|
| Posted by: sarge33rd
- [12554167] Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 18:18
WAY early, but I found this site and wanted to post a link. From a quick perusal, they seem to have a very respectable degree of success in the past, though the past data is limited. (2004, 2006, 2008 and 2010 elections)
as of today, they are calling for:
Obama: 347 Romney: 191
Senate: 49 Rep Dems: 47 "Too close to call": 4
ElectoralVote |
| | | 1 | Mith
ID: 18451815 Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 18:53
|
Big fan of Electoral-Vote.com.
Some similar sites with slighty different methodology:
Pollster omits the tossups and has it at 247-191.
Fivethirtyeight says 319-219.
|
|
| | |
| | | 3 | Boldwin
ID: 118591015 Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 22:13
|
Can anyone tell me what has changed since the 2010 election to change the dynamic we saw there? I don't see it.
|
|
| | | 4 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 22:19
|
The GOP, has shown itself to have been more interested in opposing Obama, than in helping the nation.
|
|
| | | 5 | Seattle Zen
ID: 3603123 Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 22:31
|
So typical, Baldwin. You claim to read 18 hours of news a day. You loved the 2010 elections, the Republicans did well. Trust me, you won't like the 2012 elections. I'd point you to a list of articles to explain why, but "you just won't see it".
The guy behind fivethirtyeight linked in MITH's post is so damn good that it is almost pointless having prediction contests, the has the future dead to rights. He says Obama is a 80% favorite. That election sounds locked up to me.
|
|
| | | 6 | Boldwin
ID: 118591015 Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 22:42
|
I'd trust you more if you would/could answer the question.
|
|
| | | 7 | Boldwin
ID: 118591015 Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 22:52
|
Has anyone thot to look up the board predictions for 2010?
No fair deleting!
|
|
| | | 8 | Boldwin
ID: 118591015 Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 23:24
|
#27 2010:
Taking bets on whether Obama waits for them to be sworn in before switching from blaming Bush to blaming congress for everything. - B
#36 2010:
Il.Interim Gov Quinn is trying to ride a one county win back into the mansion in a test of just how many dead people live in Cook County.
We'll have to wait two more elections to check this one:
As Jonathan Chait pointed out, health care reform is going to be around a long time. The GOP short-term surge will not. - PD#119
|
|
| | | 9 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 23:30
|
I'd trust you more if you would/could answer the question.
See post 4.
|
|
| | | 10 | Boldwin
ID: 25818119 Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 10:28
|
Why the impasse? Suppose they held a T-bill auction and no one showed up?
Stop spending or else!
Bob Woodward stumbles across the truth but doesn't recognize it.
|
|
| | | 11 | biliruben
ID: 21841115 Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 11:31
|
The fact that the tea party forcing our nation to default would likely be calamitous is news to you? Wow.
Just because the politicians you support have no moral compass doesn't mean what you apparently think it means.
|
|
| | | 12 | Pancho Villa
ID: 59645318 Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 11:32
|
Bob Woodward stumbles across the truth but doesn't recognize it.
What truth? The fact that you link to an article that refers to the Secretary of the Treasury as Timmy:
One must wonder about the intelligence and stewardship of Timmy and the other attendees of this meeting
it's obvious the author isn't interested in truth, but simply offering partisan speculation of doom for political expediency. An opinion is not the truth, except for those who refuse to take into consideration all facts and conditions that affect an outcome.
So, taking a hypothetical, off-handed remark by Geithner:
"Suppose we have an auction and no one shows up?"
Something which has never happened and, in all probability given the strength of the US as the leading global economy, likely won't, and presenting it as truth is preposterous as well as dishonest, even if unintentional.
Those of us who daily read articles from multiple sources regarding T-Bills, muni-bonds(seen Meredith Whitney lately?), debt ceiling, global currencies, etc., should be able to have intelligent discussions regarding the economic stability in this country and globally. Presenting wildly speculative hypothetical scenarios as truth precludes any intelligent discussion.
|
|
| | | 13 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 12:04
|
I am not sure why we even bother having elections anymore, it would save a lot of money to just let the computer algorithms just predict the winners.
|
|
| | | 14 | Perm Dude
ID: 577543120 Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 20:56
|
It takes some of the fun out of it, that's true.
The partisan right (exemplified by Boldwin's posts above) are clearly hoping for another 2010, but there doesn't appear to be much behind that except a lot of hope (ironic, eh?). In 2010 most of the polling (including fivethirtyeight_ predicted much of what actually happened: low Dem turnout accompanied by motivated GOP members who allowed the GOP to storm back to take back quite a few races, and the US House.
This year looks to be a year the Dems take back many of those seats, and win the White House again. The paths to victory for the Romney/Ryan ticket are looking more and more convoluted, and the post convention bounce for Obama appears real in many of the very states (OH, NH, NM, WI) that he needed it to be in. And that is going to hurt the GOP all the way down the ballot.
Wish I was running this year!
|
|
| | | 16 | Perm Dude
ID: 577543120 Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 21:29
|
I think a better indication is polling. Even Rasmussun, the GOP in-house polling firm, is showing Obama's current surge. If you have some evidence that Romney is somehow leading this race by all means--provide the link. Your doubt, or non-doubt, should be based on such facts. Otherwise, you run the risk of running on merely hopes or dreams.
I'm sorry that you feel that optimism is something to be mocked in your fellow Americans. Apparently it is reserved to GOP-backers who really, really hope for a Romney/Ryan victory.
|
|
| | | 17 | Boldwin
ID: 418371121 Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 22:37
|
I've got evidence.
2010
Now show me yours.
|
|
| | | 18 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 22:48
|
2010 B, was a Dem mistake. Complacency on their part, allowed the GOP the successes they saw.
435 house seats up in Nov 1 WH seat up 33 Senate seats
My prediction: House 219 Dem, 216 Rep Senate 49, 49 and 2 Independent WH Obama
|
|
| | | 19 | Perm Dude
ID: 577543120 Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 23:03
|
#17: 2008. Dems did not lose a House or Senate race they ran defended, defeated 12 GOP incumbents in the House (5 in the Senate), and Obama crushed McCain for the Presidency.
Oh wait--you meant today?
How about in swingin' Ohio?:
Or the poll of polls (sans Rasmussen):
Romney has ceased any substantial ad buys in Michigan and here ins Pennsylvania (where Bob Casey is expected to cruise to re-election victory in his Senate race). Ohio, Florida, New Mexico, New Hampshire, and Wisconsin are all leaning or strongly leaning toward Obama. Romney has to pretty much win them all. There is no scenario where Romney can lose Florida and win without Ohio, Pennsylvania, or Michigan.
|
|
| | | 20 | Boldwin
ID: 418371121 Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 23:21
|
Seriously, a 1.5% convention bounce is your evidence?
|
|
| | | 21 | Razor
ID: 48371122 Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 23:37
|
I predict that the GOP maintains a substantial lead in the House, that the Senate is evenly split and that Obama narrowly wins in the popular vote by wins by sixty electoral votes.
|
|
| | | 22 | Boldwin
ID: 418371121 Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 23:48
|
I'll refine this later, but I predict:
56 republican seats in the senate
245/155 split in the house favoring the republicans
Romney by 3%
|
|
| | | 23 | Boldwin
ID: 418371121 Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 23:53
|
BTW Limbaugh [who I only listen to a couple times a year, I googled this] predicts that if Obama wins, conservatives will split from the republican party. The republican party will collapse and that the country's economy will collapse @ 18 months into Obama's term.
|
|
| | | 24 | Boldwin
ID: 418371121 Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 23:57
|
|
|
| | | 25 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 00:00
|
I know he is wrong I am just surprised that anyone would fall for such a blatant scare tactic.
|
|
| | | 26 | Mith
ID: 23217270 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 00:10
|
Boldwin 20
The convention bounce is probably irrelevent, except for whatever momentum it might deliver to undecided or swayable voters in battleground states.
Obama has been significantly ahead in the electoral vote count according to state polling for as long as I've been seeing the numbers frequently posted on the home pages at NYT and HuffPo, since early summer I'd say.
|
|
| | | 29 | Boldwin
ID: 418371121 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 00:53
|
Smithsonian
These guys have been screwing over conservatives all my life. Why are conservatives still in their party when conservatives have the numbers?
|
|
| | | 30 | Boldwin
ID: 418371121 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 01:18
|
Florida at risk - Dershowitz
|
|
| | | 31 | Boldwin
ID: 418371121 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 01:26
|
Tweet:"Tough O Chicago pros will be hard to beat unless [Romney] drops old friends from team and hires some real pros. Doubtful." - Rupert Murdock
|
|
| | | 32 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 02:30
|
Mountain out of a molehill.
|
|
| | | 34 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 11:05
|
GOP already making excuses for their pending loss at the top o'the ticket.
Unlike Limbaugh, I have no doubt that the GOP will continue on as it has for some time: Learning the wrong electoral lessons, and doubling down on refusing to work with Democrats on anything. Given their voting rights trickery and gerrymandering, this will give that zombie party years more animation.
As for predictions, I'm going to guess the parties will about split the current toss up seats in the House, and assume the safe & leaning seats don't change, making this a 240 R/195 D finish. That's a high-water mark--if the GOP starts bailing on this election as the reality Romney's prospects start interfering in their fever dreams, the tossups could start breaking toward the Dems. Given the voting tinkering and gerrymandering, I don't see the Dems taking back the House this year.
In the Senate, I'm looking at 51-52 Dem seats (depending upon MA, which is probably going to stay with Brown as he pushes Romney under the bus to save his own ass). To get to Baldwin's 56, the GOP would have to not lose any of their "leaning GOP" seats, would have to win all the tossups, and pick off 3 that are currently "leaning Dem" seats. I just can't see that happening.
For the Presidential race, obviously Obama has this thing and this will become clearer the longer we get into the debating stage of the race.
|
|
| | | 35 | Boldwin
ID: 218361210 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 11:36
|
Romney leading Obama among likely independent voters, 54 percent to 40 percent.
Promise me that number doesn't change and I'll guarantee you a Romney wins.
|
|
| | | 36 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 11:50
|
Sounds like the GOP is drilling down into the good news for Obama to find some kernel of news they like, and ignoring the overall information that travels with it.
Despite that number, Obama still leads. And if it remains the same, Obama wins the Electoral College--by a lot. I'll take it.
"If Romney can beat Obama among independents this time, he can win the election."
Er, no. According to that same poll, Obama wins.
Keep in mind, of course, that the real race is for Electoral College votes. Romney, at this point, has no likely path to victory.
|
|
| | | 37 | Boldwin
ID: 218361210 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 12:12
|
Oh man, just keep talkin. This is all going up on the board later.
|
|
| | | 38 | Mith
ID: 18451815 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 12:40
|
I understand the preference to look at the friendliest data but it isn't a very logical approach.
Filtering out the independents from national polling is even less useful than measuring the convention bounces.
Where are those independents from? Because any lead Romney might have among indy voters in TX, AL, NY, CA and other hard red or hard blue states will not impact the presidential election in any way, whatsoever.
So unless you can find polls that focus on independent likely voters specifically in battleground states, the measure is mostly useless.
According to the current data on E-V, Romney can count on 131 electoral votes from solid red states (states where he is ahead by at least 10 points). Obama has 182 from hard blue states.
From states that are leaning Romney (5 - 9 point leads I think) he gets another 75, putting a total of 206 EVs in Romney's pocket. Obama gets 77 from the left-leaning states, bringing Obama's pocket total to 259 - just 11 short of the 270 needed to win.
Here are your battleground states with the most recent polling data on E-V.com, starting with most friendly to Romney (state followed by number of EVs, most recent poll results and date that poll was published):
WI - 10 EV - 48-47 Obama 8/21 IA - 6 EV - 47-45 Obama 8/26 CO - 9 EV - 49-46 Obama 9/2 NE - 6 EV - 49-46 Obama 8/26 VA - 13 EV - 49-46 Obama 8/23 FL - 29 EV - 48-48 Obama 9/9
Same link as Sarge's at the top.
As you can see with a little bit of easy math, if the candidates keep the states they currently have in their pockets, Romney cannot win if Obama takes VA or FL or any two of the remaining battleground states. If OH (18 EV) or PA (20 EV) falls out of Obama's pocket it makes victory look a bit more plausible for Romney but he obviously has a lot of work to do.
|
|
| | | 39 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 12:52
|
CNN's Interactive Electoral College map.
Fun to play with. And I'm still not seeing a path for Romney right now. PA and WI are now lean/safe Obama. Even giving Romney FL (where Obama is up right now) means Romney would have to somehow still win nearly all the other toss up states.
|
|
| | | 40 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 13:20
|
I would not say either FL or OH is in Obama's pocket. I think Obama loses Florida and wins Ohio very narrowly. I also think it will be pretty close in Wisconsin, but Obama takes it. With Ohio and Wisconsin, Obama basically just needs one other win anywhere in the country. I really doubt he loses Colorado, Iowa, Nevada AND Virginia, states which are all currently very close.
|
|
| | | 41 | Boldwin
ID: 218361210 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 13:47
|
A) a three point polling lead is barely above the statistically significant line.
B) this election will be won by the enthusiasm, get out the vote advantage. I think the anti-Obama voters are livid, positively apoplectic, even if they voted for Obama last time just to feel good about having once had a black president. The Obama voters are dispirited and disillusioned.
C) People are already decided. It won't be won by convincing the undecided and even if the swing vote was decisive, Romney's winning it.
D) The hardest campaign staffer assignment I can imagine is to get the least likely to vote, namely the young...who are sitting in their parents basement unemployed...excited enuff to rise up out of their depression and vote for Obama, four more years of this?
|
|
| | | 42 | Boldwin
ID: 218361210 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 13:51
|
And elections are won by actual voters, look at the likely voters, not the 'I think Obama's more likeable' vote, or the 'I don't want this pollster to think I'm racist' false positive.
|
|
| | | 43 | Mith
ID: 18451815 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 14:14
|
A) Agreed. That's why I called them battleground states and considered them undecided.
B) this election will be won by the enthusiasm, get out the vote advantage. Yes, in the battleground states.
C) Huh?
D) I think you're making the same mistake a lot of Kerry supporters made in 2004. You just cannot fathom the notion that swing voters think the past four years were successful by any measure and would even think about supporting the current steward.
I think many of them consider the economic trajectory of January 2009 compared with right now and see improvement, even if not enough. I also think many of them believe the GOP in the current congress was overly committed to obstructionism and feel that Obama could have accomplished more if he received better cooperation from them.
I also think the GOP has misread the swing voters to an extent. I don't think they like watching Clint Eastwood respond to an empty chair which he pretends has told him to go eff himself or the Romneys pretend they struggled in their early years or Paul Ryan pretend that a 2008 auto plant closure was Obama's fault or the campaign's statement that what they say is not subject to fat-checking. The base loves all of that stuff but not moderates so much.
I also think much of the electorate was taught by the GOP in 2004 to outright reject flip-floppers, a standard which does not help them with their current candidate.
And a blatantly dishonest and frankly unpatriotic attack on the president during a foreign policy emergency on the anniversary of 9/11 probably won't help, either.
By comparison the GOP has gotten a lot of mileage out of "you didn't build that" but the shelf life on that soundbite has probably about expired.
That's why I think the poll numbers currently look the way they do.
|
|
| | | 44 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 14:21
|
The Obama campaign will be quite effective, I think, in demonstrating that the GOP has reflexively, and consistently, prevented him from doing what he wanted to on the economy.
Obviously the GOP thinks this is a feature, not a bug (and I'd say, in some ways, this is absolutely true for the GOP base) But their success at putting up roadblocks to Obama's policies stymies their ability to place the blame on Obama for all the trouble we are in. Obama simply has to keep playing the tape of Mitch McConnell saying that the Republican's #1 job is to make sure that Obama doesn't get re-elected, while scrolling on the screen all the Obama initiatives that they blocked (such as the First Responders health care bill, the jobs bill, unemployment extension, oil spill liability law, etc). As a bonus, Obama can scroll the names of the people he has submitted for appointments that the Senate GOP refuses to allow an up-or-down vote on.
|
|
| | | 45 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 15:51
|
I have to laugh, every time I hear a GOP talking head use the phrase "this Presidents failed policies".
(1) We havent had many of his policies, for the 2 years since the GOP took the House. (2) Which of his policies has actually failed? (3) Look at the "American Jobs Act". link Economists said it wouold created some 1.3 million jobs. Why is that nr particularly important?
We have approx 8.3% unemployed atm. Some 12.3 million people. 10% of 12.3 million, is 1.23 million. So the collection of acts known collectively as the "American Jobs Act", would have reduced the nr of unemployed, by better than 10% OF the unemployed. 10% of 8.3% is .83%, and reduce unemployment by that figure, and we have 7.47% unemployment.
So, why did the GOP block this? They NEEDED to be able to point at an unemployment figure over 8% come Nov, because no Pres has ever been re-elected WITH unemployment over 8%.
Exactly. The GOP leadership, threw 1,300,000 Americans under the bus, to enhance their WH run in Nov 2012.
I for one, will not reward them for this.
|
|
| | | 46 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 16:37
|
Re 43, part (d): I think you pretty much nailed it especially the comparison to 2004 campaign, pretty much a reversal of fortune, there.
Sarge do you have another link? I think that one got changed on you.
|
|
| | | 47 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 16:42
|
corrected link
indeed boikin. Thanks for pointing it out.
|
|
| | | 48 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 16:58
|
I think you are both right and wrong on the GOP, voting down the jobs act, I think you are probably right that many probably did vote it down to block Obama, but with that said I think voting it down was the right thing to do, since it was merely a short term band aid and not really any kind of long term fix.
|
|
| | | 49 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 16:59
|
also, not that if one uses the high end of the projected jobs range (the 1.3 was the low figure I found from various sites), we would be looking at 2.6 million jobs. Or roughly 21% of the unemployed. 21% of 8.3% being 1.743%, call it 1.7. Reduce the 8.3 by 1.7 and you get 6.6% unemployment.
