US Elections 2012 Obama v Romney Official Thread
Discussion
longblackcoat said:
At the risk of agreeing with Guam, check the methodology on some of them. +5 for Obama sounds like a total outlier to me, and I'd be surprised if it's anything other than a popular draw at present.
I'm still holding with my electoral college prediction, and no more than 1% between the two candidates on polling day - no telling which will win the popular vote though.
The polls are all nonsense. I'm looking at trends and momentum and it's all with Obama.I'm still holding with my electoral college prediction, and no more than 1% between the two candidates on polling day - no telling which will win the popular vote though.
I still think Obama will win the popular vote handily, unless the intimidation tactics and thuggery of TrueTheVote etc.. put off enough people. Obama to win the EC by a decent spread whatever. Still think your 340 is a stretch but I'll take it.
Did anyone catch Romney making his football analogy in Ohio.
Willard M Romney said:
I remember once we had a football field at my high school. The field was covered with rubbish and paper goods from people who’d had a big celebration there at the game. And there was a group of us there assigned to clean it up. And I thought, ‘how are we going to clean up all the mess on this football field?’ There were just a few of us. And the person responsible for organizing the effort said, ‘Just line up along the yard lines. You go between the goal line and the 10-yard line, and the next person between the 10 and 20, and just walk down and do your lane. And if everybody cleans their lanes, we’ll get it done.’ And so today, we’re cleaning one lane if you will.
So while the president and Governor Christie are actually dealing with the aftermath of a hurricane the challenger demonstrates his own disaster relief credentials by comparing it to cleaning up the field after a high school football game! You could not make this stuff up. The guy is so detached from reality it's difficult to accept that he's completely sane.TheHeretic said:
unrepentant said:
Did anyone catch Romney making his football analogy in Ohio.
It is just a metaphor for everyone doing their bit. Willard M Romney said:
I remember once we had a football field at my high school. The field was covered with rubbish and paper goods from people who’d had a big celebration there at the game. And there was a group of us there assigned to clean it up. And I thought, ‘how are we going to clean up all the mess on this football field?’ There were just a few of us. And the person responsible for organizing the effort said, ‘Just line up along the yard lines. You go between the goal line and the 10-yard line, and the next person between the 10 and 20, and just walk down and do your lane. And if everybody cleans their lanes, we’ll get it done.’ And so today, we’re cleaning one lane if you will.
So while the president and Governor Christie are actually dealing with the aftermath of a hurricane the challenger demonstrates his own disaster relief credentials by comparing it to cleaning up the field after a high school football game! You could not make this stuff up. The guy is so detached from reality it's difficult to accept that he's completely sane.Here you go;
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/odonne...
Fittster said:
So if the polls are as inaccurate as people on here make out can we expect President Gary Johnson?
Legal pot! Go Gary. 
Disclaimer. The above comment in reference to the legalization of pot is not meant to imply in any shape or form whatsoever that the author is joker, smoker or midnight toker. Well maybe joker but nothing else.
The news just keeps getting better.
When Obama took office we were losing 800,000 jobs a month. A difficult figure to even imagine but that's what he inherited. It was obviously a gargatuan task to reverse such a tide but he's done it and there are now more people in the workforce than when he came into office. Given the scale of the continuing economic catastrophe that he inherited that's actually a remarkably fast turn around.
http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/02/news/economy/obama...
We now have record corporate profits, employment growth, rising consumer confidence and a bullish stock market. The recovery is real and the Obama economic record stands on it's own.
When Obama took office we were losing 800,000 jobs a month. A difficult figure to even imagine but that's what he inherited. It was obviously a gargatuan task to reverse such a tide but he's done it and there are now more people in the workforce than when he came into office. Given the scale of the continuing economic catastrophe that he inherited that's actually a remarkably fast turn around.
http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/02/news/economy/obama...
We now have record corporate profits, employment growth, rising consumer confidence and a bullish stock market. The recovery is real and the Obama economic record stands on it's own.
