..reading that quick... I read 'Big Tits'
US Presidential Election: Tuesday November 6th, 2012
- Thread starter Team Brian GB
- Start date
- Status
..reading that quick... I read 'Big Tits'
They will try, but I don't think it will work.
I think you overestimate the Obama campaign in messages in the last few months. Both campaigns have really struggled to communicate ideas and narratives. The weakness is this: neither candidate is really trusted by voters to deliver on what they say.
It's the 7 day rolling average. So I guess it will smooth out in the next few days.
It's safe to say that Romney had a good week.
the fact is Romney is lightweight on FP.
Obama is trusted to look out for ordinary people so I will disagree on your view there.
The only thing Romney had going for him was that the economy was still poor...but he had no realistic plans himself.
Romney has a 18% lead on the economy (even after the debate).
This is not poor. It's probably one of the biggest leads in presidential races.If this election becomes about only the economy, Obama is going to struggle to win. It makes sense they they will talk about anything but the economy, he has to. But the elections won't be won or lost on FP in this election cycle.
Romney has a 18% lead on the economy (even after the debate).
If this election becomes about only the economy, Obama is going to struggle to win. It makes sense they they will talk about anything but the economy, he has to. But the elections won't be won or lost on FP in this election cycle.
They had the Washington Post Poll broken down. The only area Romney was ahead was on Defecit Reduction..by 3. Obama lead on every other category.
The CNN and CBS polls show massive leads for Romney on the economy
Hmm it does seem that the polls don't seem to reflect how well I thought BO did.
Perhaps the perception that he was so much better than debate 1 is slightly skewing things in my head.
Perhaps the perception that he was so much better than debate 1 is slightly skewing things in my head.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/10/for_once_i_agree.php?ref=fpblg
even George Wills, a conservative thought Obama won.
The real polls will only reflect this in a few days. 65 million people watched, so it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
even George Wills, a conservative thought Obama won.
The real polls will only reflect this in a few days. 65 million people watched, so it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Obama won on policy stuff that the more engaged people will pick up on, but those people are all decided anyway.
It's hard for us, since we are all way more knowledgeable than the average voter, to see how each man appealed to undecideds and thickos.
It's hard for us, since we are all way more knowledgeable than the average voter, to see how each man appealed to undecideds and thickos.
It was a comfortable win considering it was from a more Republican sample than the electorate.
All true (although there was a bit of movement towards Obama after the VP debate), was referring more to the "risk-free" part, both are capable of screwing up. But yeah, probably won't affect the race.
All true (although there was a bit of movement towards Obama after the VP debate), was referring more to the "risk-free" part, both are capable of screwing up. But yeah, probably won't affect the race.
I know some pretty educated and knowledgeable people in terms of finance and the economy that can make strong arguments for *not voting for Obama. My neighbor is a CPA for small businesses and she is adamant the current policies are crippling her clients.
*they have yet to make a strong argument for voting for Romney though.
Watched live last night and thought Obama won about 3-1. Weird that Mara Liasson called it a draw immediately afterwards on NPR. Maybe she was trying too hard to be "objective".
Obama was obsessed with planned parenthood, mentioning it 3 times in just a few minutes. Overall he was fluent, and just seems like more of a political realist than R-money (whose own obsession was small business).
Obama was obsessed with planned parenthood, mentioning it 3 times in just a few minutes. Overall he was fluent, and just seems like more of a political realist than R-money (whose own obsession was small business).
Grew up in the Fort Worth suburbs (Tarrant County), about 20 miles west of downtown. That is one "big" city I would love to return to, but would rather live on the outskirts of the county. I like its big city status but small town feel and hospitality (and food and culture).
I would not reside in Dallas County on the other hand.
Montana is beautiful. You can't go wrong there or Wyoming.
Female vote, it went down a bit after the first debate.
Wisconsin: Romney vs. Obama
*** Obama
Getting tight, given the fact it's a small state, could REALLY depend on turnout.
*** Obama
Getting tight, given the fact it's a small state, could REALLY depend on turnout.
The funny thing is about Romneys ''Binders full of women'' anecdote, is it's not even true, he had nothing to do with the research, or the selection of these women, it happened before he was Governor, he just signed it.