THERE, is your "failed policy".
|
|
| | | 50 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 17:03
|
sarge that is not quite how the math is done you could technically add 1.3 million jobs and actually have unemployment go up since unemployment rate is function of the number of people looking for work.
|
|
| | | 51 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 17:16
|
and the 12.3 million people IS that approx number. So the 1.3 (low end) is better than 10% OF the unemployment rate. (Now yes, the final numbers could vary, depending on how many of those who have given up, wouldnt have done so. Yet the point, and the contention, remains the same.)
|
|
| | | 52 | Boldwin
ID: 218361210 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 17:24
|
And a blatantly dishonest and frankly unpatriotic attack on the president during a foreign policy emergency on the anniversary of 9/11 probably won't help, either. - MITH
SEAL Team members are not unpatriotic.
|
|
| | | 53 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 17:28
|
Romney was a SEAL? In what alternate reality?
|
|
| | | 55 | Boldwin
ID: 218361210 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 18:10
|
You need to get out more.
Read the recent books from SEALs interviewing SEALs revealing how they feel about Obama taking credit and his administration leaking too much sensitive intel for political gain.
Google it yourself.
|
|
| | | 56 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 18:16
|
bob and weave Boldwin? MITHs comment, which you italicized when yu came back with your SEAL ref, had NOTHIING to do with that subject but was made in regards to your earlier comment about the vote and Romney.
Stay on track. Besides, as has been said by others...if you think it wrong to credit Obama with OBL's death; then you can not logically assign blame TO OBL, for 9/11.
|
|
| | | 57 | Mith
ID: 18451815 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 18:21
|
I understand that these people are out there. The fact that they are SEALs doesn't make their false outrage at the president any more patriotic.
Or any more applicable to the discussion you were responding to something I said about an unpatriotic attack on the president during a foreign policy emergency on the anniversary of 9/11. What posts 52 and 55 have to do with that, I don't know.
|
|
| | | 58 | Boldwin
ID: 218361210 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 18:47
|
Maybe Obama didn't bow enuff.
Maybe don't bow, it only encourages them.
|
|
| | | 59 | Tree
ID: 538451217 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 18:52
|
SEAL Team members are not unpatriotic.
from the wikipedia entry for SEAL Team member Jesse Ventura
In a May 11, 2009 interview with Larry King, Ventura twice stated that George W. Bush was the worst president of his lifetime, adding "President Obama inherited something I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. You know? Two wars, an economy that's borderline depression."[77]
On the issue of waterboarding, Ventura added: It's a good thing I'm not president because I would prosecute every person that was involved in that torture. I would prosecute the people that did it. I would prosecute the people that ordered it. Because torture is against the law. [King: And you were a Navy Seal] That's right and I was waterboarded...at SERE school, Survival Escape Resistance Evasion (sic). It was a required school you had to go to prior to going into the combat zone, which in my era was Vietnam. All of us had to go there. We were all in essence, every one of us was waterboarded. It is torture. [King: What was it like?] It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It's no good, because you—I'll put it to you this way, you give me a water board, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders. ... If it's done wrong, you certainly could drown. You could swallow your tongue. [It] could do a whole bunch of stuff to you. If it's done wrong or—it's torture, Larry. It's torture.[78][79]
Ventura then stated that he had no respect for Dick Cheney because he is "a guy who got five deferments from the Vietnam War. Clearly, he's a coward. He wouldn't go when it was his time to go. And now he is a chickenhawk. Now he is this big tough guy who wants this hardcore policy. And he's the guy that sanctioned all this torture by calling it 'enhanced interrogation'."[78] Ventura also expressed interest in being appointed ambassador to Cuba should U.S. relations with Cuba continue to improve.[80] On a May 18, 2009 appearance on The View, Ventura asked Elisabeth Hasselbeck if waterboarding is acceptable, why were the Oklahoma City bombers, Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, not waterboarded. "We only seem to waterboard Muslims."[81] Comparing the waterboarding of detainees to the North Vietnamese torture of American P.O.W.s, Ventura asserted, "We created our own Hanoi Hilton in Guantánamo. That's our Hanoi Hilton."[81] "'Enhanced interrogation' is Dick Cheney changing a word. Dick Cheney comes up with a new word to cover his ass."[81]
On May 20, 2009, Ventura appeared on Fox & Friends. When Brian Kilmeade told Ventura that he would stop supporting waterboarding when "they're dead", Ventura responded, "Really? Have you enlisted? Have you enlisted or are you just talking?... Go walk the walk, don't talk the talk."[82]
if Ventura is Patriotic, to believe the opposite of him must be unpatriotic.
|
|
| | | 60 | Mith
ID: 23217270 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 19:22
|
Excellent point, Tree.
|
|
| | | 61 | Boldwin
ID: 18421219 Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 20:42
|
I don't disagree with JV too often and I don't disagree with him on torture.
|
|
| | | 62 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 10:55
|
Maybe don't bow, it only encourages them.
As we found with Bush.
SEAL Team members are not unpatriotic.
Probably not. But they could easily be wrong. As can the families of SEAL members (your link isn't about SEAL members, only about the reaction of SEAL member families).
There has been a lot of grumbling on the far right, taking the President to task for his "victory lap" after the Osama bin Laden hit. All hot air, as usual. They claim the President took all the credit when he did nothing of the sort, and also claim that everything was the result of the Bush Administration's hard work. Oh for two there.
These are people who want to deny even the association of President Obama with some success. Small minded people with political axes to grind have little influence except with like-minded people to commiserate with.
|
|
| | | 63 | Boldwin
ID: 58831223 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 11:43
|
Bush didn't bow to them. He held hands with them.
|
|
| | | 64 | Mith
ID: 18451815 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 12:01
|
And kiss them on the lips.
|
|
| | | 65 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 12:02
|
re 51: just as follow up just to give you an idea of how approximate all these numbers are 12.3 million is about 4% of the population not 8%.
|
|
| | | 66 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 12:12
|
It is. However, unemployed numbers dont typically count 7 year olds.
|
|
| | | 67 | Mith
ID: 18451815 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 12:15
|
For the record there is TONS of precedent for American presidents to bow when greeting foreign leaders. Search google images, you'll see photos of Reagan, Nixon, Eisenhower and others doing the same thing. Though Bush is the only presidential serial kisser of foreign male lips that I know of.
Seriously I thought the issue was put to bed years ago.
|
|
| | | 68 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 12:40
|
Just goes to show how thorough the neo-cons' hold on the GOP is these days. And how little they have learned. Ugly American diplomacy. Not exactly the way to get the mutual respect that is necessary for cooperative ventures.
|
|
| | | 69 | Tree
ID: 58391311 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 12:48
|
There has been a lot of grumbling on the far right, taking the President to task for his "victory lap" after the Osama bin Laden hit. All hot air, as usual. They claim the President took all the credit when he did nothing of the sort...
this has been their MO for awhile. They take him to task for these sort of things, while blaming him when he personally doesn't immediately send troops to Libya or some such nonsense.
this was something i saw across Facebook from some of my right-leaning friends:

to one, i pointed out that Obama's presidency has seen OBL and about 30 other top Al-Queda guys taken out. he responded by saying "well, he didn't do it personally. i'm sure he has advisors around him..."
to which i said "well, of course. and those same advisors might be telling him not send troops to Libya at this point.."
he said "nope. that's not how it works."
this, is what we're up against. it is baffling.
|
|
| | | 70 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 12:54
|
It is somewhat ironic that Obama enjoys a strong amount of support among the actual, active military (and recent veterans as well). The soldiers know that Obama is unlikely to waste American lives and treasure and explore non-military options first.
In a world full of bad people, trying to be the world's biggest badass has some real shortcomings.
|
|
| | | 71 | Frick
ID: 14082314 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 13:18
|
Our inclusive economic and political systems are what make America great, but I have to admit thinking that we might be slightly better off if not everyone (this applies to both sides) was able to vote.
Attacking an Ambassador is an attack that I don't think any country would condone. Even during the depths of the cold war, Ambassadors were considered untouchable. I think we need to give Libya a chance to handle this internally and apologize. If they don't, the response should be handled internationally, by all nations, not just the US.
|
|
| | | 72 | Boldwin
ID: 58831223 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 13:34
|
I'd have to know a lot more about the Libya situation than I do now to understand why anyone would suggest 'going in'. What would be the target? Some amorphous network of terrorists unconnected to the government?
|
|
| | | 73 | Tree
ID: 58391311 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 13:39
|
I'd have to know a lot more about the Libya situation than I do now to understand why anyone would suggest 'going in'. What would be the target? Some amorphous network of terrorists unconnected to the government?
this was exactly my point on various facebook stages. many of my right-leaning friends seem to want a pound of flesh...they didn't care of innocents get taken out in the process.
you're oddly liberal with your sentiment here.
|
|
| | | 74 | Mith
ID: 23217270 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 13:49
|
That poster is... interesting. What was Reagan's response to the 1983 Beirut bombing that killed 241 Marines in their barracks, along with scores or other people?
|
|
| | | 75 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 14:07
|
I had a rather lengthy and heated debate with a Nebraskan yesterday re Libya. He insists, the riot and resulting actions were an act of war and we need to go in go in hard. I challenged him to enlist and lead the charge vs sitting in his comfy living room and demanding other people go and die in order to appease his sense of wounded American pride.
Chickenhawks.....I cant say how much disdain I have for those types.
|
|
| | | 76 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 14:29
|
I lost the link but it seems there are already plans to send drones into Libya.
|
|
| | | 77 | J-Bar
ID: 45841317 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 18:15
|
Going in hard is ludicrous. Responding and getting assurances from a hard line is not.
RE 73 I assume by this comment you believe that there is no collateral damage involved with drone attacks- another ludicrous sentiment.
|
|
| | | 78 | Biliruben
ID: 358252515 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 18:47
|
Ass. U. Me.
|
|
| | | 79 | J-Bar
ID: 45841317 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 21:30
|
Ok, deduce, is that better.
|
|
| | | 80 | J-Bar
ID: 45841317 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 21:31
|
that might Ded (on) U CE
|
|
| | | 81 | J-Bar
ID: 45841317 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 21:31
|
*be
|
|
| | | 82 | Mith
ID: 437192317 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 21:34
|
you're oddly liberal with your sentiment here.
Actually I'd say that's a genuinely conservative sentiment coming from B.
|
|
| | | 83 | Boldwin
ID: 108261318 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 21:42
|
I think not killing innocent people is a non-partisan issue.
|
|
| | | 84 | Mith
ID: 437192317 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 21:45
|
Well you know where your sentiment comes from, and I can certainly agree with that.
|
|
| | | 85 | Tree
ID: 17039238 Thu, Sep 13, 2012, 23:13
|
fair enough. traditional conservative indeed, not the war-mongering rabid type we see far too often.
|
|
| | | 86 | Building 7 Leader
ID: 171572711 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 07:48
|
That Republican party wouldn't be so bad, if they weren't such war mongers. They're supposed to be for limited government, except for defense, where the budget and the scope have no limit. A lot of those defense expenditures are really for offense.
|
|
| | | 87 | Boldwin
ID: 12814149 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 10:17
|
If the hostage standoff in 1979 impacted Jimmy Carter, I wonder what effect 6 or 7 embassy takeovers will have on Obama's chances? Embassy Protests Spread To Other “Arab Spring” Nations. “Yesterday I wrote that this looks like 1979 all over again. Today, we’re seeing the same diplomatic impotence displayed in that awful year, and the inevitable result. Thirty-three years ago, we got pushed out of the Persian Gulf; today, we’re getting pushed out of North Africa. Three years ago, President Obama assured us that his speech in Cairo would change the world, and eighteen months ago gave himself credit for the Arab Spring by citing that very speech. Ever since that speech took place, the American position has eroded in the Middle East, and it’s eroding rapidly now. We may not be able to retain embassies in Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt any longer; we certainly can’t fly the flag above them securely at the moment.”
Good thing we don’t have some dumb cowboy in charge of this stuff, isn’t it? - Glenn Reynolds, Instapundit Further predictions: Abadin covers her mouth and gloats, Hillary watches that presidency 'we owe her' go down the tubes.
I'd sooner see Palin teaching 'smart diplomacy' than Obama.
|
|
| | | 88 | Boldwin
ID: 12814149 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 10:18
|
And I predict Nerve needs a better plan B than showing up at the embassy with his passport.
|
|
| | | 89 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 11:40
|
#86: +1
|
|
| | | 90 | bibA
ID: 54522612 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 11:44
|
86 - You do not want to go in there with troops, and apparently you do not believe the situation should be handled diplomatically. How would you like the administration actually do?
|
|
| | | 91 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 11:45
|
I'd sooner see Palin teaching 'smart diplomacy' than Obama.
I'd sooner see her teaching it than Biden. It would be good for laughs, anyway, as she pisses away the stature others have built up.
Meanwhile, I'm pleased to see McCain refusing to attack Obama, and praising the Ambassador: Interview on YouTube.
|
|
| | | 92 | Mith
ID: 18451815 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 12:04
|
I have a feeling (putting aside the wild card that is the developing situation in the Middle East) the polls that come out next week are going to be really bad for Romney.
I don't think his reaction (and subsequent doubling down on it) to the mission protests and attacks helped and I really don't think this will play well, either.MITT ROMNEY: No, that’s not what I propose. And, of course, part of my plan is to stimulate economic growth. The biggest source of getting the country to a balanced budget is not by raising taxes or by cutting spending. It’s by encouraging the growth of the economy. So my tax plan is to encourage investment in growth in America, more jobs, that means more people paying taxes. So that’s a big component of what allows us to get to a balanced budget. GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: But his study, which you’ve cited, says it can only work if you take away those deductions for everyone earning more than $100,000. MITT ROMNEY: Well, it doesn’t necessarily show the same growth that we’re anticipating. And I haven’t seen his precise study. But I can tell you that we can lower our rates– GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, you cited the study, though. MITT ROMNEY: Well, I said that there are five different studies that point out that we can get to a balanced budget without raising taxes on middle income people. Let me tell you, George, the fundamentals of my tax policy are these. Number one, reduce tax burdens on middle-income people. So no one can say my plan is going to raise taxes on middle-income people, because principle number one is keep the burden down on middle-income taxpayers. GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income? MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less. So number one, don’t reduce– or excuse me, don’t raise taxes on middle-income people, lower them. Number two, don’t reduce the share of taxes paid by the wealthiest. The top 5% will still pay the same share of taxes they pay today. That’s principle one, principle two. Principle three is create incentives for growth, make it easier for businesses to start and to add jobs. And finally, simplify the code, make it easier for people to pay their taxes than the way they have to now. GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: But you and Congressman Ryan, you’re going to hold the line. You’re not going to put out any more detail on what kind of deductions you’re willing or loopholes you’re willing to close in order to pay for these tax cuts? MITT ROMNEY: You know, I had chance of being a governor and fighting for things I believe in as a governor. And I’ve found that you have to work with the people across the aisle. My legislature was 87 percent Democrat. So if I’d have come out and said, “Here this is my bill. This is the way I want it,” you’d never get it done. You lay out your principles. Those are my principles, don’t raise taxes on middle-income people, make sure the high-income people pay the same share they’re paying today, encourage growth by bringing down rates, and finally simplify the code. Those are my principles. I’ll stick with them. And I believe that’s going to help get the economy going and grow jobs.
|
|
| | | 93 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 12:35
|
What embassy take overs B? Which Embassy exactly, has been taken over?
|
|
| | | 94 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 12:36
|
The ones in Texas, Mississippi, and Alaska, sarge.
|
|
| | | 95 | Boldwin
ID: 12814149 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 12:52
|
Sarge demonstrating his weak grasp of the concepts of spreading and predicting.
|
|
| | | 96 | Tree
ID: 3825149 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 12:52
|
MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less
i wonder what that makes me.....
|
|
| | | 97 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 13:02
|
Apparently, Romney's English comprehension is out of whack.Since $100,000 is less than $200,000 to $250,000 as defined by Mitt, his correct response should have been "Yes. Middle income is 250 thousand and under. Down to X at which point you enter low income." OTH, if in Mitts eyes it requires 200k to BE middle class...well, thats a whole different problem, isnt it?
|
|
| | | 98 | Mith
ID: 23217270 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 13:06
|
It's kind of an ambiguous statement that leaves him a lot of wiggle room, should the media try to pin him down.
I wonder if it was a gaffe in that he simply intended to include $200-250k incomes in the middle class or if he was actually floating the notion that he won't promise to protect $100k income households from a potential tax increase.
|
|
| | | 99 | Boldwin
ID: 12814149 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 18:17
|
This is really an unfair issue. The technical description of middle class is far different than the popular perception of middle class. No one wants to admit they are in the poor class. The stretching for ego' sake is enormous.
Basically partisans are trying to hang Ronmey for being truthful and accurate instead of participating in a popular fiction, how dare he.
|
|
| | | 100 | Boldwin
ID: 12814149 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 18:28
|
There was a definitive book I read [whose name escapes me] describing the life, habits and views common to the different classes, and while I enjoyed the book and many surprising insights, nothing so gobsmacked me in the book as how far off was my own assumption of where the actual middle class cut-off line was drawn by sociologists and economists.
Can't find the book which I own, can't google it up in 4 minutes.
Possibly Class, by Paul Fussell.
|
|
| | | 101 | Perm Dude
ID: 577543120 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 19:20
|
As a guy who talks about the middle class all the time, Romney should know where the lines are, even if they aren't clear to the rest of us. After all, he wants to be President.
|
|
| | | 102 | Boldwin
ID: 12814149 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 19:31
|
And Obama was raised by Frank Marshall politically. So we know how he feels about the middle class.
|
|
| | | 103 | Perm Dude
ID: 577543120 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 19:37
|
Of course he was. It really is too bad that all that work didn't reflect in his actual policy positions.
But hey--when Romney makes a mistake, we can always blame Frank Marshall, yes?
|
|
| | | 104 | Boldwin
ID: 12814149 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 19:51
|
If the hostage standoff in 1979 impacted Jimmy Carter, I wonder what effect 6 or 7 embassy takeovers will have on Obama's chances? - B#87
What embassy take overs B? Which Embassy exactly, has been taken over? - Sarge#93
Sarge demonstrating his weak grasp of the concepts of spreading and predicting. - B#95Libya Breached.
Now the Tunisia embassy is breached.