Marf said:
Guam said:
unrepentant said:
7.9
And this weeks real figure is?This is no different to governments here, who massage the numbers to look good into an election <ignoring the seasonal temp jobs impact at this time of year>
Independent analysts at Moody's analytics and macromedia dvisors are already predicting that the economy will create 12 million new jobs over the next 4 years. Obamanomics work.
Guam said:
Ah here we go with the Insults again, you just cant resist can you, you are well suited to american political life thats for sure.
Invective and racist attacks next up?
Yeah the economy is fine and yet Unemployment is higher than during the carter administration <and he was roundly viewed as a failure>.
BTW you still havent answered my question of last night?
First off, I have no interest in what you say and I don't read your posts unless they included in a post by a poster whose opinion I value. Please don't quote my posts, no post I make (apart from this one) is directed at you in any way and I have no interest at all in interacting with you. Invective and racist attacks next up?
Yeah the economy is fine and yet Unemployment is higher than during the carter administration <and he was roundly viewed as a failure>.
BTW you still havent answered my question of last night?
I have never made a racist post in my life and I bitterly resent the suggestion from someone like you that I have. Don't do it again.
Mermaid said:
UR, do you think stock markets sell off regardless of who wins?
I think that stock markets make their own rules and their movements are often completely irrational. I'm not sure that the result of this election will cause a major shift one way or the other. If Obama wins, they've already factored it in because everything is based on future predictions. Given the steep rises in the past two years there may be a correction at some point as profit taking occurs but who knows? If I did I'd be a wealthy man!
speedy_thrills said:
There is usually a way to interpret complex statistics as being in your favour.
In truth government has played little part in economic recovery except for intervention measures in cyclical industries and keeping public spenig going. They've been too busy infighting to implement serious improvements.
Not in this case. Look at Europe post 08. Austerity measures implemented by various governments lead to double dip recession and huge job losses. Obamanomics stimulated the economy leading to recovery, growth and job creation and avoided deep recession and ensured that the USA emerged earlier and stronger from the downturn.In truth government has played little part in economic recovery except for intervention measures in cyclical industries and keeping public spenig going. They've been too busy infighting to implement serious improvements.
longblackcoat said:
I find it truly amazing that both candidates seem perfectly happy to quibble about the use of funds to bail out banks or car makers, to try to score points over whose tax plans will raise more revenue, or who can cut a few billion from welfare, yet they're perfectly happy to keep hosing cash into the military. To question the military spending is deemed to be somehow un-American, and to demonstrate a lack of patriotism, yet to me the very idea of arguing fiercely over the costs of a healthcare plan, say, that could be funded with some of the small change from the military programmes, seems absurd.
I have absolutely no time for Romney, but to say that Obamanomics works is only to say that a badly broken arm is better than amputation; true, but you'd rather avoid both. Obama could and should have diverted more of the country's resources inwards, and stimulated the US economy. He's done very little of this - or, at least, he could have done hugely more - and after four years, the patient is still in intensive care, albeit not breathing without emergency oxygen. But it's still a very sick patient.
Have to take issue with you there. Obama is proposing cuts to the military, agreed with his generals, for which he is derided by Romney who wants to increase military spending against the advice of the military. Obama has pulled out of Iraq and is coming out of Afghanistan, both unbudgeted wars that Bush took us into.I have absolutely no time for Romney, but to say that Obamanomics works is only to say that a badly broken arm is better than amputation; true, but you'd rather avoid both. Obama could and should have diverted more of the country's resources inwards, and stimulated the US economy. He's done very little of this - or, at least, he could have done hugely more - and after four years, the patient is still in intensive care, albeit not breathing without emergency oxygen. But it's still a very sick patient.
Obama has stimulated, has pointed the money inwards and has been roundly abused for doing so! The auto bailout was necessary and has been extremely successful.
The ship of state is an unwieldy and complex machine and cannot be turned around overnight. Given what he inherited the turn around has been speedy and the patient is now up and walking around. Under the republicans the patient would be dead.
Captain Cadillac said:
They're at it again..... More voter fraud. And guess who said group is aligned with? Ghosts of ACORN anyone?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/03/hitler-...