I bet he has a binder on Candy Crowley going.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/656-million-watched-second-debate-slightly-less-than
The second presidential debate between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney drew an estimated 65.6 million viewers on Tuesday night, according to Nielsen, slightly less than the 67.2 million who tuned in to the first debate.
almost as many people watched the second as the first debate.
think 51 million watched the Biden debate.
The second presidential debate between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney drew an estimated 65.6 million viewers on Tuesday night, according to Nielsen, slightly less than the 67.2 million who tuned in to the first debate.
almost as many people watched the second as the first debate.
think 51 million watched the Biden debate.
I think NPR had it right. Seemed like each candidate had their moments. While they did engage each other and it was a lively debate most of boiled down to likeability or who you wanted to believe more. Both stayed pretty much on points we've all heard a million times already.
Actually quite shocked about that when I heard it. I thought for sure the audience would fall off sharply. If you saw the breakdown by network it fairly interesting too I though. The exact same debate on something like 12 channels. I think it was NBC first and ABC second followed by Fox News.
Saw a funny bumper sticker today: "REAL NEWS" then "Fox" written alongside it top to bottom.
I'm not sure anyone is that educated or knowledgeable about the economy. That's pretty much how we got in this situation in the first place.
Well if she's knowledgeable and educated she'll know that voting for "the other guy" is only sensible when that guy is actually giving you an alternative. When "the other guy" is obfuscating his plan, and refusing to specify his tactics - despite his opponent's only big sensitive weak spot being this very area - then you can be pretty sure "the other guy" is not an educated or knowledgeable punt to make.
And if you can't make a choice on the economy, then the knowledgeable and educated thing to do would be to take your lead from other policies.
And the knowledgeable and educated people would usually go for the one that didn't want to burn the poor, sew up women, bomb China & fly off to Kolob in their magic underwear.
Also, anyone see the man on the street thing with Jimmy Kimmel? I saw parts and I'm starting to think there should be some kind of testing for voting. They went out the day before the debate and asked people who won the second debate. People actually said they watched it and picked a winner along with what part of the debate they liked.
So I put very very little stock into polls.....
They went out the day before the debate and asked people who won the second debate. People actually said they watched it and picked a winner along with what part of the debate they liked. So I put very very little stock into polls.....
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.
No, but I know plenty that have been, and I have read/seen plenty about it to know it must be great.
I have been to Boise.
So I had to respond to that FB post I posted about 3-5 pages ago, the raging "god/government/anti-Obama" post.
---
The government has a responsibility to aid its civilians as it deems necessary. It's not the church's responsibility to do anything but provide a place to worship. Anything else is simply on the good will of the clergy. Bill Gates isn't christian and he's one the biggest philanthropists around. Warren Buffett as well. God isn't needed at all, mainly because man created him but that's my opinion.
No one is pushing religion out of the country, it's just another christian persecution complex, and I once drank the juice too. Instead, separation of church and state is being enforced and the majority cannot simply impose their will on others as they have in the past. Religion simply has no place in the running of a government and a nation. Theocracies do not work, look at Iran and Yemen for example, and how corrupt the Vatican is. The founding fathers of this country ensured that religion would be left out of running the government. I don't mind if religion is taught in school as long as ALL religions are taught without bias/disregard and as pseudo-science, while real science like evolution is properly addressed.
Healthcare is both just and necessary so medical bills do not destroy an individual or family. People must expect a miracle by Obama to recover the economy in four years - recall how close to a global economic crash we were in 2008 - and perhaps if Boehner and ilk would stop being jerks in the House maybe Obama can do more. The DOW has doubled under Obama (you will not hear that on Fox), and those rich GOP supporters like Adelson, Trump, and Romney, have made millions from it while others have struggled, and do not want to pay a fairer share in taxes. The Iraq war has ended, a war that demoralized our military and was never just or necessary. Oh, and one more - that Bin Laden guy - gone.