Germany's embassy in Somalia breached and burned.
Walls in Sudan embassy breached.
USA embassy in Egypt walls breached.
USA embassy in Yemen has walls breached Give it a couple hours.
|
|
| | | 105 | Perm Dude
ID: 577543120 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 19:56
|
It very well could hurt him politically. Of course, the GOP was insisting that Obama was going to be hurt politically by calling for peace instead of what we are getting, but their ODS has hit silly season.
I certainly am not looking forward to FOX News trying to hide their glee over the next week or two.
|
|
| | | 106 | Mith
ID: 437192317 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 19:57
|
Basically partisans are trying to hang Ronmey for being truthful and accurate instead of participating in a popular fiction
Please define the popular fiction that Romney avoids in the preceding excerpt, if you would.
|
|
| | | 107 | Boldwin
ID: 12814149 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 21:25
|
That Romney is too much of an elitist to understand what the middle class actually consists of.
|
|
| | | 108 | Mith
ID: 437192317 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 21:43
|
Huh?
Partisans are trying to hang Ronmey for being truthful and accurate instead of participating in the popular fiction that Romney is too much of an elitist to understand what the middle class actually consists of?
|
|
| | | 109 | Boldwin
ID: 12814149 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 21:51
|
You and George Steph. are merely flogging this issue of where the middle class cut-off line is, to repeat the Romney=elitist meme and distract from the 'Obama aint fixed a thing' reality.
The more you portray him as raising that cut-off line...
[which he isn't, it's defined by economists and sociologists and he's just being factual]
...the more you can paint him an out of touch elitist.
|
|
| | | 110 | Mith
ID: 437192317 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 22:06
|
So I'm not allowed to wonder out loud if Romney will protect me from a tax hike by asking what he means when he says middle class?
Where'd your "I'm not shill for the GOP" hat go? So much for your your tea party principless, huh?
|
|
| | | 111 | Mith
ID: 437192317 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 22:07
|
I'm going to get an awful lot of milage out of #109 in future posts.
|
|
| | | 112 | Boldwin
ID: 12814149 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 22:25
|
You do know that the Tea Party wants to protect EVERYONE from a tax hike, right?
|
|
| | | 113 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 22:36
|
hahahaha oh wait, you actually believe them huh? hahahahaha
|
|
| | | 114 | Mith
ID: 23217270 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 23:09
|
So much for that. Any other potential Romney supporters at this forum care to weigh in on what he might mean by saying $100k isn't middle class but "$200k - $250k and less" is?
|
|
| | | 115 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 23:29
|
Only way to interpret what he said MITH, is that 100k is insufficient to fall into the middle class. Apparently, 150-250k is his idea of middle class and under 150k = poor. Which in GOP parlance means, "leech upon society".
|
|
| | | 116 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Fri, Sep 14, 2012, 23:32
|
Heh. Romney obviously flubbed his answer. But apparently anointed GOP candidates are unable to flub, and the blame must go to the person asking the question.
You can tell a lot about a person with how they react after they make a mistake. According to the GOP, that is not a concern because Romney doesn't make a mistake.
I read some where some wingers are taking Obama to task for not having open press conferences during this current Middle East blowup. Apparently they forget that, in a Romney administration, press conferences with the "lamestream" media would be of interest to historians only.
|
|
| | | 117 | Mith
ID: 18451815 Sat, Sep 15, 2012, 00:41
|
Sarge 115
I disagree, although as far as I can tell that's what Boldwin seemed to be getting at in #s 99 & 100 - in defense of what Romney said.
I'm not so sure Romney meant it that way. But I guess if he refuses to deliver a straight answer it'll indicate that you and B are right.
|
|
| | | 118 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Sat, Sep 15, 2012, 01:19
|
Oh I dont doubt that isnt how he meant it. But according to the English language, that is what he said/implied, with his chosen response.
|
|
| | |
| | | 121 | Mith
ID: 23217270 Thu, Sep 20, 2012, 19:04
|
Looks like BS to me. Nationwide polls are irrelevant. There are more solidly red districts and they enjoy fewer voters per capita than blue.
I recall our old friend Boxman coming across that fact in an early chapter of Audacity of Hope and declaring it proof that the book was too biased for him to continue reading it.
|
|
| | | 122 | Seattle Zen
ID: 47630913 Thu, Sep 20, 2012, 19:07
|
They make the argument that there has been a correlation between nationwide polls in the past and House seat distribution. They agree that specific district-by-district polls are more accurate, but currently there is not enough poll data for each of the 438 districts to make calls individually.
|
|
| | | 123 | Mith
ID: 18451815 Thu, Sep 20, 2012, 19:17
|
Didn't the GOP control the last two redistrictings?
|
|
| | | 124 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Thu, Sep 20, 2012, 19:27
|
Yes, and that didnt stop M Bachmann from claiming her district had become more Democratic under the redistricting,when in fact the ratio of registered republican to Dem voters in her redefined district improved from her GOP POV.
|
|
| | | 125 | Seattle Zen
ID: 3603123 Thu, Sep 20, 2012, 19:35
|
Each state redistricts individually. Furthermore, as the story states, sometimes when a party controls the redistricting, they make the most powerful members' districts stronger which can actually weaken their colleagues' chances.
|
|
| | | 126 | Boldwin
ID: 15821200 Thu, Sep 20, 2012, 19:45
|
The goal of gerrymandering is to gain/keep control of legislatures. While the most influential certainly prevent watering down their own chances, they still rig it so they get the most districts possible. - Capt. Obvious
|
|
| | | 127 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Thu, Sep 20, 2012, 21:37
|
Nationwide polls are irrelevant.
They are more relevant to House races than Presidential ones.
I don't think that the Dems will take back the House. But I think they will make it that much harder for Boehner, who is already walking a tight line with his radical right.
I'd be pleased to see West, Bachmann, and a few others gone. And things look much better on that front. A House cleared out of the crazies would be a better House, even if under GOP control.
|
|
| | | 128 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Fri, Sep 21, 2012, 10:49
|
The House will likely stay solidly in GOP control. Incumbents, even bad ones, are hard to unseat.
|
|
| | | 129 | Boldwin
ID: 298262322 Sun, Sep 23, 2012, 23:34
|
Romney's alleged 'terrible month' with the '47% gaffe'.

Typical pollster assumptions structuring the poll:Schoen pointed out that the Pew poll was based on Democrats sampled for having an 11 percent voters registration edge over Republicans. He further added, “saying that America has gotten more Democratic than 2008, which is a questionable assumption.” But if they were trying to structure them properly:In fact, Rasmussen keeps a running monthly poll of party identification. In the latest poll, released September 1, they found:During August, 37.6% of Americans considered themselves Republicans. That’s up from 34.9% in July and 35.4% in June. It’s also the largest number of Republicans ever recorded by Rasmussen Report since monthly tracking began in November 2002. So tell me again what changed since 2010 to make people more pro-Obama?
|
|
| | | 130 | Boldwin
ID: 298262322 Sun, Sep 23, 2012, 23:43
|
Penn statistical dead heat.
Uhm, so if it's that close in a state that hasn't voted R for pres since 1988, how can the swing states be leaning O?
How are the yard signs looking, PD?
|
|
| | | 131 | Mith
ID: 23217270 Mon, Sep 24, 2012, 07:05
|
Most likely that'll wind up being an outlier. The previous polls this month in PA had Obama ahead (in order of release date) by 11, 9, 9, 1, 6 and 12 points.
That last one with the 12 point margin was a Rasmussen poll completed last week.
link
The fact that no one, including the Lonely Conservative writer, has heard of this polling outfit further suggests that it's probably an outlier.
Overall it's still not looking good for Romney.
|
|
| | | 132 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Mon, Sep 24, 2012, 07:25
|
Susquehanna has been showing a strong Romney bias for some time. Their previous poll had only a 1 point Obama lead.
Between their most recent 2 polls, Rasmussen came out with a 12 point Obama lead in PA, and the polling average is +7 points for Obama. Talking about Susquehanna as though this race is suddenly close here is pretty much the definition of cherry picking.
Romney has boatloads of cash and yet has pulled out of the state. Even they don't believe the Susquehanna polls.
|
|
| | | 133 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Mon, Sep 24, 2012, 13:23
|
I think the relevant question now is who benefits in the congressional races with the almost certain demise of Romney? And will the scale of his demise swing the congressional races?
|
|
| | | 134 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Mon, Sep 24, 2012, 13:28
|
One can only hope it will have a Congressional impact.
|
|
| | | 135 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Mon, Sep 24, 2012, 13:39
|
An excellent question, boikin.
I haven't looked much at the congressional races here (and the Senate seat, now held by Bob Casey, is safely in his hands again it looks like). But there does appear to be some local impact at the State House level, and a strong Dem effort (helped, in no small part, by voting machines which allow one-push party-line voting) might make the State house back in play for the Democrats--a key as we deal with redistricting.
Complicating things a bit here is that the GOP redistricting effort was throw out because of gerrymandering, so lines were redrawn, then redrawn again, then reverted back to the old lines. In some cases people just don't know who is running in their district!
I'd imagine this kind of thing is playing out in quite a few other states as well.
|
|
| | | 136 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Mon, Sep 24, 2012, 14:28
|
Obama's coattails will be enough to pick up a few seats but nothing like in 2008. Romney seems likely to lose at this stage, but he won't get blown out in the popular vote. Thus, the effect on the House races will be minimal and the GOP will retain control, albeit with a slightly smaller (but still considerable) majority.
|
|
| | | 137 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Mon, Sep 24, 2012, 16:22
|
I guess what I was kind of thinking if it looks like Romney can keep it close but lose, it clearly benefits the Dems, but if it looks like a blow out could that actually help the GOP. the theory going would be that with the assured 4 more years of Obama would decrease the numbers of dems turning out and increasing drive to get out the vote for GOP candidates. OR then again its just landslide everywhere.
|
|
| | | 138 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Mon, Sep 24, 2012, 16:30
|
A blowout for the President would almost certainly mean Democratic pickups in the House. Someone who votes for Obama voter is less likely to vote for a GOP House candidate who has been steadfastly anti-Obama.
Regardless, I don't see a Presidential landslide victory unless Romney keeps going with his flubs or gets completely smoked in the debates.
|
|
| | |
| | |
| | | 141 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Wed, Sep 26, 2012, 10:13
|
I will be anxious to see what excuses the right-wingers who don't believe polling data because it's too librul come up with on November 7th. Election fraud? Media won the election for Obama? The excuses will be used as a shield to avoid saying, "I was wrong. I don't understand Americans or polling as much as I thought I did."
|
|
| | | 142 | Tree
ID: 57842011 Wed, Sep 26, 2012, 11:14
|
they've been making excuses for years, blaming some of the things you've mentioned above. Also Romney recently blamed the Obama campaign for his own campaign being poorly run.
|
|
| | |
| | | 144 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Wed, Sep 26, 2012, 11:55
|
Romney cannot win if he loses both states. Even if he loses just one, he would be in a very difficult position to win. If Obama takes Ohio, all he has to do is pick up one more battleground state to win.
|
|
| | | 145 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Sep 26, 2012, 12:02
|
IF Obama wins OH and FL...the game is in fact over. Those 2 plus the other easily blue states, put him over 280 ECVs, and the race is only to 270.
|
|
| | | 146 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Wed, Sep 26, 2012, 13:26
|
Here is my question if poling was either not done or not publicized would there be an effect on the results?
|
|
| | | 147 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Sep 26, 2012, 13:43
|
That is a valid question. I dont recall the name of the theory, but there is a college memory from sociology, where the theory states that he fact that people are being studied, changes the outcome.
I am sure that to some point, it does impact. How much? I have no idea.
|
|
| | | 148 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Wed, Sep 26, 2012, 13:44
|
#139: The Romney campaign, and their backers, continue to believe this is the 1980 campaign all over again...
But a closer look at that campaign shows that Reagan never really was in any trouble after May of that year:
|
|
| | | 149 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Wed, Sep 26, 2012, 13:45
|
I don't think what is going on now if a large change in whether people are supporting Romney or Obama. What is going on is enthusiasm changes--slightly fewer Republicans are calling themselves likely voters, and slightly more Democrats are.
|
|
| | | 150 | Boldwin
ID: 228302617 Wed, Sep 26, 2012, 18:33
|
Which is media voter suppression. The in-the-tank media is doing everything they can to make Obama look like a winner.
I think these people will register their strong Obama revulsion by voting anyway.
|
|
| | | 151 | Tree
ID: 57842011 Wed, Sep 26, 2012, 19:31
|
The in-the-tank media is Facts are doing everything they can to make Obama look like a winner.
fixed that for ya.
|
|
| | | 152 | Building 7 Leader
ID: 171572711 Wed, Sep 26, 2012, 20:46
|
#148 Reagan never really was in any trouble after May of that year
Other than the period of Aug - Oct where it looks like he has a scant 2 point lead.
Also note how the numbers change drastically after the debate. And there have not even been any debates yet in 2012.
|
|
| | | 153 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Sep 26, 2012, 20:53
|
The debates, are going to hurt Romney HUGE, unless he manages to come off as absolutely BRILLIANT in the very 1st one.
|
|
| | | 154 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 00:38
|
I think these people will register their strong Obama revulsion by voting anyway.
Maybe they will. But many are simply dropping out at this point. Their "revulsion" seemingly isn't as strong as yours.
sarge: I think that the debates won't change a thing, in the end. I'm looking forward to them, since Romney will finally have to answer questions about math. But Romney had about 50 debates in his primary, is a decent debater, and will exceed the expectations of many, I think.
|
|
| | | 155 | biliruben
ID: 41431323 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 05:42
|
I don't have any expectation that Romney will do any basic addition in the debates. If he does, it will help him.
|
|
| | | 156 | Boldwin
ID: 478592622 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 07:14
|
You can be absolutely sure Biden will be protesting that he was under the impression there would be no math. He doesn't wanna match math with Paul Ryan.
|
|
| | | 157 | biliruben
ID: 41431323 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 07:20
|
All Paul Ryan has is hand-waving. Where are the cuts, Paul? Where are the cuts?
|
|
| | | 158 | Building 7 Leader
ID: 171572711 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 07:43
|
Romney Pulls Ahead by Dick Morris
It seems not all polls are the same.
Also, since Biden lost to Palin in the debates, he's going to get shellacked by Ryan.
|
|
| | | 159 | Boldwin
ID: 478592622 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 08:20
|
Did you catch Obama saying he wanted to export more jobs, yesterday? The media will have a harder time covering for him during a debate.
And can you wait for Biden?
 
Aftermath:

Biden could actually backfire on republicans. So bad he's darn entertaining, people could forget the entertainer would be a heartbeat away.
|
|
| | | 160 | Tree
ID: 57842011 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 10:16
|
so, we should post the endless array of funny and goofy mitt romney and paul ryan photos? that accomplishes what, exactly?
oh, right. nothing.
|
|
| | | 161 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 10:18
|
Romney Pulls Ahead by Dick Morris
It seems not all polls are the same.
Also, since Biden lost to Palin in the debates, he's going to get shellacked by Ryan.
That link and headline may say Romney pulls head, but the polling data he is using doesn't even say that. The headline is refuted by the rest of the article.
Biden did not "lose" the debate with Palin. Palin did exceed very low expectations for her, but neither managed to land any game changing punches which was Biden's plan all along. With a big lead, he was playing prevent defense rather than blitzing. With the expectations reversed this time around, I think Biden will fare well but again it will not ultimately matter much. Ryan has some pretty controversial policy positions that Biden will try to highlight. Ryan has no such ammo on Biden himself.
|
|
| | |
| | |
| | | 164 | Boldwin
ID: 368252710 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 11:28
|
Funny, PD was never hired by Clinton to engineer his campaign strategy.
Such an expert.
|
|
| | | 165 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 11:30
|
Lots of guys had their moment in the sun 15 years ago, then became a joke.
|
|
| | | 166 | Boldwin
ID: 368252710 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 11:39
|
Had you the courage to play Poliboard baseball this year I'd be beating you all about the place with my Jeter.
|
|
| | | 167 | Boldwin
ID: 368252710 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 11:49
|
Past is prelude:
Let’s take the most recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll which currently shows Obama beating Romney 50 percent to 45 percent. The poll has a +5 Dem advantage, 42 percent to 37 percent.
Now let’s look at the most comparable 2010 NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, conducted in late August of that year. That poll had a very comparable +4 Dem sample, 39 percent to 35 percent, and had Dems beating Republicans by two in a generic congressional ballot, 34 percent to 32 percent.
So how did the NBC/WSJ prediction of a +4 Dem advantage at the polls hold up on election in 2010? Not well.
According to the official exit polls party turnout was even in 2010, 35 percent to 35 percent. Additionally, Independents broke strong for Republicans giving them an overall six point win on House ballots nationally, 51 percent to 45 percent.
|
|
| | | 168 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 11:58
|
#166: As I've said before, I won't be playing in any leagues with you. Mostly because I don't have to.
I realize you continue to pray for another 2010, but it simply isn't going to happen.
|
|
| | | 169 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 12:03
|
The Right's Self-Delusion Syndrome.
It comes, IMO, from a self-referential media and willingness to burn the bridges of information flow that isn't already internally accepted or generated.
|
|
| | | 170 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 12:30
|
So who is going to be this year's azdbacker?
|
|
| | | 171 | Tree
ID: 88512711 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 12:55
|
Had you the courage to play Poliboard baseball this year I'd be beating you all about the place with my Jeter
which, of course, has nothing to do with anything relevant.
never mind that one player doesn't win a season for you. he was a nice pick, but he's not the only reason you're currently in first place.
|
|
| | | 172 | Building 7
ID: 87592712 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 13:56
|
Poor predictions can be shown for all polling companies.
They are assuming the R vs D turnout will be similar to 2008, and I don't think it will.
|
|
| | | 173 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 14:02
|
They are not. They are reporting what people are telling them. The pollsters are not themselves predictors--they are reporting the answers to poll questions from samples.
There is, of course, a natural error in the work--the margin of error. And while we might see a poll that has Obama up 9 points in Ohio with a MOE of 4.5 and say he might only be up half of that, he might very well be up 50% more as well.