Nice one Skip. Ignore all the countless cases of Reprublican voter fraud exposed over the past months and highlight this BS. It's like Nathan Sproul never existed. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/03/hitler-...
FunkyNige said:
Sorry to dive into this thread, but New Scientist had an article a few weeks back about the polls vs forecasts in the run up to this election. Makes some interesting reading (they say it's not even close) but it is a month old and I haven't been keeping up to date with what has happened since then.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21528840.200...
A glance at the electoral college map has shown for a long time that Romney would effectively need a miracle to win. It's why the GOP have spent much of the past year or two trying to rig the ballot by excluding as many poor and ethnic (democrat) voters in swing states like Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio as possible and why the likes of Nathan Sproul have been paid by them to do what they do. It also explains the desperate campaign that Romney has been running in Ohio, repeatedly showing the ad claiming that Chrysler are moving Jeep production to China, despite the company insisting that it is not and is in fact hiring in Ohio. http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21528840.200...
The bookies have been pretty unwavering. Obama has been odds on all the way, Romney has been a long odds outsider and still is.
Brilliant article from the editorial board of the Washington Post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mitt-romney...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mitt-romney...
Washington Post said:
THROUGH ALL the flip-flops, there has been one consistency in the campaign of Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney: a contempt for the electorate. How else to explain his refusal to disclose essential information? Defying recent bipartisan tradition, he failed to release the names of his bundlers — the high rollers who collected hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations. He never provided sufficient tax returns to show voters how he became rich. How, other than an assumption that voters are too dim to remember what Mr. Romney has said across the years and months, to account for his breathtaking ideological shifts? He was a friend of immigrants, then a scourge of immigrants, then again a friend. He was a Kissingerian foreign policy realist, then a McCain-like hawk, then a purveyor of peace. He pioneered Obamacare, he detested Obamacare, then he found elements in it to cherish. Assault weapons were bad, then good. Abortion was okay, then bad. Climate change was an urgent problem; then, not so much. Hurricane cleanup was a job for the states, until it was once again a job for the feds.
Blib said:
Like most Western, 21st Century politicians. He knows which way the wind blows.
Hmm...Fortunately for us in the USA we have a president who doesn't bend with the wind. Say what you like about Obama but he is very consistent about his beliefs and policies. Romney is just an empty suit, a Blairite politician who will say whatever he thinks people want to hear.
As the article says, he treats the electorate with utter contempt, believing that those who vote republican are too stupid to remember what he has said last year or last week and will vote on what he says today. Fortunately there are more thinkers than lemmings and he will not prevail.
Latest desperate move from Camp Romyan.
They are now suggesting that Chris Christie was led to believe that he was to be Willard's running mate until he was usurped by Ryan. Therefore he has sour grapes and that is why he has praised Obama. This is clearly nonsense as there is no way that Christie would have been interested in being Willard's sidekick as he would have been a shoe in for the nomination himself had he chosen to run. He also gave the keynote speech at the RNC, albeit a speech that was all about Christie and not much to do with slippery Mitt.
Clearly knowing that they are done the Romyans already have surrogates whispering about Christie and Sandy being responsible for slipperry's failure, no mention of course of the pisspoor mendacious candidate himself..
They are now suggesting that Chris Christie was led to believe that he was to be Willard's running mate until he was usurped by Ryan. Therefore he has sour grapes and that is why he has praised Obama. This is clearly nonsense as there is no way that Christie would have been interested in being Willard's sidekick as he would have been a shoe in for the nomination himself had he chosen to run. He also gave the keynote speech at the RNC, albeit a speech that was all about Christie and not much to do with slippery Mitt.
Clearly knowing that they are done the Romyans already have surrogates whispering about Christie and Sandy being responsible for slipperry's failure, no mention of course of the pisspoor mendacious candidate himself..
deeps said:
Romney is currently available to back at odds of 4.5, Obama 1.28, on the exchanges, which suggests that punters with the most clout strongly believe in an Obama victory. That said I've had a few quid fun bet on Romney at those odds.
Basically Obama is 2/7 odds on, Romney is 7/2 against. The bookies see it as a one horse race. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff