US Elections 2012 Obama v Romney Official Thread

[davepoth]

vonuber said:

Jim, why do you call him 'Obummer'?

It's nowhere near as offensive in American vernacular, remember.

[unrepentant]

This graph has been posted before but it's worth posting again. When President Obama took offer job losses were at a peak. You don't just turn the tap on, it takes time to reverse the trend. We have had 30 months of growth now in the private sector and that's an achievement. Had it not been for the stimulus that graph would look very different, the bars would all be below the line.



It's true that the public sector has shed 600,000 or so jobs in the same period. But can you imagine what the GOP would be saying if it hadn't.........

I was listening to NPR this morning on the way to work and they were saying that there are many hundreds of thousands of vacancies at the moment. What is needed are jobseekers with the right skills and that is the challenge.

[Captain Cadillac]

Guam said:

Jimbeaux said:

The unemployment %, along with the "I have stopped looking for a job" figure (which has never been factored into the unemployment totals)is believed to be around 14% IIRC.

I heard 15% from some commentators, however given the partisan nature of most of the sites I went with the lowest <Conservative> Estimate........ooh I used conservative in a correct context does that mean I am on Romneys side now?

This is correct. Actual unemployment in the USA is around 15% as best as can be determined. How is that possible? Easy. The government has recently determined that anyone who is unemployed after a set period of time is considered to be "no longer in the job market" and that person is no longer considered unemployed.

My ex girlfriends best friend has been looking for work as a teacher for well over one year. She is no longer considered unemployed although she may not agree with that statement herself.....

Then there's underemployment, there's lots of people who have taken ANY job just to put food on the table. One of our stores has a salesman, the guy is on track to make $80-90k this year. He used to work for an investment bank in NY City making that a month.

[Captain Cadillac]

Jimbeaux said:

Any one alone is not as representative as REALCLEARPOLITICS, which averages all polls. Do you disagree?

How could anyone? That's where I got the polls that I posted earlier. RCP takes the latest poll data and posts it on their site. Pretty simple and REALLY CLEAR, is it not?

[Captain Cadillac]

unrepentant said:

I was listening to NPR this morning on the way to work

No! Not you!

[Jimbeaux]

Countdown said:

Jimbeaux said:

Countdown said:

Jimbeaux said:

Countdown said:

Jimbeaux said:

Give up there Guam. It is long evident that some (by no means all) on this thread are licking the back of Obummer's bag; nothing of that substance will be acknowledged. Worry not though, the American people will address it.

You have a lot of faith in the intelligence of American people. Bear in mind that 30% of Republicans think Obama is muslim. Does that seem rational or intelligent to you?

As I said, it will be addressed by the American people.

Again....avoid the question.

I avoided nothing. You claim some bit of trivia. I can find polls that show different, and so on.

Trivia? The fact that 30% of Romney voters think Obama is a Muslim is trivia?

It worries me that the electorate of the most powerful country in the world are so stupid. However it does tend to explain how the Texan Chimp managed to get elected twice.

With regards to your comment about finding polls that show otherwise, please do. (You have promised evidence before and not been exactly forthcoming when pressed).

How is it then that the most powerful country, as you all it, manages such being "stupid"? Maybe you are being a bit over the top.

[Jimbeaux]

Countdown said:

Guam said:

I concur however if reviewing post Conference data teaches us anything, challengers have lost from ties and significant leads, conversely they have won from significant deficits in poll ratings following conference season.

The reality is I feel, neither side has yet produced a strong enough case to the American Voter.

Ultimately it will probably now come down to spending ability <the facet I dislike more than any other in US political life>.

.

Agreed. I think MR will win unless Obama can get the grassroots out to vote. He'll need a lot more motivational speeches if he's going to do that.

Not so sure; history is on the side of sitting Presidents.

[Jimbeaux]

unrepentant said:

Countdown said:

Agreed. I think MR will win unless Obama can get the grassroots out to vote. He'll need a lot more motivational speeches if he's going to do that.

The race will come down to a relatively small number of voters in a relaively small number of states. The votes of suburban women in 3 or 4 states could end up being the difference. I still think that Obama will win the popular vote by 6%. If he does that he will carry the swing states and retain the presidency.

DO you think the popular vote will matter if the states stay that are red or blue stay that way? Then it would just be down to battleground states.

[Jimbeaux]

vonuber said:

Jim, why do you call him 'Obummer'?

I stole that moniker from another PHer TBH. It is amusing to watch how some Obama lovers get touchy when I do that. Fair play I suppose for having to listen to the "Texas Chimp" quip all these years.