Reporting reality is what the pollsters are not getting attacked for. The reality is looking bad for Mitt Romney, so the Right is attacking the messenger. The problem isn't the messenger--it is that Mitt Romney is a poor choice for a candidate and is dragging down the his party with him.
|
|
| | | 174 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 14:05
|
Actually PD, I think the problem the GOP has right now in history, *IS*, the GOP itself. It is, its own worst enemy right now.
|
|
| | | 175 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 14:11
|
Maybe. They certainly have no problem trying to tear at the process if they don't get their way, like whiny teenagers. Rather than wonder why they aren't getting votes from certain segments, they try to limit the people who can vote. Etc etc.
|
|
| | | 176 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 14:11
|
And no, I have no clue as to the waiver process in RIFC AA #1 either.
|
|
| | | 177 | Tree
ID: 88512711 Thu, Sep 27, 2012, 14:15
|
And no, I have no clue as to the waiver process in RIFC AA #1 either.
indeed. i won't be playing next year if this bidding business is still the way it's being done.
|
|
| | |
| | | 179 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 02:42
|
Bad enough to outvote the Republicans. Meanwhile, knowing they boxed themselves into a corner on Romney, the GOP is absolutely desperate for good news of any sort at this point.
|
|
| | | 180 | Boldwin
ID: 484290 Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 05:52
|
I like how pollsters can't spin the ballot request numbers. Kinda destroys the presumption they use in their polls that Dems have a built in 8% advantage.
|
|
| | | 181 | Tree
ID: 57842011 Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 09:16
|
good to see the lame excuses setting in already.
|
|
| | | 182 | Boldwin
ID: 484290 Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 09:39
|
Really? I don't know what lame excuse you are going to use.
|
|
| | | 183 | Tree
ID: 55819299 Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 10:21
|
Really? I don't know what lame excuse you are going to use.
i won't need an excuse come election day. my candidate has run a campaign just well enough to win an election he should lose, and the opposition candidate has run a campaign so poorly, it boggles the mind how much his staff must be getting paid to bungle things so badly.
|
|
| | | 184 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 10:56
|
I like how pollsters can't spin the ballot request numbers.
So some counties in Ohio have early ballot requests which weigh toward the GOP--this is your spin that somehow Ohio is in play?
I just want to make sure I understand the current GOP dream before I shake you awake...
|
|
| | | 185 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 10:57
|
The second week of November should be dedicated to re-posting all of those fever dream posts about how Romney is really going to win.
On second thought, this is the predictions thread--a little (lot) of slack should be granted.
|
|
| | | 186 | Tree
ID: 358112910 Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 11:20
|
The second week of November should be dedicated to re-posting all of those fever dream posts about how Romney is really going to win.
it is kind of at the point where it's ridiculous. yes, anything can happen before election time.
but for now, all the polling data shows a fairly large win for Obama.
|
|
| | | 187 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 12:08
|
I for one, remain cautiously optimistic. All the exit polls showed a Kerry win in OH too. (An election, I still think Diebold stole)
|
|
| | | 188 | Boldwin
ID: 428282914 Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 16:03
|
I would not put that past Diebold. Or the Bush crew.
When I say I fear Dems are a lock to steal 2% of the election this year, I am giving them the benefit of the doubt. I really suspect it will be as large as 8% in some states.
|
|
| | | 189 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 18:52
|
You predict that 8% of the vote in some states are fraudulent? Besides your own inflated fears of the "machine" what do you base this upon?
|
|
| | | 190 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Sat, Sep 29, 2012, 19:30
|
Lets be clear here...8% = 2 votes out of every 25 cast.
|
|
| | | 191 | Mith
ID: 98342014 Mon, Oct 01, 2012, 11:17
|
Politico To talk with any working Republican political operative these days is to hear the same tale of woe: a grim accounting of the past few weeks, a dash of gallows humor and a measure of hope that President Obama is still beatable. Never in question is that Mitt Romney is trailing — the private surveys these strategists see for their down-ballot clients make that clear. The only question is by how much.
But hanging up the phone or clicking out of e-mail is to find a parallel universe on the right. On TV, talk radio and especially the Internet is a place where the swing-state polls that show Romney losing are not just inaccurate but part of an intentional plot by the heretofore unknown media-pollster axis to depress Republican voters. In this other world, Romney not only isn’t losing — he’s on the verge of a convincing victory.
There has always been a divide between the Republican consultant class and conservative media figures. Operatives must dwell in the real world because their jobs depend on winning and losing. The likes of Morris and Limbaugh have different incentives. They want to build their email lists and listening audiences and there’s no faster way to conservative hearts than to kick the dreaded mainstream media. And when it’s well after Labor Day of a presidential year and the Republican nominee isn’t faring well, reassuring the home team that there’s just a scoreboard malfunction offers a seeming dose of logic to the situation.
But the Internet has let the alternate campaign reality flower this fall in a way that’s both striking and depressing to political professionals and pollsters. One website, unskewedpolls.com, even readjusts the public polling to include more Republicans in samples. The results: Romney leads in nearly every national poll released in September. Of course arbitrarily reweighting polls is wildly unscientific, but that hasn’t stopped Republicans like Limbaugh and even Texas Gov. Rick Perry from mentioning the site.
The attempt to debunk polls is in many ways the logical, if absurd, outgrowth of a choose-your-own-adventure political news environment where partisans have outlets that will echo their views.
“It’s ‘you-are-right’ news,” sighed longtime Republican strategist Mike Murphy, adding that if it was Democrats losing liberals would be baying about “Rupert [Murdoch] doing mind control on the numbers.”
But it’s one thing to advocate for a preferred party and portray the other in the worst possible light. Questioning the integrity of professional pollsters is something different: It’s preposterous.
Consider: For the vast polling conspiracy of 2012 to be legitimate would be to presume that longtime GOP pollster Bill McInturff is on the deal. McInturff co-runs the respected Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll with veteran Democratic pollster Peter Hart.
McInturff is also business partners with Neil Newhouse, Romney’s own pollster. So, by this standard, Romney’s own campaign could also be part of the conspiracy to … hurt the Romney campaign.
Of course, there’s no such motivation on the part of any pollster hired by mainstream news organizations to gauge public opinion.
“The Prime Directive of pollster survival is to make sure you ‘get it right’ — whether that be good or bad — for your party,” McInturff explained in an e-mail.
“Party identification is basically an attitudinal variable, not a stable population parameter. It is designed to vary,” wrote Gallup chief Frank Newport last week in a piece titled “The Recurring — and Misleading — Focus on Party Identification.”
Yet some Republicans, seeing some polls with a partisan identification breakdown unlikely to resemble the make-up of a state, believe it’s time to start weighting by party.
Veteran GOP pollster Whit Ayres said his preference would be for survey takers to weight their data according to an average of the party ID results they get over the course of an election cycle, in order to minimize variation.
“The poor journalists who get this data are in the position of having to explain why Obama went up by 7 in this month and down by 7 in that month, even though nothing happened and they know in their gut that nothing happened,” said Ayres, who added, “I don’t buy this sinister motivation that some people attribution to polls. I just think it’s the luck of the draw when you’re drawing a sample.”
Ayres argued there’s no reason to avoid reality-based polling, which he said still shows a winnable race: “Are things not going as well as they should for the Romney campaign? Of course, that’s just obvious. But we’re at the start of the fourth quarter and the guy is a field goal behind.”
|
|
| | | 192 | Perm Dude
ID: 56832185 Mon, Oct 01, 2012, 11:33
|
Reminds me of 2004, where it was the Dems talking about "oversampling" and "cell phone bias."
This is all a leadup to a massive Romney loss, some downballot GOP shortfalls as a result, and the GOP, as a whole, only learning how to whine rather than learning any lesson at all.
|
|
| | | 193 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Fri, Oct 05, 2012, 09:42
|
Looks like unemployment is under 8% and has been for while, insert crazy conspiracy theory here, which I guess means you can stick a fork in Romney and his post debate comeback. Strangely enough seeing the number was 7.8% actually made me feel more confident about things and if that is any indication, that should pretty wrap up the election for Obama, I am not sure how that will translate to incumbents in other races.
|
|
| | | 194 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Fri, Oct 05, 2012, 09:52
|
There is one more jobs report the Friday before election day. I doubt that report will have as much of an impact as this one though since nearly everyone will have made up their mind by then.
|
|
| | | 195 | Boldwin
ID: 40937423 Fri, Oct 05, 2012, 11:19
|
White House Authorizes Search for President’s Mojo - New Yorker MagazineWhite House Press Secretary Jay Carney announced the search with an air of urgency: “We will use every resource at our disposal to ensure the return of the President’s mojo, and that goes double for his groove.”
|
|
| | | 196 | Boldwin
ID: 40937423 Fri, Oct 05, 2012, 11:32
|
Cook County Surprise
Doesn't mean Romney will win Illinois. The GOP appears to have conceded Illinois, maybe they shouldn't.
|
|
| | |
| | | 198 | Boldwin
ID: 40937423 Fri, Oct 05, 2012, 13:45
|
Besides, that poll didn't include dead Cook County residents so you know it's way way off.
|
|
| | |
| | | 200 | slug
ID: 167132313 Fri, Oct 05, 2012, 16:33
|
They could have skipped the whole article except for the last sentence. U6 rate is at 14.7%, same as last month
|
|
| | | 201 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Fri, Oct 05, 2012, 16:36
|
from your link B;
To begin with, we must recognize that we are coasting along near the bottom of the employment nadir – a steep trench that was created by the 2008-2009 recession.
Ummm no, the recession was 2007-2008. The crash and burn in retail, came in 3rd QTR 2008.
|
|
| | |
| | | 203 | Biliruben
ID: 358252515 Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 09:47
|
Rasmusson weights by party, which is a fluid characteristic, so a statistical no-no.
|
|
| | |
| | | 205 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 17:28
|
I read Boldwin's post as agreeing with the fact that they are dreaming.
|
|
| | | 206 | Boldwin
ID: 589301022 Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 17:50
|
Don't worry. Biden will right the ship.
|
|
| | | 207 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 17:52
|
He only has to stop most of the bleeding. Given the way he's being treated by the Right beforehand (basically, as a lout and a joke) he has a lot of opportunity here against Dan Quayle 2.0.
|
|
| | | 208 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 18:01
|
Quite unintentionally, 206 may well be correct. Just, not the ship B thinks.
|
|
| | | 209 | Boldwin
ID: 589301022 Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 18:10
|
I actually like Biden when he's not armed and dangerous. Always the chance for some random act of truth to slip out unintended. It will be fascinating to see what level of gravitas he attempts to project. I can imagine a fun loving sweet-spot for him but if he attempts 'full of himself', which he is entirely wont to do, waiting for the clown shoes, whoopie-cushions and trick collar to peek out will be soooo delicious.
|
|
| | | 210 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 18:19
|
Biden, despite being somewhat of a buffoon, is a capable debater. That expectations are low for him will only help. He sometimes sticks his foot in his mouth, but he is more of an Joe Everyman than anyone else in the race.
|
|
| | | 211 | Pancho Villa
ID: 59645318 Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 18:37
|
The more interesting aspect of the debate is that Ryan can't be Ryan.
|
|
| | | 212 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 18:43
|
I suspect Ryan will be trying a rope-a-dope and coming off very different from Romney in his last debate. We saw the aggressive side, now here comes the quiet reflective side, in other words.
|
|
| | | 213 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 18:57
|
Watching CNN discuss tonights debate, an done of the Democratic strategists just said this same thing PV. That he HOPED Ryan would say what he believes, honestly, because in the saying he would reveal his extremism and turn-off the independents in an instant.
|
|
| | | 214 | Boldwin
ID: 119531322 Sun, Oct 14, 2012, 04:10
|

Obama's Intrade Chart

Romney's Intrade Chart
|
|
| | | 215 | Boldwin
ID: 119531322 Sun, Oct 14, 2012, 20:01
|
The captain wired in he had water comin' in and the good ship and crew was in peril. And later that night when 'is lights went outta sight came the wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald.
---
So instead their new mission is to be perceived as actually reporting news rather than spinning it. Thus comes media credibility day, the day the press decides to act like actual reporters instead of liberal advocates, it will last long enough for them to claim that they called the election correctly… - Da Tech Guy's Blog
|
|
| | | 216 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Sun, Oct 14, 2012, 20:09
|
Still conducting the War On Facts? Nice.
|
|
| | |
| | | 218 | Boldwin
ID: 09251621 Wed, Oct 17, 2012, 14:50
|
The last Marquette University poll of Wisconsin was conducted the last week of September, prior to the first presidential debate. It found Obama with a comfortable 11-point lead among likely voters, 53-42. Among the broader universe of registered voters, Obama enjoyed a 14-point lead of Romney, 54-40. He had leads on job approval, favorability and better handling most issues. What a difference a debate makes.
In the University's latest poll of Wisconsin, released this afternoon, Obama's comfortable lead has been wiped out. He's headline support dropped four points and Romney's support surged up 6 points. The race is essentially tied, with Obama getting support from 49% of likely voters to Romney's 48%. - 10/17/12
In new poll, Romney rating as strong leader is 55%, up from 47% two wks ago. #mulawpoll Michigan University
Before VP debate, Ryan fav/unfav was 46/41. Afterward, it was 50/40
Before VP debate, Biden fav/unfav was 49/41. Afterward, it was 44/47
Results two weeks ago put Obama ahead of Romney in every issue area. Now it is much closer, with Romney ahead in some.
Sample in this poll shows change in Democratic identifiers from 34% to 31%, with GOP identifiers staying at 28%
|
|
| | | 219 | Mith
ID: 98342014 Wed, Oct 17, 2012, 15:20
|
Can I take this to mean you've given up on bitching that the polling outfits (including Rasmussen and those associated with the Romney campaign) are all in bed with the Dems?
Or if Obama gets a bounce after last night's debate can we expect more of that line?
|
|
| | | 220 | Boldwin
ID: 539121714 Wed, Oct 17, 2012, 15:23
|
No MITH, until the pollsters give up the MYTH that there is @11 percentage point advantage in likely Dem voters, the polls will all skew Dem, even the ones showing Romney in the lead.
|
|
| | | 221 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Oct 17, 2012, 15:28
|
Any poll which is not of likely voters and does not ask who they will vote for is useless. "Strong leader" questions are merely filler for cherry-picking partisans hoping to shore up their weak candidate.
|
|
| | | 222 | Boldwin
ID: 539121714 Wed, Oct 17, 2012, 16:23
|
PD
Your comment completely ignores that pollsters just automatically tack on an extra 11% to dem numbers, just because of decades old voting patterns and outdated voter registration. I don't have any problem with identifying who is likely. That is useful, critical even.
|
|
| | | 225 | Boldwin
ID: 539121714 Wed, Oct 17, 2012, 16:47
|
It's called 'the Democratic Sampling Advantage' and they are assuming in some cases that Dems will have even more of an advantage than in '08. That is just obviously wrong.
Want a skewed poll? Just assume Dems have a built in advantage of up to 13%. More registered Dems in years past, more dems than reps in '08. You can sorta rationalize it if you turn yer head just so.
I have seen states where more republican absentee ballots are being requested than Dems in states Obama carried last time. And they were calling those states for Obama. Run that thru yer poll.
|
|
| | | 226 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Oct 17, 2012, 17:50
|
I know what a sampling average is. You are simply wrong that pollsters "tack on an extra 11%."
It isn't even worth discussing with you, to be blunt. You are convinced by no evidence that you are anything other than a victim of obvious and not-so obvious bias.
|
|
| | |
| | | 228 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Fri, Oct 19, 2012, 02:11
|
I think the Jewish vote will be a little more clarified after the next debate, on foreign policy.
The polling I've seen so far shows Obama doing quite well among the Jewish voters. He might not hit that 78% he got against McCain, but he is unlikely to drop below 60% IMO. I think that poll is an outlier.
|
|
| | | 258 | Boldwin
ID: 29929235 Tue, Oct 23, 2012, 11:56
|
“If I were looking at the numbers and managing the campaign, I would be upset,” Beckel said. “I’m not sure panic. But if the numbers are correct, it’s over. It is over. - Bob Beckel re gallup poll
|
|
| | | 259 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Tue, Oct 23, 2012, 12:07
|
"If the numbers are correct..."
Exactly. Gallup is an interesting outlier right now. Perhaps because were sampling more whites than ever (and, when they changes, suddenly Obama's Gallup approval shot up to 53%?) I really don't know, but it all hinges upon "correct" and I think a poll of polls is more useful than any particular poll.
Its a tight race. Except in the Electoral College, where Obama has a persistent and consistent lead.
|
|
| | | 260 | Mith
ID: 98342014 Tue, Oct 23, 2012, 12:09
|
Beckel said that about the Gallup poll that came out last week that at the time and still continues to stand out as an outlier. And of course the context omitted from #258 is that Beckel finished the statement by noting that he in fact didn't believe those results.
But for those keeping score, three weeks ago the polling agencies were all in the bag for Obama. Now Gallup's numbers above all others are to be boasted by Romney supporters.
|
|
| | | 272 | Boldwin
ID: 29929235 Tue, Oct 23, 2012, 22:59
|
Today’s Rasumssen three day tracking poll now shows Romney over Obama 50% to 46%. - RedState Tho you can still find people who claim Obama won the last debate.
|
|
| | | 273 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Tue, Oct 23, 2012, 23:04
|
Aren't those two different things?
And their tracking poll already was 50/46 on Sunday. I don't know if their newest tracking poll includes post-debate results yet (usually you've got to give it two days before they start to appear in tracking polls), but if there was any change at all it is likely too small to move the numbers right now.
|
|
| | |
| | | 275 | DWetzel
ID: 25740420 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 00:40
|
Reading is apparently not fundamental.
|
|
| | | 277 | Boldwin
ID: 29929235 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 02:25
|
As if they were actually to a man trying to vindicate Winston Churchill's “A young man who isn't a socialist hasn't got a heart; an old man who is a socialist hasn't got a head.”...
It looks like The entire 1990-1991 season cast of "Saturday Night Live" can't bring themselves to vote for Obama.
|
|
| | |
| | | 279 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 12:27
|
I'm not sure why this would be a surprise. Dennis Miller and Victoria Jackson have long worked on behalf of conservative issues, for example. Surely you weren't under the impression that they ever were Democrats?
This isn't a case of people changing their minds and getting conservative as they got older. this is a case of people being conservative for many years but suddenly a desperate and wobbly conservative media site latched onto the "news."
|
|
| | | 280 | Tree
ID: 129352411 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 12:41
|
Sandler was a donor to Rudy Giuliani's presidential campaign. i'm not sure if that's something worth bragging about.
let me help you out Baldwin - here's a list of Conservative celebrities.
beyond them being names on a list, and your false point about people getting more conservative as they get older, i'm not sure how any of this matters anyway.
|
|
| | | 281 | Boldwin
ID: 2397243 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 14:03
|
I think it's interesting because SNL is particularly liberal and influential. To have a class do a complete turnaround is certainly significant. I of course know 2/3 on your list, which I also ran across but there is a difference between having always been a conservative in hiding, and being a band of uberlibs turned conservative. And they haven't all gone conservative but they've all had it up to here with Obama.
|
|
| | | 282 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 14:07
|
It isn't a turnaround.
One member not on your list: Al Franken. Think he's going for Romney?
:)
|
|
| | | 283 | Great One
ID: 2431114 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 14:31
|
Wish we could get some audio of Victoria Jackson on Stern's show recently. Heard that was pretty good.
|
|
| | |
| | | 285 | Boldwin
ID: 2397243 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 15:17
|
Rockstar Treatment

Looks familiar somehow. Where did I see this kind of thing before? People headed to this ran into 2 hour highway backups and half the crowd had to be turned away at the door.
But Obama is deliberately keeping his crowds small to more effectively communicate, don't you know.
|
|
| | | 287 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 16:35
|
Second image not loading.
Meanwhile, Obama still leading in CO. Like most other places the race is tightening but Romney has never led there. And with fewer and fewer undecideds still in the LV category is isn't looking good for Romney there.
|
|
| | | 288 | Boldwin
ID: 2397243 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 16:58
|
Start showing us the rockstar treatment Obama is getting when he goes to Colorado, etc.
|
|
| | | 289 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 17:05
|
Why?
|
|
| | | 290 | Boldwin
ID: 2397243 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 17:14
|
This is a prediction thread. Let's put see some gauges.
|
|
| | | 292 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 17:17
|
Romney isn't getting the rockstar treatment. He's getting the Messiah treatment.
Prediction: Obama wins Colorado.
|
|
| | | 293 | Boldwin
ID: 2397243 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 17:19
|
Here, I'll help you get started.


Dayton Ohio EnviroXXXXXXs in action.
|
|
| | | 294 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 17:20
|
I'll go one further..Obama wins OH, CO, IA, WI and the Presidency.
|
|
| | | 295 | Boldwin
ID: 2397243 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 17:38
|
I notice that that signage left the "vote often" implied in good ole Chicago style.
|
|
| | | 297 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 21:16
|
Reuters/Ipsos likes Obama
Obama maintains a larger advantage in the state-by-state battle that will determine the outcome of the election. Ipsos projects that Obama holds an edge in the most hotly contested states, including Florida, Virginia and Ohio, and is likely to win by a relatively comfortable margin of 332 electoral votes to 206 electoral votes.
|
|
| | | 298 | Tree
ID: 57842011 Thu, Oct 25, 2012, 01:18
|
To have a class do a complete turnaround is certainly significant.
as pointed out already, there was no turnaround.
Here, I'll help you get started.
what are you showing in the second picture in that post? a rally where there was no Obama...how actually is that relevant? oh wait, never mind, it's not - well, i mean, unless you're being dishonest once again.
|
|
| | | 299 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Thu, Oct 25, 2012, 10:04
|
This election is shaping up a lot like 2004. I think the challenger does everything he needs to do except win Ohio. Unlike 2004, I can see the challenger ending up winning the popular vote.
|
|
| | | 301 | Seattle Zen
ID: 47630913 Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 17:40
|
Getting back on topic....
October 26, 2012. Obama a three-to-one favorite to win.
with a 75% chance of winning Ohio. Romney's momentum seems to have stopped.
We have seen this many times before, elections usually tighten up in the last weeks. Don't y'all remember how John McCain said that if the election was at the end of November, he would have won? The 2008 election is often remembered like this to Republicans: McCain was about to take the lead and win this thing, then the financial crisis rocked the economy and Obama ("with the help of millions of illegal votes" if you are really crazy) just barely won. You'll hear much the same four years from now: Romney took the lead nationally and was crushing him in the debates, but then the partisan office of labor statistics lied about the jobless rate dropping by a whole percentage point and there were other lies by the media that the "economy is strong" and Obama AGAIN won when he should have lost. Throw in a Soros meme for the crazies.
This race is not as close as people think. Obama will win. More predictions soon.
|
|
| | | 302 | Boldwin
ID: 51902523 Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 20:08
|
There is one similarity. The Republican party hierachy insisted on a candidate the republican base doesn't like.
Romney is at least willing to fight harder than McCain.
|
|
| | | 303 | Pancho Villa
ID: 59645318 Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 20:18
|
The Republican party hierachy insisted on a candidate the republican base doesn't like.
I guess by Republican party hierarchy you mean Republican voters in state primaries.
|
|
| | | 304 | DWetzel
ID: 25740420 Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 20:28
|
Excellent.
Moral: conservative/religious wingnuts who think they are the Republican base have a vastly overinflated sense of their own worth. (Not exactly breaking news, I know.)
|
|
| | | 307 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 22:28
|
The "base" couldn't get its act together--in quite a few states they couldn't even get candidates on the ballot.
I'm sure it soothes the nerves to think that your candidates were the victims of smooth-talking insiders who hijacked the election rather than the fact that your party ended up with the best worst candidate because the campaigns of everyone else were run by amateurs without the basic political skills necessary to run a national campaign. And since, for the GOP, politics is now less about solving problems than in soothing emotions this might be a good, though predictable thing for the "base."
The campaigns of pretty much everyone except Romney were run by groups of sophomore College Republicans. Romney won by default, not because he had insider help.
|
|
| | | 308 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 22:40
|
The 'best' GOP candidate, never really got off the ground.
|
|
| | | 309 | Boldwin
ID: 51902523 Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 22:59
|
Every conservative hating liberal here wanted Romney to be nominated. What more needs to be said?
|
|
| | | 310 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 23:01
|
No, every "liberal" here wanted Santorum, or Palin or Bachmann. Then it would have been a slam dunk Obama re-election w/o any need to even hold the voting. Had the GOP nominated Huntsman, they would have had a shot at those famous Reagan Demcrats. BUT, they would not have been nominating a mindless puppet, and THAT, was Huntsmans downfall.
|
|
| | | 311 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Sat, Oct 27, 2012, 00:25
|
That's exactly right. I was hoping Palin was jumping in, and said so several times.
|
|
| | | 333 | Pancho Villa
ID: 59645318 Sun, Oct 28, 2012, 11:19
|
#331 is a weak defense for a weak post. Not just weak, but a flaming example of just how little thoughtful analysis goes into most every post we're subjected to by forum fascists. If you don't support criminalization of strikes by employees and lockouts by employers because you deem these acts as prejudicial and detrimental to the national community and therefore to society as an entirety, then you aren't who I'm referring to. If you do, own your fascism, and let the middle class put something in their pockets. See how easy it is to play this stupid game?
the country club republican money men
It boggles the mind how someone can write such a meaningless phrase and pretend like it's coherent. Who are you talking about? Donald Trump? He owns country clubs, he has money, and he tried to host his own presidential debate except only Santorum and Gingrich said they'd attend. Rush Limbaugh? He's a member of the all white Everglades Country Club in Palm Beach(my mistake, they allowed blacks to join 3 years ago). How about the members of Augusta National, where longtime Masters chairman Clifford Roberts, who helped found Augusta National in 1933, famously said, "As long as I'm alive, all the golfers will be white and all the caddies will be black."
And all the members will be male.
Colin Powell? According to Pete du Pont
The struggle you see in the Republican Party today is the country club Republican versus the bowling alley Republican. Colin Powell brings us back to the country club image. He's an insider. He's a moderate.
Is that what you meant? Country club Republican money men who are black and support Obama for president are responsible for Romney's nomination.
Google "country club republican" returns 41 million hits! According to wikipedia,
Some of the characteristics attributed to a country club Republicans are a higher than average income or wealth[Romney - check], a lack of sympathy with the lower income citizens[Romney - check], and liberal views on abortion, gay rights, and other social issues[Romney -check before flip-flopping]. They are also said to put less emphasis and value on religion[Romney - a Mormon - no check] and have attended more prestigious colleges than most other Republican Party members[Romney - Stanford, BYU, Harvard - check]
They don't even mention golf!
|
|
| | | 338 | Boldwin
ID: 509192814 Sun, Oct 28, 2012, 15:34
|
How the gender gap is closing. - NRO I couldn't explain it.
Now if I could just find someone to explain how Obama is improving wrt male voters.
|
|
| | | 339 | Boldwin
ID: 509192814 Sun, Oct 28, 2012, 15:41
|
Very interesting NRO comment from Jim Bennett:John, let me suggest that the criteria for victory are changing. The debate no longer ends when the debaters walk off stage. And now it no longer ends when the TV spinners have, like cuckoos, laid their eggs and flown away. There is now the long, long reverberation in social media, where the basic debate footage serves as raw material for mash-ups and parodies and treatments for the rest of the election cycle and beyond. And Biden’s performance, which won him some tactical advantage in the debate, has set him up as the target for rich satire and a way that Ryan’s conventional performance didn’t and cannot do. His performance is comic gold, and although within hard-core Dem/left circles he will be celebrated as the warrior, everywhere else, and especially for basically apolitical young YouTube viewers, he will be the jackass supreme. I suspect that by Election Day, the various parodic videos will have had a larger viewership than the debate itself. By this criterion, the tactic was a massive miscalculation. You really can't underestimate the twitterverse wars, viral videos, both campaign generated and spontaneous, and other social media battlegrounds. There will be some fascinating internet summaries of the social media war when the time comes to sum up this election. Keep an eye out for those.
|
|
| | | 340 | Boldwin
ID: 33933290 Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 10:19
|
Battleground Poll coincides with the Gallop Poll readings.While Obama can close the gap with a strong voter turnout effort, “reports from the field would indicate that not to be the case, and Mitt Romney may well be heading to a decisive victory,” says pollster Ed Goeas.
Should Romney win by 5 percentage points, it would increase Republican chances of gaining control of the Senate. His coattails would help elect GOP Senate candidates in Virginia, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. “Republicans are now certain to hold the House,” Goeas said, “regardless of how the presidential race turns out.”
The poll’s election model takes into account variables including voter intensity, age, and education, and voters who are certain in their vote. The race “remains very close in the surface,” Goeas said, “but the political environment and the composition of the likely electorate favor Governor Romney.”
The projected outcome by the Battleground Poll is close to that of the Gallup Poll. Last week, Gallup said Romney leads Obama 49 percent to 46 percent in its model of the electorate’s composition on November 6.
The Battleground Poll is conducted by Goeas of the Tarrance Group and Celinda Lake of Lake Research Partners. Goeas is a Republican, Lake a Democrat. The survey is affiliated with Politico and George Washington University. On ABC / Stephanopolis this weekend Andrew Sullivan said there were two tracks in polling. The 'Gallop/ABC polling universe' portends a Romney crushing win. The other polling universe sees it much closer.
|
|
| | | 341 | Tree
ID: 57842011 Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 11:03
|
i' m trying to find the data and actual information to support the link in 340...not the linked article, but where they got their information.
in the most recent poll from Battleground, released today, Obama has the lead. here's the time line of their polls...
|
|
| | | 342 | Seattle Zen
ID: 3603123 Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 11:28
|
From Tree's link
The president also leads by 8 points among those who have already voted, 53 to 45 percent.
This has a double whammy effect on Romney. Not only does he have to make up ground, but it is discouraging to his base and really hampers GOTV efforts. Why go out and vote when your candidate has already lost?
|
|
| | | 343 | biliruben
ID: 21841115 Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 11:29
|
There is no poll.
It looks like a weighted model using a whole bunch of variables that makes Romney's chances look much, much better than they actually are, because they don't want. Why, I'm not sure. Weighting like that has been discredited as unscientific, so I'm guessing they are trying to stave of the despair from their base.
The actual Poll. Obama retakes lead
|
|
| | | 344 | Boldwin
ID: 33933290 Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 12:10
|
Well Politico, a decidedly 'leaning left while trying to appear neutral' site and Celinda Lake of Lake Research Partners are involved with that prediction so I don't know what objective reason you would have to discount it.
|
|
| | | 345 | biliruben
ID: 21841115 Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 12:11
|
They are involved with the actual poll, which has Obama in the lead.
I have no idea who is involved in the statistical nonsense you linked to.
|
|
| | | 346 | Boldwin
ID: 33933290 Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 12:12
|
Lake has worked with organizations and individuals such as the AFL-CIO, the SEIU, Emily's List, The White House Project, Planned Parenthood, the Democratic National Committee (DNC), Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano...etc - wiki
|
|
| | | 347 | biliruben
ID: 21841115 Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 12:24
|
Yeah, I get that. She is linked to the poll. She, as far as I can tell, has nothing to do with the projection.
I have no idea who did the projection, and what it even means. If you can give me a link to the actual description of the analysis from a reputable source then we can start a discussion. Linking to the Weekly Standard article with, as far as I can tell, numbers pulled out of some bloggers arse, doesn't count as a legitimate place to even begin discourse.
|
|
| | | 348 | biliruben
ID: 21841115 Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 12:42
|
As I suspected.
This was the Republican side of the equation, Goeas, and his particular spin on the numbers. The spin was partisan, not bipartisan. It also doesn't have any scientific validity, as far as I can tell.
Baldwin - please start doing your own homework.
|
|
| | | 349 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 13:37
|
That isn't opening up for me, bili. Is there another link.
|
|
| | | 350 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 13:46
|
opened for me just now
|
|
| | | 351 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 14:11
|
Still couldn't read it, but it did open in IE as a pdf.
Yeah, that is pure spin. Once or twice they even referred to Romney as just Mitt which shows how chummy they feel with the candidate.
More desperate attempts to put lipstick on their pig.
|
|
| | | 354 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 15:52
|
It is about the economy. And many people realize that Romney would take us back to the same policies and spending and taxing priorities which made it such a mess.
No, I don't think people are so stupid as to believe Mitt Romney would have lifted a finger to save 1.3 million jobs associated with an auto industry failure.
We would be in a horrible, horrible situation if we'd taken and implemented Romney's ideas about how to handle the economy.
|
|
| | | 355 | biliruben
ID: 21841115 Mon, Oct 29, 2012, 16:15
|
So Baldwin gets caught shoveling shiznet and calling it roses. His response is to counter with content-free aphorisms and insults.
I think that's a step up! At least he isn't actively disseminating lies. It would be nice of addressed and retracted those lies, but hey, baby steps.
He's good enough, he's smart enough, and doggone it, I really like him!
|
|
| | | 356 | Frick
ID: 2193319 Wed, Oct 31, 2012, 14:36
|
It looks likely that the Republicans will lose a seat in the Senate. And the loss of the seat can be traced squarely back to the Tea Party. Luger would have cruised to a victory.
The bottom line is this: Hoosier voters are poised to elect Joe Donnelly as their next United States Senator. Throughout the cycle, Hoosiers have had strong reservations about Richard Mourdock’s extremist and obstructionist approach to politics, and his comments during last week’s debate just served to reinforce those concerns. Voters want a candidate who will work with Democrats and Republicans to do what is best for Indiana.
What a novel idea, doing what is the best for your constituents, not for your party.
|
|
| | | 357 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Fri, Nov 02, 2012, 22:26
|
7 predictors to reassure nervous Obama supporters
Freaking out about the supertight presidential race and the near-daily barrage of polls suggesting that Obama—no, wait, Romney—could, maybe, possibly, eke out a narrow victory? Sick of empty punditry and craving data-driven electoral analysis? Are you unafraid of mysterious nerdy things like math?
If you answered yes to any of the above, check out these seven guys who crunch mountains of polling data so you don't have to. They don't have crystal balls, but they might just have the next best thing.
|
|
| | | 358 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Sat, Nov 03, 2012, 20:08
|
In fairness, the GOP didnt much want Mitt
IMHO, Mitt didnt so much "win" the GOP nomination, as he just outlasted all the loonies who saw fit ti run against him. I mean, it really wasnt all that difficult to look like the best option, when the choices were Perry, Bachmann, Cain, Santorum....
|
|
| | |
| | |
| | | 361 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Mon, Nov 05, 2012, 02:55
|
Actually, Ryan is almost certainly going to win his House seat back.
|
|
| | | 362 | Seattle Zen
ID: 3603123 Mon, Nov 05, 2012, 11:16
|
Here is my final prediction post for this grand 2012 election:
President Obama wins the popular vote and re-election. He surprises everyone with a win in Florida.
The Senate remains a Democratic majority with 52.
The House is remarkably close, so close that we do not who will be Speaker tomorrow night. I predict there will be 8-10 close races that will go to recount and those results will determine who has the majority. In the end, it will probably be Republican. Would Paul Ryan run against Boehner for Speaker?
Here in WA, I-502 wins, R 74 loses a close one and as much as I hope this does not happen, Rob McKenna becomes the first WA Rep. governor since 1985.
|
|
| | | 363 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Mon, Nov 05, 2012, 12:08
|
My predictions have not changed much since post 21. I'll revise my Senate prediction to 52-48 in favor of the Democratic caucus.
So on the whole, nothing changes except hopefully the GOP will be more willing to compromise over the next four years.
|
|
| | | 364 | DWetzel
ID: 25740420 Mon, Nov 05, 2012, 12:56
|
Obama, 293-245. Popular vote will be very close, but Obama will win that too by a margin of less than 0.5%, held down a bit by low voter turnout in the northeast.
Senate: 51-49 Dem (assuming you're counting Angus King with the Dems, he's an independent in Maine), after a long Indiana recount.
