
 
Saliph said:
Exactly, it's not "half-true". Lowering the rates to the degree Romney has laid out in his plan amounts to ~$5trill.
Click to expand...

$4.5-4.7 trillion over ten years. Removing all deductions would raise about $480 billion in tax a year, so $4.8 trillion over ten years. Removing the deductions would be political suicide because a hell of a lot of voters would pay a lot more tax.
 
It would be suicide if you admitted to it, yeah. Which Romney isn't, which is kind of the point.
 
mjs020294 said:
$4.5-4.7 trillion over ten years. Removing all deductions would raise about $480 billion in tax a year, so $4.8 trillion over ten years. Removing the deductions would be political suicide because a hell of a lot of voters would pay a lot more tax.
Click to expand...

Tax Policy Center (and others) have concluded that Romney's plan is mathematically impossible.

To help Romney, the center did so under the most favorable conditions, which also happen to be wildly unrealistic. The analysts assumed that any cuts to deductions or loopholes would begin with top earners, and that no one earning less than $200,000 would have their deductions reduced until all those earning more than $200,000 had lost all of their deductions and tax preferences first. They assumed, as Romney has promised, that the reforms would spare the portions of the tax code that privilege saving and investment. They even ran a simulation in which they used a model developed, in part, by Greg Mankiw, one of Romney’s economic advisers, that posits “implausibly large growth effects” from tax cuts.

The numbers never worked out. No matter how hard the Tax Policy Center labored to make Romney’s promises add up, every simulation ended the same way: with a tax increase on the middle class. The tax cuts Romney is offering to the rich are simply larger than the size of the (non-investment) deductions and loopholes that exist for the rich. That’s why it’s “mathematically impossible” for Romney’s plan to produce anything but a tax increase on the middle class.
 
Someone needs to give Andrew Sullivan a slap....what a fecking berk. I reckon the last debate will simply become a footnote after Obama wins. FFS, Romney is not some energized newcomer, he's the same lying, pandering, flip-flopping rich asshole that he has always been. A debate win isn't ever going to change that fact.
 
An old school Republican, and a man of integrity. The only Congressman to refuse a bribe and to report the bribe attempt to the FBI during the Abscam investigations in the 80's.
 
Saliph said:
An old school Republican, and a man of integrity. The only Congressman to refuse a bribe and to report the bribe attempt to the FBI during the Abscam investigations in the 80's.
Click to expand...

Must be heart-breaking for him and others like Chuck Hagel to lose their party. Not sure why there isnt any process of introspection on the Repubs side to
figure out that if moderate repubs can suppose Obama, surely it must say something unless they too think Hagel is a socialist.
 
How biased are RCP? Their US average is ridiculous.
 
Check out which polls they include in their average though, and the dates and the respective polling scores.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.