[Jimbeaux]

davepoth said:

vonuber said:

Jim, why do you call him 'Obummer'?

It's nowhere near as offensive in American vernacular, remember.

True, and I would not have known its offensive nature had I not lifted it from a Brit PHer.

[Jimbeaux]

Captain Cadillac said:

Jimbeaux said:

Any one alone is not as representative as REALCLEARPOLITICS, which averages all polls. Do you disagree?

How could anyone? That's where I got the polls that I posted earlier. RCP takes the latest poll data and posts it on their site. Pretty simple and REALLY CLEAR, is it not?

[Jimbeaux]

Captain Cadillac said:

unrepentant said:

I was listening to NPR this morning on the way to work

No! Not you!

NPR is bent left a bit but I must say I do like them and listen to the "All Things Considered" program quite often.

[unrepentant]

Captain Cadillac said:

unrepentant said:

I was listening to NPR this morning on the way to work

No! Not you!

Funnily enough I find it to be pretty impartial. They are also having local debates between the parties that can get heated but are well argued (by both sides) and much better to listen to than the one sided rhetoric one normally hears. They also broadcast BBC world service which gives a very balanced and in depth review of global events.

[Captain Cadillac]

unrepentant said:

Captain Cadillac said:

unrepentant said:

I was listening to NPR this morning on the way to work

No! Not you!

Funnily enough I find it to be pretty impartial. They are also having local debates between the parties that can get heated but are well argued (by both sides) and much better to listen to than the one sided rhetoric one normally hears. They also broadcast BBC world service which gives a very balanced and in depth review of global events.

I used to listen to them a bit (I can't forgive them for firing Bob Edwards), I do like Car Talk but rarely get a chance to listen anymore. TBH my car time is usually gobbled up by Howard Stern. BBC is great, but I also get it on Sirius/XM.

My father was either listening to NPR or Sports Talk radio in the car, and he was a die hard Republican.

[unrepentant]

Captain Cadillac said:

unrepentant said:

Captain Cadillac said:

unrepentant said:

I was listening to NPR this morning on the way to work

No! Not you!

Funnily enough I find it to be pretty impartial. They are also having local debates between the parties that can get heated but are well argued (by both sides) and much better to listen to than the one sided rhetoric one normally hears. They also broadcast BBC world service which gives a very balanced and in depth review of global events.

I used to listen to them a bit (I can't forgive them for firing Bob Edwards), I do like Car Talk but rarely get a chance to listen anymore. TBH my car time is usually gobbled up by Howard Stern. BBC is great, but I also get it on Sirius/XM.

My father was either listening to NPR or Sports Talk radio in the car, and he was a die hard Republican.

I had sirius free for 3 months in the XJ when I got it eight months ago and in my Camaro when I got it in 2010. I liked it, especially the fact that I could get the BBC but was too mean to pay the subscription when the free period ended. In fairness to me I have Bowers and Wilkins audio in the Jag and it's frickin awesome so I mainly listen to music on my ipod or stream it from the iphone when I'm in that. My other cars are too old for satellite.

[speedy_thrills]

speedy_thrills said:

Is this even really a contest? If you think so Mitt Romney is returning 2.88 (to Obamas 1.4).

You can now get 3.1 on Romney despite negative economic data.

Interesting as the talking heads thought poor economic data would give Romney an edge but the people who put money on it think Romney is less likely to win now than two weeks ago.

Edited by speedy_thrills on Sunday 9th September 11:43

[unrepentant]

I don't think Reagan would fit into the current GOP. Far too liberal.

[rohrl]

Pinko Liberal.

[turbobloke]

A millionaire who's also earning in that bracket (7 figures) will pay more income tax than a lower income individual even without tax bands due to the miracle of percentages. 20% of $2m is considerably more than 20% of $40k so Reagan could be arguing for a flat rate of tax as it fits his second statement. 40% of $2m is even more still.

On the same basis, high earners pay more than their fair share in any system other than a flat rate where everybody pays their fair share. If a millionaire pays no income tax, maybe they're not earning anything other than from investments, and that income will be taxed as well.

This sort of politicobabble from any Party is a wafer thin veneer trying to edify a policy of milking high earners above their fair share by appealing to selfishness and envy in the electorate. As all politicians have their share of reptilian DNA, they'll all do it from time to time, some more than others.

[davepoth]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/0...

I guess these numbers will get confirmed tomorrow, but they really don't look good for Romney.

Edited by davepoth on Sunday 9th September 23:02