House: Really, really close; I wouldn't be surprised if it's nominally Republican and then a couple of Rs, disenchanted with the extremist wing of their party, jump ship and flip control of the House.
|
|
| | | 365 | Frick
ID: 2193319 Mon, Nov 05, 2012, 15:13
|
NY Times
Very cool interactive What-if machine. Want to know the paths each candidate has to victory. Or the remote, but possible tie scenarios?
|
|
| | | 366 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Mon, Nov 05, 2012, 15:16
|
I would be very surprised if the House is close.
|
|
| | | 367 | wolfer
ID: 198112510 Mon, Nov 05, 2012, 15:21
|
Re : 360 and 361.
Ryan will at least sweat it out for his House seat. His challenger raised like 10 times more money than Ryan's challenger 2 years ago and has even "forced" Ryan to run ads on TV, something that Ryan has never done in prior elections.
|
|
| | | 368 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Mon, Nov 05, 2012, 15:25
|
I agree, Razor. I see the GOP still holding strongly to it (mostly because of favorable district lines). But a House without Backman, West, and Joe Wilson would be a real step forward.
|
|
| | | 369 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Mon, Nov 05, 2012, 15:50
|
My post 18:
My prediction: House 219 Dem, 216 Rep Senate 49, 49 and 2 Independent WH Obama
**************************************
House 205 D, 230 R (changing that one) Senate 52 D 2 I 46 R WH Obama
|
|
| | | 370 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 07:57
|
Voted. Very cold, and a long line. I was #32 in line and it took about 40 minutes altogether.
Get out and vote, people!
|
|
| | | 371 | Frick
ID: 2193319 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 09:12
|
I was able to vote and get back to my house in well under 15 minutes. I'm not sure what took longer, waiting for them to find my name in the voter roll or filling out a mixed ticket.
I'll admit that I skipped voting on 4 races where there was only 1 candidate.
|
|
| | | 372 | biliruben
ID: 41431323 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 09:21
|
All mail here in Washington. Voted early and often.
|
|
| | | 373 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 09:21
|
I usually do the same thing, Frick, though when I'm not rushed I'll sometimes just write my own name in!
|
|
| | | 374 | walk
ID: 15102168 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 09:22
|
45 minutes to vote in NYC, getting to the polls at 6:50am, too. Lots of folks try to vote before work, where the polls here open at 6am. My wife got there at 5:55am, and it took her 40 minutes.
|
|
| | | 375 | Pancho Villa
ID: 59645318 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 09:46
|
Starting my day in what could be Romney's biggest win percentage-wise(Utah), then driving to Grand Junction, Colorado, which could be instrumental in the final tally.
Although Western Colorado is quite red, it will be fun watching the returns in a battleground state, presuming the election is still in doubt by the time the polls close there.
Weather report for the Rocky Mountains early November? High near 70 through Thursday, perfect for golf.
|
|
| | | 376 | Pancho Villa
ID: 59645318 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 10:06
|
Hate to do this to my friends in the Northeast who are suffering through devastating weather-related issues, but here is where I'll be teeing off at 12:45.
|
|
| | | 377 | DWetzel
ID: 25740420 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 10:25
|
"Hate to do this"
My take on this
(Also have some plans to golf this afternoon, but it might rain. Sigh.)
|
|
| | | 378 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 10:40
|
That was a dick move, PV. Just sayin'. :)
Roundup of pundit predictions. What, exactly, is Jim Cramer smoking?
|
|
| | | 379 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 10:44
|
As a follow-up to Jim Cramer's prediction of Obama getting 440 EV's, I was just checking my interactive electoral vote map, and there is no way Obama can get 440 without him getting all the battleground states, plus Texas and 2-3 other smaller Southern states. And even then he's barely at 440.
|
|
| | | 380 | boikin
ID: 532592112 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 11:20
|
So I just ran an expected net present value analysis on which candidates would benefit me most and then factored in the probability of candidate victories and found that my time is worth more than the gas and time it would take to vote. In other words the outcome of the election has about the same impact on me as who wins the Superbowl. I am going to bet that if generalized this out to general population I would find that good chunk of population could make this same calculation. I guess it was good I voted absentee, then again it probably won't be counted.
Final prediction as was back in 08 when I said Obama would win and would also get reelected. As for the other races I think we will regress back to mean, so I expect the GOP to lose quite a few seats in the house and Dems to lose a few to none in the senate.
Now on to 2016 Hillary vs. X....
|
|
| | | 381 | biliruben
ID: 21841115 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 12:09
|
Yeah, my vote was almost exclusively important for local and state issues. Charter schools (for-profit property tax leaches), Marijuana legalization (duuuude!), and gay marriage (My nuptial bliss is going to take such a hit if my friend Cindy visit her partner of 20 years in the hospital. Not.).
I guess McKenna's a pretty big penis, but the governor seems to be pretty ineffectual here in Washington, judging by Gregoire's record.
|
|
| | | 383 | statconsultants
ID: 141011611 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 12:13
|
It will be a close race, but it could be over very early. You can call if for Obama if he wins Ohio. And Ohio closes early this year because of the campaign to suppress the working vote there.
7:30 EST.
|
|
| | | 384 | walk
ID: 15102168 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 12:45
|
I cannot make any predictions after reading Nate Silver over time. To me, his analysis and use of probability makes most everything else pale in comparison.
|
|
| | | 385 | Seattle Zen
ID: 47630913 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 12:47
|
Completely agree, walk. Nate Silver has been my security blanket for the past six months.
|
|
| | | 386 | Mith
ID: 23217270 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 13:15
|
Because of Sandy affecting primarily heavily populated blue parts of blue states, I think Obama is more likely to lose the popular vote than the polls indicate.
|
|
| | | 387 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 13:53
|
agreed MITH
|
|
| | | 388 | Great One
ID: 2431114 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 15:30
|
Do we ever do a Gurupie vote thread? or is that too private for most people?
|
|
| | | 389 | wolfer
ID: 271047615 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 16:48
|
I know we have had one in prior years.
|
|
| | | 390 | biliruben
ID: 41431323 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 16:49
|
Ralph. Nader.
|
|
| | | 391 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 17:21
|
I voted Jill Stein for President.
|
|
| | | 392 | Boldwin
ID: 44102618 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 19:02
|
Remember way back when in post#3 I asked what had changed since 2010 that would make the outcome any different and no one could name a single thing?
That was your wake up call.
|
|
| | | 393 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 19:19
|
remember way back in nr 4, when I answered your nr 3? That was YOUR wake up call.
|
|
| | | 394 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 20:39
|
CO rejects the pro-wrestling family TP Senate candidate..
IN appears to be rejecting the TP Senate candidate...
MO appears to be rejectcing the TP Candidate...
extremism, is going to take a hit this cycle....About damn time.
|
|
| | |
| | | 396 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 21:04
|
My bad in 394...wasnt CO, was CN not going for McMahon
|
|
| | | 397 | Scoobies
ID: 23891721 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 21:07
|
CT? :)
|
|
| | | 398 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 21:11
|
lol sure...that works :/
|
|
| | | 399 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 21:48
|
Baldwin wins Wisconsin. Not our Baldwin, but I'm sure there is a lot in common between ours and the Democratic woman double amputee vet ...
|
|
| | | 400 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 21:56
|
FL is gonna go BLUE! Once its final, its game over. Romney can NOT get to 270, w/o both FL and OH.
|
|
| | | 401 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 22:03
|
Re:NH
I thought "Live Free or Die" had an obvious answer, but people surprise you. - Frank J. Fleming Frank J. Fleming @ lMAO
|
|
| | | 402 | DWetzel
ID: 25740420 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 22:17
|
Summary of my thoughts:
|
|
| | | 403 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 22:20
|
I guess we're going to die now, is that right Boldwin? The end of the world because Obama defeated the guy you never really liked anyway?
|
|
| | | 404 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 22:23
|
That pretty much sums it up.
|
|
| | | 405 | Pancho Villa in GJ
ID: 1010151016 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 22:27
|
Sitting here in Colorado where Obama and the pot initiative are both ahead at the moment
|
|
| | | 406 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 22:27
|
Since this is the prediction thread:
My predictions for the "State of the Union" come 2016:
Gas prices: $4.25/gal (emerging markets will keep upward pressure on pricing. I think them flattening, is about the best we can hope for)
Unemployment: 5.1%
Dow Jones: + 32%
Deficit: $600B
National Debt: 19.4 trillion
Hillary runs for and wins the Dem nomination.
B's head asplodes.
My Vikings, still suck.
|
|
| | | 407 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 22:35
|
What can't go on forever won't.
|
|
| | | 408 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 22:42
|
Right, glad you agree, the Tea Party is now trivialized.
|
|
| | | 409 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 22:43
|
If your opponent hands you an issue like Benghazi and you don't use it, you'll end up like McCain.
|
|
| | | 410 | DWetzel
ID: 25740420 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 22:48
|
It's fun to see Boldwin in full butthurt mode.
|
|
| | |
| | | 412 | Pancho Villa in GJ
ID: 1010151016 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 23:17
|
Obama wins Ohio. Game over.
|
|
| | | 413 | DWetzel
ID: 25740420 Tue, Nov 06, 2012, 23:40
|
Karl Rove vs. Math is a pretty enthralling match on Fox News right now.
|
|
| | | 415 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 00:16
|
sarge: I deleted #414. It didn't add anything to the discussion and was simply a personal attack on another board member.
|
|
| | | 416 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 00:24
|
A people eventually get the government they deserve.
You want every detail of your life micromanaged by merciless big government agents? You got it.
You want the economy of Greece? You'll get there.
You think putting America hating salafists in charge of a third of the world is a great idea, your sons will die for your mistake.
You think American soldiers should be allowed to die undefended against a couple dozen jihadis while there are two drones and a Spooky gun ship overhead capable of unimaginable defensive power. Your sons can go out on the battlefield under this commander in chief.
You didn't value those constitutional protections? Kiss them goodbye.
You think society works best without traditional virtues, inherit the wind.
Congratulations.
|
|
| | | 417 | Tree
ID: 57842011 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 00:28
|
That pretty much sums it up.
you're moving to Costa Rica now, right?
If your opponent hands you an issue like Benghazi and you don't use it
they used it harder than a vegas whore. and the American people saw through it...
Right, glad you agree, the Tea Party is now trivialized.
amen. save for Ted Cruz (and come on, it's Texas, so it's an exception), the Tea Party got neutered tonight...
|
|
| | | 418 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 00:43
|
no issue PD....
So B, I put up my predictions for 2016, as I did when GWB was re-elected in 2004. (and I was pretty well on the mark with those, for where we;d be come 2008)...now, what SPECIFICALLY, are you saying is GOING to happen?
|
|
| | | 419 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 00:47
|
"...The fundamental transformation of America." - Obama
"Kiss Camelot goodbye." - Boldwin
|
|
| | | 420 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 00:53
|
specifics Boldwin.....drop the partisan nonsense and be specific
|
|
| | | 421 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 00:54
|
Camelot was a myth, of course, so I'm not exactly clear what you are saying will actually happen.
|
|
| | | 422 | Great One
ID: 512531316 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 00:59
|
Hey Boldwin... as predicted in Poli Baseball this spring when baseball started.
"It'll be TWO big wins for GObama in 2012"
|
|
| | | 423 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 01:09
|
Far more likely than the American people reelecting a communist with strong muslim sympathies.
|
|
| | | 424 | Tree
ID: 57842011 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 01:14
|
You think putting America hating...
honestly, based on 416, the only America hating i see, is from you.
this is a nation that just re-elected Barack Obama.
this is a nation that just elected its first openly gay senator.
this is a nation that just passed a ballot initiative legalizing recreational marijuana use.
this is a nation that has four states looking like - at this point with ballots still be counted - will either give the right to same-sex couples to marry or reverse bans previously passed on such relationships.
this is a nation that rejected candidates who trivialized rape and who were associated with the Tea Party.
this is NOT about Greece or Salafists or the rejection of mythical "traditional values" or any of the other imaginary boogeymen you conjure up.
this is a nation that is marching forward towards equality, towards history, and towards real, genuine change.
watch the people who represent your side of the aisle Baldwin. Watch them refer to the "spanking" nthey got this evening, watch them referring to this as a "wake up call" for their own party.
the further right Republicans go, the more they will marginalize themselves, and some, are now realizing that.
|
|
| | | 425 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 01:15
|
You're babbling now. What do you mean? What specific concrete predictions are you making?
|
|
| | |
| | | 427 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 02:11
|
There are several books about the plans being drawn up by the groups that have promoted him. Try reading 'Fool Me Twice'.
At random, he's going to make it so that no matter what you earn, you'll end up getting taxed until you might as well have stayed in poverty. You'll end up making roughly the same thing.
He's going to tax the suburbs to pay for the big cities.
He's going to neuter the military. He'll put the military under the control of panels that are beyond the control of congress.
There will be less and less real democratic local control or democratic anything. Power will be extracted from the congress and given to the executive branch.
Creeping UN controls of everyday life.
So many immigrants you will have to go on a treasure hunt to find a real American. They'll have so much government preference you might as well put on a waitress apron and serve them the rest of your life. Forget your own interests.
Habitat For Humanity with prison guards running the program. You WILL lay four courses of brick. And you will like it.
He'll bankrupt and squander as fast as he can until the Muslim Brotherhood will be convinced destroying the USA will be a pushover. He will make that very very tempting for them.
Sooner or later Soros will pull the rug out from under the capitalist system for Obama.
Israel will be nuked or abandoned to the tender mercies of the Muslim Brotherhood.
|
|
| | | 428 | DWetzel
ID: 25740420 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 02:15
|
So, this is just more of your light hearted trash talk and not the insane ramblings of a lunatic, right?
|
|
| | | 429 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 02:16
|
Read a book.
|
|
| | | 430 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 02:21
|
So, if in 2016; the MB is not pushing for control here in CONUS and Israel isnt glowing in the dark, and taxes on incomes under 150k arent 75%...are you prepared to admit that your rantings are purely BS partisan garbage, empty and devoid of any basis in reality?
|
|
| | | 431 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 02:24
|
Now granted, a House of Representatives even more Tea Party than before will make that awful hard, but to the extent he can work around them, with executive orders and regulatory agencies and czars, and extortion from the senate he will do so. Politics being 'the art of the possible'.
|
|
| | | 432 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 02:26
|
As well as the constant pressure from his lapdog media. The media not even recognizable to half the country. Now just a propaganda subunit of the socialist government.
|
|
| | | 433 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 02:27
|
So, if in 2016; the MB is not pushing for control here in CONUS and Israel isnt glowing in the dark, and taxes on incomes under 150k arent 75%...are you prepared to admit that your rantings are purely BS partisan garbage, empty and devoid of any basis in reality?
I'll breath a sigh of relief that he was slowed down a little. Hopefully.
|
|
| | | 434 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 02:31
|
Really tho, we are already there on some of those. I just heard last week of a family of five getting over $1500 in monthly foodstamps. What's the point of working? Do you realize what percentage of the population doesn't have a food budget that high? Why work? Join the handouts line. Vote Obama and some guy with a gun will steal anything you want for you.
|
|
| | | 435 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 02:35
|
You "heard"??? Thats BS and you know it. Food stamps, avg approx $29/wk per person for food.
|
|
| | | 436 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 02:37
|
This was told to me by the manager of a grocery store who can look right into their WIC account or whatever they call it.
|
|
| | | 437 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 02:44
|
He lied
|
|
| | | 438 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 02:49
|
IL Assistamce calculator
I plugged in a family of SEVEN monthly gross earnings of 700 rent of 330 ins of 40 assistance with heating
showed up with a total of 1052/m in potential assistance. Really B..quit just eating it up like a starving man, when someone shovels pure unadulterated garbage your way, and do some cursory research.
|
|
| | | 439 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 03:04
|
I had already been working on it [https://www.google.com/#q=highest+food+stamp+allotment+illinois&hl=en&tbo=d&ei=XxCaUNzXMOGyyAHn0YDQAQ&start=20&sa=N&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=946618dc30a8941&bpcl=37643589&biw=1143&bih=699], but I trust this guy implicitly. I rather doubt they can save carry-over from month to month and he can see into their accounts. When they don't know what they have available he can tell them.
|
|
| | | 440 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 09:10
|
I predict Obama will figure out a way to blame the crash of Europe's economy and that depression spreading to America...on Bush of course.
|
|
| | | 441 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 09:45
|
If I were so consistently wrong, I'd stop posting altogether, much less in a thread where everyone can just scroll up and read my wrong posts.
I underestimated the Democrats in the Senate and Obama. I said the Democratic Caucus would win 52 seats and Obama would win by 60 electoral votes, and it looks like the Democratic Caucus will be 55-56 seats and Obama won by 125. Though if Florida turns, my prediction of 60 EV's being the difference was just about right.
|
|
| | | 442 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 09:46
|
I'm keeping my eye on Mark Steyn. He's already had to flee one country overrun by the enemy. Maybe he can figure out an exit strategy.
|
|
| | | 443 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 09:48
|
I predict no change in tone or demeanor on the part of the rabid Right, who will continue to seek out and cheer American failures so as to blame Obama. Writing fiction if they have to.
|
|
| | | 444 | Great One
ID: 2431114 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 09:52
|
Obama could help an old lady across the street and Fox News would say he led her into traffic.
|
|
| | | 445 | ChicagoTRS
ID: 149171815 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 09:52
|
Eventually this country will need to pay the piper...we can't continue to print more and more money and fall deeper in debt without facing severe problems in the future. Seems neither party is interested in smaller government or controlling spending.
I will never understand why Americans seem interested in turning this country to socialism...it goes against why this country was founded and we see the end results of socialism in Europe yet we ignore the warnings.
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy..."
Guess Tyler was right...
|
|
| | | 446 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 10:11
|
Which big government neocon, Democrat-lite, or unprincipled moderate does the liberal forum suggest republicans nominate next time?
|
|
| | | 447 | Great One
ID: 2431114 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 10:14
|
I suggest Sarah Palin. She knows whats up. The answers are in her hands. Or written on them at least.
|
|
| | | 448 | Frick
ID: 2193319 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 10:26
|
From a Indiana political blog, but it applies across the country.