Instead, let's elect a man that made millions by destroying companies and lives due to greed, has no idea how to relate to us common folks, is deathly afraid to show his taxes despite his dad doing such, and say good bye middle class, good bye medicare, good bye social security, and hello wars in Iran and Syria, and eventual economic ruin. He'll be led by a group of raving right-wing neo-cons that want to install their way on the nation. Not to mention a man deeply involved in a cult. Mormonism is so whack I cannot believe christians are not opposed to him.---
---
The government has a responsibility to aid its civilians as it deems necessary. It's not the church's responsibility to do anything but provide a place to worship. Anything else is simply on the good will of the clergy. Bill Gates isn't christian and he's one the biggest philanthropists around. Warren Buffett as well. God isn't needed at all, mainly because man created him but that's my opinion.
No one is pushing religion out of the country, it's just another christian persecution complex, and I once drank the juice too. Instead, separation of church and state is being enforced and the majority cannot simply impose their will on others as they have in the past. Religion simply has no place in the running of a government and a nation. Theocracies do not work, look at Iran and Yemen for example, and how corrupt the Vatican is. The founding fathers of this country ensured that religion would be left out of running the government. I don't mind if religion is taught in school as long as ALL religions are taught without bias/disregard and as pseudo-science, while real science like evolution is properly addressed.
Healthcare is both just and necessary so medical bills do not destroy an individual or family. People must expect a miracle by Obama to recover the economy in four years - recall how close to a global economic crash we were in 2008 - and perhaps if Boehner and ilk would stop being jerks in the House maybe Obama can do more. The DOW has doubled under Obama (you will not hear that on Fox), and those rich GOP supporters like Adelson, Trump, and Romney, have made millions from it while others have struggled, and do not want to pay a fairer share in taxes. The Iraq war has ended, a war that demoralized our military and was never just or necessary. Oh, and one more - that Bin Laden guy - gone.
Instead, let's elect a man that made millions by destroying companies and lives due to greed, has no idea how to relate to us common folks, is deathly afraid to show his taxes despite his dad doing such, and say good bye middle class, good bye medicare, good bye social security, and hello wars in Iran and Syria, and eventual economic ruin. He'll be led by a group of raving right-wing neo-cons that want to install their way on the nation. Not to mention a man deeply involved in a cult. Mormonism is so whack I cannot believe christians are not opposed to him.---
Btw, a friend told me that one of the lesser party candidates was arrested for protesting outside the debate last night.
Brings me to this - this is a democracy and yet only two parties are invited to these debates. Why not give adequate debate time to the other parties?
Brings me to this - this is a democracy and yet only two parties are invited to these debates. Why not give adequate debate time to the other parties?
Probably a problem with the networks I'd guess. I'm sure the two major parties squash it and the networks don't fight it. I'd like to at least see Johnson and Stein up there.
Who was the one arrested?
EDIT: Stein was arrested along with her Green Party VP. They should let her in. Too bad.
Or with the average politician.
Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the other ones.
Winnie was a bit of a cnut. But he said some damn cool things.
I just googled it... Jill Stein...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...ill-stein-arrested-green-party_n_1971960.html
I'm fairly certain the networks and corporations do not allow it. Will it ever be possible to break this duopoly?
Perot?
It'll be tough to see again. Could Ron Paul of done it had he declared as an Independent or Libertarian early? Maybe.
Paul is a nutter, he'd got destroyed against this duo, and only his lunatic supporters would vote for him. I'd say he'd get well under 10%, probably under 5% of the vote, and not a single electoral vote (unless the POTUS electoral college allows states to split votes, there could be some rogue nut casting an electoral vote or two to him).
However, I would prefer to see all candidates on the ballot given a fair chance. Democracy, oh wait, we're a Duopoly funded by Corporations, my bad.
However, I would prefer to see all candidates on the ballot given a fair chance. Democracy, oh wait, we're a Duopoly funded by Corporations, my bad.
The Democrats don't want the Greens represented and the Republicans woudl rahter do without the Libertarians. Each with a self interest.
It's a bit different at state level though right? Didn't a third party, the IP i thinki, secure a respectable vote share in Minnesota last time around?
It's a bit different at state level though right? Didn't a third party, the IP i thinki, secure a respectable vote share in Minnesota last time around?
- Status