Never underestimate moderate voters. As both parties tend to nominate candidate further to the right and left of the general electorate, remember, most Hoosiers while conservative are practical and don’t take too kind to crazy. And for those of you who don’t like “RINOs” try winning without them.
Politics is about addition. America is changing. It is a lot more black and brown and less white. And if you don’t get people on the ticket who look like America, you are going to have problems.
|
|
| | | 449 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 10:40
|
I watched some of FOX News rather late, and it was interesting in that some of the contributors were magnanimous only in saying that the closeness of the race meant Obama should adopt more GOP policies as a sign of his compromise.
Also, Obama has no mandate, and the GOP might now want to return his calls at least.
Unreality-based news.
|
|
| | | 450 | biliruben
ID: 21841115 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 11:22
|
Fox was funnier than comedy central last night, with the spittle and tears.
|
|
| | | 451 | Tree
ID: 481017710 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 11:27
|
post 22, via Baldwin: Ill refine this later, but I predict:
56 republican seats in the senate
245/155 split in the house favoring the republicans
Romney by 3%
reality:
45 Republican seats in the Senate.
232/192 split in the house favoring the republicans.
Obama by 2% (so far)
just wasn't even close to your prediction.
i wonder if you'll keep looking at 2010 when predicting results for 2014 and 2016.
|
|
| | | 452 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 11:33
|
2010 could have been the USA high water mark for common sense in this century. By the time Bill Ayers gets done perverting the undergraduates there won't be enuff sound Americans left to save this country from the useful idiots.
|
|
| | | 453 | DWetzel
ID: 25740420 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 11:41
|
This book I read says you're wrong.
Sorry you can't subjugate the women and minorities any more. If you repeal a few constitutional amendments you have a good chance of winning though.
|
|
| | | 454 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 11:44
|
It could have been, but instead we got the Tea Party. I'm not sure how or why the Right has drunk the Kool Aid that "common sense" is somehow always at odds with "facts" but it is nice that America has pushed back against the clowns in the TP.
It is funny to look back through the early posts, then the later ones where Boldwin mocks the pollsters predicting exactly what happened. These are all "best guesses" on our part, but the Right was so clearly in fingers-in-the-ears mode throughout this campaign.
|
|
| | | 455 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 11:49
|
I watched a lot of Fox News last night, just as I did in 2008. Last night was even funnier. In 2008, I think they were resigned to lose which meant they were at least prepared. Last night, they felt they were in for a big night. If it can be believed, the network has trended even more to the right over the past four years. How can you have objective news coverage when your contributors include:
- Karl Rove, the most prominent Republican strategist in the country and who raised hundreds of millions of dollars to defeat Obama - Sarah Palin, GOP kingmaker, fundraiser and vice presidential candidate in the last election - Dick Cheney's wife - Charles Krauthammer, prominent conservative writer and pundit
Why would a news organization covering the election results trot out such a blatantly partisan group of people? It was like a who's who of conservatism. This is in addition to the Fox "journalists" who inject their own conservative spin. When calling the Massachusetts Senate race, in the span of 30 seconds, I heard 3 separate references to Elizabeth Warren's "scandal" regarding her claiming to be Native American. It was an unnecessary dig that served no purpose when calling election results.
Fox has its place, but it is not serious journalism. My very moderate, apolitical girlfriend who had never really watched before was laughing at the unintentional comedy.
|
|
| | | 456 | DWetzel
ID: 25740420 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 11:55
|
"Why would a news organization covering the election results trot out such a blatantly partisan group of people?"
I mean, other than they call themselves "Fox News", clearly it's because they aren't a news organization at all.
|
|
| | | 457 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 12:00
|
It actually was hysterical, to watch and listen to FOX blame everything under the sun EXCEPT for the rights extremism, for the loss. Pundit after pundit, denied that the right needed to re-evaluate anything, but now Obama has to come "toward the center". lmao They REFUSE to admit, that Obama HAS come to center, and they have simply trotted 3 steps right, for every one he made to the middle.
|
|
| | | 458 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 12:03
|
The conservative right continues to invent their own reality. This couldn't be more clear than their war on polling science and Nate Silver, who they claimed was biased and way off.
|
|
| | | 459 | Boldwin
ID: 331031620 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 12:08
|
What republicans have done right in the last 30 years was Reagan's administration and Newt's congress. Everything else was a disaster looking at the big picture.
So naturally Sarge suggests republicans do everything except what has worked for them.
|
|
| | | 460 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 12:42
|
The conservative right continues to invent their own reality.
See post 459 for confirmation.
|
|
| | | 461 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 12:54
|
So in the same post, Boldwin indicates that he sees two seminal areas of Republican success in the last 30 years (both of which came as the result of working with Democrats at the time), while chiding sarge for urging -- wait for it-- the GOP to work with Democrats.
|
|
| | | 462 | Tree
ID: 0104712 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 13:04
|
What republicans have done right in the last 30 years was Reagan's administration and Newt's congress. Everything else was a disaster looking at the big picture.
So naturally Sarge suggests republicans do everything except what has worked for them.
the current spate of Republicans have done nothing even remotely similar to what worked for Ronald Reagan. not even one iota.
|
|
| | | 463 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 13:38
|
Newt Gingrich, "I was wrong"
Worth watching through for his distinction between "outreach" and "inclusion."
|
|
| | |
| | | 465 | Razor
ID: 177192916 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 14:20
|
CNN calls the final two Senate seats for the Democrats bringing the final total to 55 (including two Independents who will caucus with the Democrats) to 45. Obviously not winning the Presidency was the most disappointing to the GOP, but the most stunning result was losing seats in the Senate in a year where Democrats were very vulnerable.
|
|
| | | 466 | Boldwin
ID: 12107713 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 14:36
|
The only thing conservatives get for inclusion and outreach is getting our minority members pissed on.
|
|
| | | 467 | Tree
ID: 91058713 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 15:00
|
is getting our minority members pissed on.
in other words, not elected or re-elected, because America rejected their extreme views, and their anger-based campaigns.
|
|
| | | 468 | Boldwin
ID: 12107713 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 15:09
|
No, I mean the non-stop slander such as that directed at Clarence Thomas and recently Stacey Dash.
|
|
| | | 469 | slug
ID: 167132313 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 15:21
|
Somebody listened to their Rush this morning
|
|
| | | 470 | Great One
ID: 2431114 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 15:26
|
Thought Rush moved to Canada or Costa Rica or something... didn't he say he was going to?
|
|
| | | 471 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 16:45
|
as opposed to the non stop slander heaped upon Sandra Fluke for ex?
|
|
| | | 472 | Mith
ID: 98342014 Wed, Nov 07, 2012, 16:59
|
Obama won the popular vote. I was wrong.
|
|
| | | 473 | Boldwin
ID: 12107713 Thu, Nov 08, 2012, 06:59
|
Greece's unemployment rate just hit a record 25.4%, and about 350,000 too many people just decided, 'Mmmm, gimme some of what they're having.'
|
|
| | | 474 | Tree
ID: 57842011 Thu, Nov 08, 2012, 09:58
|
Greece's unemployment rate just hit a record 25.4%, and about 350,000 too many people just decided, 'Mmmm, gimme some of what they're having.'
this is also a lie.
|
|
| | | 475 | Boldwin
ID: 12107713 Thu, Nov 08, 2012, 11:08
|
Here's a dark vision that will come true.
Right now, fanned out all across America are a legion of agent provocateurs doing their level best to suggest and convince a patriot loyal to the constitution into making a violent act.
If you dig into the matter you will discover the government knew all about it and the whereabouts of the actor every stage of the way, after creating the situation in the first place. You will discover 3/4 of the persons involved where actually working for the government. You will discover that a Cub Scout with a slingshot and a cell phone could have prevented it, given how much was known in advance.
And by the time the enemy MSM gets done with their firestorm and their spinning the story you will wonder what kind of monster could possibly harbor any lingering affection for the constitution.
|
|
| | | 476 | Boldwin
ID: 12107713 Thu, Nov 08, 2012, 11:09
|
And yeah, there is a deliberate joke thrown in there to lighten the mood.
|
|
| | | 477 | Tree
ID: 57842011 Thu, Nov 08, 2012, 11:19
|
Here's a dark vision that will come true.
if this, and 400 other of your predictions come true, you'll still won't be in striking distance of the Mendoza line.
|
|
| | | 478 | Boldwin
ID: 12107713 Thu, Nov 08, 2012, 13:21
|
TWEET OF THE DAY "If you own a business and have to lay people off, fire the Obama voters first"
|
|
| | | 479 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Thu, Nov 08, 2012, 13:23
|
Heh. And then have to do all the work themselves?
|
|
| | |
| | |
| | | 486 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Thu, Nov 08, 2012, 16:35
|
that you do PD.Good on him, for manning up.
|
|
| | |
| | | 488 | Boldwin
ID: 12107713 Thu, Nov 08, 2012, 19:18
|
How do you get the left to call you names? Tell them the truth - Jon Lovitz
|
|
| | | 489 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Thu, Nov 08, 2012, 19:33
|
before you can do that though, you have to know what the truth is. Something, you clearly do not.
|
|
| | | 490 | Boldwin
ID: 42105820 Fri, Nov 09, 2012, 06:57
|
Puerto Rico Finally Votes To Become 51st State and will do so if congress approves. I expect they will.
|
|
| | | 491 | Boldwin
ID: 42105820 Fri, Nov 09, 2012, 07:39
|
|
|
| | | 492 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Fri, Nov 09, 2012, 10:12
|
#490: That was non-binding, and the new governor isn't a pro-state guy from what I understand. It will be interesting to see if this moves forward--Obama has indicated he would support whatever they citizens there wanted.
|
|
| | | 493 | Boldwin
ID: 48102099 Fri, Nov 09, 2012, 10:42
|
That was just the first time I had run into that story and was surprised it wasn't better publicized. I haven't finished researching it.
AFAIK it's the first time ever it's won a vote so that's certainly significant all by itself.
|
|
| | | 494 | Mith
ID: 18451815 Fri, Nov 09, 2012, 10:52
|
It's looking more likely. Cue the wingnut demand for an amendment to enshrine English as the official language.
|
|
| | | 495 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Fri, Nov 09, 2012, 10:58
|
#494: I read somewhere that PR would have to adopt English as an official language--I meant to look that up (perhaps Congress already passed a law that new states would have that requirement?). If this moves any more, we might need a new thread!
|
|
| | | 496 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Fri, Nov 09, 2012, 16:14
|
And I've read, in several places, that it is *Obama* who doesn't have a broad mandate.
|
|
| | | 497 | Tree
ID: 57842011 Fri, Nov 09, 2012, 16:24
|
no wonder Baldwin is so pissed. his voting power is now less than that of people of color.
|
|
| | | 498 | Boldwin
ID: 48102099 Sat, Nov 10, 2012, 00:55
|
23 years ago today the Berlin Wall came down.
Nothing man-made lasts forever.
|
|
| | | 499 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Sat, Nov 10, 2012, 01:05
|
funny, thats about the same time the GOP abandoned fiscally conservative policies.
|
|
| | | 500 | Boldwin
ID: 48102099 Sat, Nov 10, 2012, 01:16
|
Obama will turn America into an enormous labor market full of contractors & part-time workers and then try to take credit for a boom in small business.
He did Europe one better. He gave us the seven day weekend!
- Twitterverse
|
|
| | | 501 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Sat, Nov 10, 2012, 01:27
|
no...ultra rightwingnut twitterverse. Not to be confused with the REST of the twitterverse,
|
|
| | | 502 | Tree
ID: 57842011 Sat, Nov 10, 2012, 08:35
|
Nothing man-made lasts forever.
you're referring to the institutionalized power of white men in this country, aren't you?
it must chap your hide to see so many African-Americans, Hispanics, and women not only playing key roles in elections across this nation, but actually being difference makers.
this isn't your old white man's world anymore baldwin. it's a country for the people, by the people, because of the people.
history is moving forward. you can ride along with, or get left behind.
|
|
| | | 503 | Pancho Villa
ID: 59645318 Sat, Nov 10, 2012, 09:45
|
or get left behind
Wrong tense. He's already been left behind. His entire political future wish list hinged on a failed Tea Party dogma that peeked in the 2010 mid-terms. Typical of their dysfuctional approach to politics are comments by Jenny Beth Martin.
Republicans were stuck with “a weak, moderate candidate,” in the eyes of Jenny Beth Martin of Cherokee County, a national leader of the Tea Party Patriots. Romney was “hand-picked by the Beltway elites and country-club establishment wing of the Republican Party. The presidential loss is unequivocally on them,” Martin wrote in an email to supporters.
Beltway elites and country-club establishment wing of the Republican Party.
Translation - We hate ourselves. We hate Mitt Romney, John McCain, George W Bush, George H W Bush, Bob Dole, Dick Lugar, Orin Hatch, Chris Christie, Ron Paul, Colin Powell and Chief Justice John Roberts, to name just a few. And those are just some of the Republicans we hate. Of course the list of non-Republicans we hate is so long that listing them would crash the internet, but let's be clear - we don't just disagree with them, we hate them. Want them dead.
We love Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Todd Akin, Richard Murdoch, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and Ann Coulter, to name just a few.
We're undecided about Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan, Donald Trump and Newt Gingrich, even though Newt is a Beltway elite and country-club establishment Republican we're supposed to automatically hate.
We can't understand why we're having trouble building a coherent political coalition just because we hate the word moderate almost as much as we hate Muslims. We can't understand why Democrats keep parading around Bill Clinton, John Kerry, even Jimmy Carter. Don't they understand how important it is to demonize members of your own party?
|
|
| | | 504 | Tree
ID: 171059109 Sat, Nov 10, 2012, 10:59
|
Don't they understand how important it is to demonize members of your own party?
this is the part that is most amazing to me, and nothing speaks truer to this than the treatment of Chris Christie, and the blame of Romney's loss being placed on him.
a month ago, he was still the darling of the GOP.
Thirteen months ago, he was the first GOP Governor to endorse Mitt Romney.
Eighteen months ago, he was being pushed heavily by the GOP to run for president.
but the, two weeks ago, he praised Obama for his handling of Hurricane Sandy.
“I appreciated the president’s outreach today in making sure that we know he’s watching this and is concerned about the health and welfare and safety of the people of the state of New Jersey,” he said.
and with that, the $hit hit the fan, and the finger pointing started, just because (Republicans) hate the word moderate almost as much as we hate Muslims.
Christie would have been a helluva strong candidate for the GOP in 2016, and pointing to his praising of Obama would have been a great asset and counter to Democrat claims that the GOP is trying to divide this nation.
instead, they've blown it already, by blaming him for Romney's loss and pointing to his compliments of Obama as a weakness.
|
|
| | | 505 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Sat, Nov 10, 2012, 11:36
|
Christie would have been a helluva strong candidate for the GOP in 2016, and pointing to his praising of Obama would have been a great asset and counter to Democrat claims that the GOP is trying to divide this nation.
instead, they've blown it already, by blaming him for Romney's loss and pointing to his compliments of Obama as a weakness.
and BOOM!, in went the final nail to the GOP coffin.
|
|
| | | 506 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Sat, Nov 10, 2012, 11:57
|
Democrats are opening up to Christie a tiny bit because, when the rubber hit the road, he showed that he cared about his state and put politics aside when the situation demanded it. He's still a blowhard and a bully but at least he's shown himself to take his job seriously.
Republicans started hating him because he was seem working on his job with the enemy.
Which of these parties has a future? Change or die, GOP. Your choice.
|
|
| | | 507 | Pancho Villa
ID: 59645318 Sat, Nov 10, 2012, 12:59
|
I'm almost convinced there will be a complte split in the GOP, with moderates and Beltway elitists and country-club establishment Republicans maintaining the GOP mantle, and the Tea Party forming their own party.
I don't expect that to last very long, since modern American politics demands billions of dollars to compete on the national stage, and it's hard to see where the Tea Party, whose candidates have not shown stellar results except for 2010 congressional races, can get the broad financial backing necessary to mount a legitimate 3rd party assault. Tea Party darling Alan West couldn't hang onto his congressional seat, and, in my newly created 4th district in Utah, Bluedog Dem Jim Matheson beat Mia Love in a real shocker.
Not long ago, a person could be a moderate and a conservative. Reagan, for instance. Now, in order to be a conservative, you must subscribe to an ideology based on hatred and degradation. Boldwin, for instance.
|
|
| | | 508 | Tree
ID: 171059109 Sat, Nov 10, 2012, 13:16
|
some good things in this article, which somewhat describes the reasons why left-leaning candidates and issues dominated on election day.
It's a reality Republican analyst Alex Castellanos, a CNN contributor, described as he was absorbing the "beating" the GOP took Tuesday.
There is "kind of a 1950s America that we lost," Castellanos said. "It's an old way of looking at the world."
|
|
| | |
| | | 510 | Seattle Zen
ID: 3603123 Sat, Nov 10, 2012, 14:31
|
Alan West lost?!?!?! AWESOME.
I was right about Florida. I was wrong about the House, thought it would be closer, but I am so stoked that an asshat like West lost. I think there will be about 20~30 House Republicans who will cross the aisle for a few important votes. Wonder what their mainstream media nickname will be... the four-letter word filter won't let us post what the Limbaugh idiots will call them.
I'm SO VERY glad that I was wrong about Ref 74 and the governor's race here in WA. We had an amazing election this year, I'm guessing this is what it would feel like if the Vikings won the Super Bowl.
And for Coulter and all those other haters, Gov. Christie's actions post Sandy is WHY people like him so much, he is human.
|
|
| | |
| | |
| | | 513 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Sun, Nov 11, 2012, 17:06
|
"So how did Romney lose a race that numerous reputable polls and pundits predicted would be an easy win, based on historical patterns?"
So many responses to this assumption...
|
|
| | | 514 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Sun, Nov 11, 2012, 17:58
|
The comments, reveal a depth of ignorance, that is frightening.
|
|
| | | 515 | Pancho Villa
ID: 59645318 Sun, Nov 11, 2012, 18:40
|
Had the election hinged on one state, like Florida in 2000, maybe one could sympathize with Alexander's sentiment.
Obama won 332 electoral votes to Romney's 206. A landslide, according to Republican pundits like: Dick Morris - 325 Romney in a landslide Larry Kudlow - 330 Romney in a landslide George Will - 321 Romney in a landslide Wayne Allen Root - Romney by 100 to 120 electoral vote landslide
Why do Townhall readers allow their intelligence to be insulted like this?
|
|
| | | 516 | Tree
ID: 57842011 Sun, Nov 11, 2012, 19:06
|
Why do Townhall readers allow their intelligence to be insulted like this?
the same denial that existed pre-election, exists post-election.
There is simply some sort of disconnect - Baldwin is a good example - that has these people still not believing "their side" lost not just the election, and lost it badly, but lost numerous races and ballot initiatives around the country.
it's someone else's fault - the media, the ballot counters, the debate moderators, Chris Christie, Big Bird, whoever - that "their side" lost. thusly, as long as they stay on message, they can win, as long as these other things don't interfere again.
|
|
| | | 517 | Pancho Villa
ID: 59645318 Sun, Nov 11, 2012, 19:27
|
Well, I think I found why Romney lost. link
|
|
| | | 520 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Mon, Nov 12, 2012, 12:37
|
Krugman speaking the truth
Back in 2010, self-styled deficit hawks — better described as deficit scolds — took over much of our political discourse. At a time of mass unemployment and record-low borrowing costs, a time when economic theory said we needed more, not less, deficit spending, the scolds convinced most of our political class that deficits rather than jobs should be our top economic priority. And now that the election is over, they’re trying to pick up where they left off.
|
|
| | | 521 | Boldwin
ID: 361012125 Mon, Nov 12, 2012, 12:55
|
a time when economic theory said as if Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek never existed.
|
|
| | | 522 | Boldwin
ID: 361012125 Mon, Nov 12, 2012, 12:58
|
they’re trying to pick up where they left off.
If you were re-elected and you were Tea Party last time, why wouldn't you pick up where you left off? It's what your constituents asked for.
|
|
| | | 523 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Mon, Nov 12, 2012, 13:07
|
Milton Friedman, as has been discussed on these boards before, had not problem with some deficit spending during recessions.
|
|
| | | 524 | biliruben
ID: 21841115 Mon, Nov 12, 2012, 13:12
|
Christian Science Monitor.
Ironically, it was his painstaking, objective analysis in the landmark work, "A Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960," that gave him such labels. In that work, he and coauthor Anna J. Schwartz asserted that the Great Depression was not a failure of market capitalism, but of government policy. They showed that the Federal Reserve acted ineptly in allowing the money stock to decline by "more than a third," converting a garden-variety recession into the worst economic catastrophe of the 20th century.
Free-market economists such as Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek failed in their attempts to dislodge Keynesianism because they refused to do any empirical work. But Friedman's quantitative efforts were so powerful that he changed professional opinion about the cause of the Great Depression.
His empirical studies at Chicago convinced him that "money mattered" more than fiscal policy (spending and taxes). Friedman also discovered that "long and variable lags" in Federal Reserve policy would confound Keynesian efforts to fine tune the economy. Instead, he advocated a steady monetary rule – an emphasis that former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan says was instrumental in guiding Europe and the US toward low inflation during the past two decades.
Friedman also overturned the "Phillips Curve" trade-off between inflation and unemployment. That's important, because for years central bankers wrongly believed – and some still do – that they had to accept high inflation as the price of low unemployment. ----- Yet Friedman's empiricism also led him into disagreements with his free-market supporters. He dismissed the conservative view that deficit spending was necessarily bad, or that tax cuts stimulated the economy in the short run.
|
|
| | | 525 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Mon, Nov 12, 2012, 13:12
|
House GOP control, was retained PURELY through the gerrymandering following 2010's midterms. Honest people, dont even bother to deny that.
Why did the GOP lose seats in the Senate? Why did the GOP WH candidate, get THRASHED?
The TP, is a has been, whose power is gone. Either the GOP recognizes that, or it will die,
|
|
| | | 526 | Boldwin
ID: 361012125 Mon, Nov 12, 2012, 13:16
|
Yeah, and Keynes backpeddled just a tiny bit at the end, and Krugman even suggests UFO's as an economic solution. So Krugman is...overrated.
|
|
| | | 527 | Boldwin
ID: 361012125 Mon, Nov 12, 2012, 13:19
|
Sometimes the electorate deliberately chooses divided government. Thus choosing limited movement, signalling their indecision or desire to go slow.
|
|
| | | 528 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Mon, Nov 12, 2012, 13:24
|
hmmmm take B's word on economics, or a Nobel Prize winners in Krugman??? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm tough call......
|
|
| | | 529 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Mon, Nov 12, 2012, 13:31
|
Democrats in contested House races received more votes than did Republicans in House races. Sure--sometimes they do vote deliberately for divided government. Few, however vote for government to come to a standstill. This is why Tea Party members have had such a difficult time winning re-election.
Sometimes people vote but it really doesn't count. The GOP has lost 5 of the last 6 popular votes for President, for instance.
|
|
| | | 530 | biliruben
ID: 21841115 Mon, Nov 12, 2012, 13:52
|
Yet Friedman's empiricism also led him into disagreements with his free-market supporters. He dismissed the conservative view that deficit spending was necessarily bad, or that tax cuts stimulated the economy in the short run.
If you are talking about Hayak, he's a dreamer with a bit of trouble with math. He would probably be right at home stumping for Romney's 5 + 2 = -20 plan.
If you are talking about Friedman, his views are diametrically opposed to the Tea Party nonsense.
|
|
| | | 531 | Boldwin
ID: 2810151220 Tue, Nov 13, 2012, 06:01
|
Pepsi looking to layoff 4,000 workers
|
|
| | | 532 | Boldwin
ID: 2810151220 Tue, Nov 13, 2012, 08:24
|
NBCUniversal to lay off 1.5% of its workforce
|
|
| | | 533 | Tree
ID: 57842011 Tue, Nov 13, 2012, 08:26
|
Pepsi looking to layoff 4,000 workers
tsk tsk. you're being proven wrong very quickly again.
try having some self-respect. do even the slightest bit of research, will ya? or stop lying. whichever one the case may be this time.
That news is nearly a year old.
|
|
| | |
| | | 535 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Tue, Nov 13, 2012, 11:38
|
RomneyRyanCorp planning to immediately lay off 100% of its workforce...
|
|
| | | 536 | Boldwin
ID: 2810151220 Tue, Nov 13, 2012, 14:08
|
From #NJ real estate agent Rick Ambrose: Online interest is down over 50%; activity for listings and showings almost zero
|
|
| | | 538 | slug
ID: 167132313 Tue, Nov 13, 2012, 14:18
|
According to Fannie Mae's recently released October National Housing Survey, Americans continue to show growing confidence in home price increases over the next 12 months, providing further indications of a slow but steady recovery. Consumer confidence, along with an increase in rental price expectations, may encourage more consumers to purchase a home in the coming months
Is it possible that the NJ info in post 536 is a result of some recent severe weather in the area?
|
|
| | | 539 | Boldwin
ID: 2810151220 Tue, Nov 13, 2012, 14:23
|
Fair point.
|
|
| | | 540 | Tree
ID: 1110281314 Tue, Nov 13, 2012, 15:28
|
From #NJ real estate agent Rick Ambrose: Online interest is down over 50%; activity for listings and showings almost zero
Rick Ambrose is a Realtor with Coldwell Banker specializing in lakefront real estate and distinctive MLS homes for sale in Lake Mohawk, Sparta, Mendham and Randolph NJ.
yes. lakefront real estate and "distinctive" home sales are still down.
how is this news, or relevant?
meanwhile, my dad, who is a realtor in Bergen County, NJ, is having his best year over the last six.
|
|
| | |
| | | 542 | Boldwin
ID: 1210341416 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 08:45
|
BLS plays catch-up.
U.S. weekly jobless claims jump 78,000 to 439,000, an 18 month high.
Hmm, bogus impossible lowball figure just before election to 18 month high figure week after election.
Hmmmm...who could have possibly seen that coming?
We are deep in 1984.
|
|
| | | 543 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 11:24
|
As far as we know, you are part of it, too. That's why no one really believes your numbers anymore.
|
|
| | | 544 | Mith
ID: 98342014 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 12:05
|
BLS says most of the increases occurred in areas hit by Sandy.
I guess it's preposterous to thgink the worst natural disaster to hit the most populous part of the country in a century might significantly notch up national jobless claims.
|
|
| | | 548 | Boldwin
ID: 61050158 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 13:28
|
April 2, 2003 - You will be happy to learn that the former head of the KGB (the secret police of the former Soviet Union), General Yevgeni Primakov, has been hired as a consultant by the US Department of Homeland Security. --- What I liked about this segment is that they interviewed General Yevgeni Primakov, who is now a consultant to the Department of Homeland Security along with General Alexander Karpov.
Primakov was laughing about it because he's getting paid a big fee to do it. He doesn't care, of course. Primakov speaks beautiful English, as you would expect a former head of the KGB to do. When he was asked what is this CAPPS II program really about, because obviously even "terrorists" could have credit ratings.
Primakov said that this is one of the steps now being employed along with NICA and new identity upgrade features which are coming to your driver's license. It is being used to get the people used to new types of documentation and carrying new types of identity cards pursuant to the United States instituting a formal policy of internal passports. And he actually used the words "internal passports."
It's like he said and he was pretty knowledgeable. When the NICA (National Identity Card Act) gets passed, the Posse Comitatus Act gets overturned, a few other pieces of legislation yet to be proffered get passed, the White House will have more control over the American people than the Kremlin had over the Russian people when Stalin was alive. He said that and then he laughed.
What Primakov finds funny are what he calls these "right wing flag wavers" that were so anti-communist and now they're supporting a state policy of internal passports.
The irony is deafening.
Then there's General Karpov, former KGB station chief of their Washington station at their embassy and the first director of the Russian Federal Security Service.
You could call this the "Sovietization of America." Primakov said he can't wait to get on the payroll (he called it the "pay corps," referring to the Heritage Foundation, the PNAC and all the other right wing foundations in the United States) He cant get over how many ex-KGB generals and colonels still want to come over to the United States and become consultants to get on the pay corps.
It has been reported that Nikita Krushchev Jr. works for the Heritage Foundation. Another right wing foundation has Elena Stalin. The Old Soviet Brand names are all coming to Washington to get on the gravy train and teach the Bush administration how to further restrict the rights of the American people.
And Primakov is waiting for the USSA, The United Soviet States of America. It'll probably make him feel right at home.
|
|
| | | 549 | Mith
ID: 98342014 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 13:40
|
Why in the world is that relevant?
|
|
| | | 550 | Tree
ID: 1210521512 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 13:58
|
April 2, 2003 - You will be happy to learn that the former head of the KGB (the secret police of the former Soviet Union), General Yevgeni Primakov, has been hired as a consultant by the US Department of Homeland Security.
did you even bother to read your own unattributed article (which, likely, is plagiarism, since you copy and pasted word-for-word with no attribution)?
notice the date. 2003. Bush's presidency. there's also been similar articles written in 2004 and 2005.
but none on any mainstream site.
anyway, not at all sure what your point is, but it's certainly a funny post considering the date.
|
|
| | | 551 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 14:04
|
Remember--this is the Predictions thread, Tree. So this is about the future...
|
|
| | | 552 | Mith
ID: 98342014 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 14:06
|
LOL!
I noticed that Daily Kos ran part of that article on 11/14/2004. So maybe he came across a version that he thought was current and rused to post it, blind by his seething hate for the president of the United States which (as should be obvious to every forum member) trumps his principle of not bearing false witness.
|
|
| | | 553 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 14:13
|
Back to the Future!
|
|
| | | 554 | Boldwin
ID: 61050158 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 14:14
|
I put the date right up front. As you know I consider neocons to be Trotskyites and certainly the Bush family isn't any less a globalist tool than Obama is.
People need to be watching FEMA and the DHS very very carefully. The constitution's grip on that bunch is slim to none.
|
|
| | | 555 | Boldwin
ID: 61050158 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 14:17
|
And that post followed a quote from 1958 which someone thot was just more truth you all couldn't handle.
Totalitarians are relentless. They operate from the big picture and the long haul.
|
|
| | | 556 | Boldwin
ID: 61050158 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 14:20
|
Look around. Commit what you see to memory. One of the most oft-quoted Reaganisms warns that "one of these days you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children, and our children's children, what it once was like in America when men were free."
We better start making memories of freedom so we can tell or children and our children's children what America was like when we were young. When we were free. - Jacqueline Otto
|
|
| | | 557 | Mith
ID: 98342014 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 14:36
|
Sure. But why post that now and here?
Why not in the Big Brother thread, which is where you posted it to back when the story was current.
|
|
| | | 558 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 14:49
|
Because this thread has turned into Boldwin's Free Form Anxieties Thread. Not a big stretch, on the Right, from "Predictions."
|
|
| | | 559 | Tree
ID: 331031515 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 16:03
|
Because this thread has turned into Boldwin's Free Form Anxieties Thread.
dang. i was close. i had it under "not able to figure out how to start his own blog. oh, and batshirt crazy too."
i have to admit, i'm enjoying his rants. reminds me of the "preachers" on Times Square.
|
|
| | | 560 | Great One
ID: 2431114 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 16:10
|
Did Boldwin predict anywhere that Obama would lose? I am just curious.
|
|
| | | 561 | Tree
ID: 331031515 Thu, Nov 15, 2012, 16:41
|
post 22, from Baldwin: Ill refine this later, but I predict:
56 republican seats in the senate
245/155 split in the house favoring the republicans
Romney by 3%
i don't know that he ever refined it.
|
|
| | | 569 | Boldwin
ID: 910431619 Fri, Nov 16, 2012, 21:40
|
See gap between 544 and 548.
|
|
| | | 570 | biliruben
ID: 59551120 Fri, Nov 16, 2012, 23:35
|
You were planning on refining your prediction 10 days after the election?
|
|
| | | 572 | Boldwin
ID: 910431619 Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 09:56
|
Shocks the heck out of me.
Huffpo does a poll. Huffington Post conducted their own poll to determine national support for the idea. Four questions were asked to ascertain 1) awarness of secession, 2) support for secession in general, 3) support for Texas to secede, and 4) support for their own state to secede. Below are the results to the fourth question, “Would you support or oppose >your< state seceding from the United States?”
Strongly support 12.4% Tend to support 10.4% Tend to oppose 10.3% Strongly oppose 41.6% Not sure 25.3%
These results, which were collected November 14-15 with a sample size of 100, were released at 5:31pm EST Friday under the headline “Secession Poll: Majority Opposes Their State Seceding From The Union,” a technically accurate but somehwhat “minimalist” approach to headline writing.
It seems more than striking–and headline worthy–that 22.4 percent of Americans “strongly” or “tend to” support their state seceding. Coupled with the more than 700,000 signatures that have so far been signed onto various states’ petitions, a case is building for more than the normal post-defeat malaise.
And the White House has announced that they will respond to the secession petitions that meet the 25,000 signature requirement by December 9, when the first qualified petitions (including Texas) expire.
If President Obama thought he had a task to unite the country in 2008, just look at the divisions he’s having to heal in 2012. Forward? There are barely 40% of the population that even follow politics. I would have presumed numbers this high would have only obtained in Texas.
|
|
| | | 573 | biliruben
ID: 21841115 Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 10:38
|
I'm personally pro-city-state. Objectively, we in the cities are the job creators. The rest are faux conservative leeches, sucking and bruising the tender government teet we spend so much time and resources nurturing.
You abuse and disrespect your betters, so it may be better for you to go out into the wide-wide world and finally learn to take care of yourself.
|
|
| | | 574 | Boldwin
ID: 910431619 Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 10:59
|
Please.
|
|
| | |
| | | 576 | Boldwin
ID: 910431619 Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 11:09
|
bili
If all you 'makers' in the blue zones [*bellylaugh*] ever get tired of carrying the rest of us in the red zones, please feel free to 'Let my people go'.
Feel no compunction. Just do it. We'll muddle along without you.
|
|
| | | 577 | DWetzel
ID: 25740420 Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 12:08
|
Nobody's stopping you. Costa Rica is a short bus ride away.
And I mean short bus in both senses of the word.
|
|
| | | 578 | Tree
ID: 231071713 Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 14:07
|
575 couldn't be more dishonest and wrong.
as the conflict escalates...
A White House spokesman, saying "the precipitating factor for the conflict was the rocket fire coming out of Gaza" into civilian areas, stressed that "Israel has a right to defend itself. He also underscored the importance of Israel avoiding civilian casualties.
fully supportive of Israel, despite Baldwin's hopes for the destruction of both the United States and Israel.
|
|
| | | 579 | Boldwin
ID: 910431619 Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 15:34
|
I'm not hoping for any destruction. Putting the MB is charge of the muslim world and Obama in charge of ours guarantees destruction.
|
|
| | | 580 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 15:34
|
No it doesnt.
|
|
| | | 581 | Boldwin
ID: 910431619 Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 19:44
|
Hostess Union Leader's salaries.

Parasites actually care if the host survives.
I see Democrats.
|
|
| | | 582 | sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 19:47
|
all together, just barely over half of what the CEO took, just before filing BK.
|
|
| | | 583 | Boldwin
ID: 910431619 Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 20:08
|
I wonder if there are any skinny union leaders? I haven't seen any.

I Frank Hurt Hostess.
|
|
| | | 584 | Perm Dude
ID: 201027169 Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 20:24
|
Those union leaders, of course, were in charge of a union far greater than just hostess. And the Right still doesn't seem to care that the union had given back $110 million to the company.
The hacks aren't interested in the fact that don't back up their crazy point that somehow unions were to blame for this.
|
|
| | | 585 | Boldwin
ID: 910431619 Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 20:40
|
Get it back after the recovery. This isn't rocket science. And you do have faith recovery is right around the corner, right?
|
|
| | | 587 | Tree
ID: 57842011 Sun, Nov 18, 2012, 14:32
|
Hostess Union Leader's salaries.
which pale in comparison to the salaries of the Hostess Board of Directors.
I see Democrats.
you see nothing. you speculate, without regard to facts.
|
|
|
|