The woo-woos on the Left have nowhere near the political power the Christian Taliban has.Originally Posted by The Rani
- Join Date
- Sep 2006
- Location
- Moorhead, MN, USA
- Posts
- 14,442
The woo-woos on the Left have nowhere near the political power the Christian Taliban has.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.
-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism
Fair is fair! I agree with Odin on that one.
Well yeah but the two parties are in control of the debates and they're not going to let that happen. But you can't get someone else elected to fix it because they can't get in to the debates.
Obama looks like he's aged 20 years in 4 by learning that even if you do get inside, you still can't change it. It might look like an impossible battle from all angles, but at least he's trying.
Those words, "temperate and moderate", are words either of political cowardice, or of cunning, or seduction. A thing, moderately good, is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper, is always a virtue; but moderation in principle, is a species of vice.
'82 - Once & always independent
The RCP average is closing rapidly, from Obama +4.1 a week ago to Obama +1.4 now. The only two national polls with data from after the debate are the Rasmussen and Gallup tracking polls. Rasmussen is a 3-day average, which still includes the 3rd (the day of the debate), so 1/3 of its data is pre-debate. It shows Romney ahead by 2. Gallup is a 7-day average, so 5/7 of its data is from before the debate, and it has Obama dropping from a 6 point lead a few days ago to 3 now. It will probably shift a lot more as those older days drop out. If you average only Rasmussen and Gallup (which is all we have as of now), with over half of the overall data still coming from before the debate, this is what you get:
Obama: 48
Romney: 47.5
Spread: Obama +0.5
It'll be interesting to see what it looks like a few days from now, with some other polls taken after the debate. The trends suggest Romney will be in the lead.
"I see you got your fist out, say your peace and get out. Yeah I get the gist of it, but it's alright." - Jerry Garcia, 1987
five thirty-eight gives obama an 83.6% chance of winning on november 6th.
nate silver is pretty good at what he does.
Nobody is taking Nate Silver seriously anymore. The guy is a laughingstock.
"I see you got your fist out, say your peace and get out. Yeah I get the gist of it, but it's alright." - Jerry Garcia, 1987
If you were a school-board member, would you hire someone to be an American history teacher who cannot identify the decades in which the American Revolution happened, cannot recognize the significance of the Mayflower Compact, and does not know what "Jim Crow" means? But maybe you are educated in something other than history in college? Lay people need not be experts to set standards.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
I dunno, the lines on his face said he kept trying despite full awareness of the futility. No big promises this time, except that he'll keep trying.
Those words, "temperate and moderate", are words either of political cowardice, or of cunning, or seduction. A thing, moderately good, is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper, is always a virtue; but moderation in principle, is a species of vice.
'82 - Once & always independent
You fall for the assumption that a statistical trend in politics sustains itself. It almost never does. Polling trends ordinarily revert to the mean. The contest has been going on for a long time, and Mitt Romney had one good night because he broke some of the norms of debating. He has not changed as a person.
To be sure, collapses happen, but they usually have a cause in something other than polling. Polling can reflect a scandal... but it is the scandal that causes a poll to go bad for a pol.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
Agree with you here. This is akin to a convention bounce. Anyone actually using the debates to figure out who to vote for will wait until all four are finished. Word is Obama watched Wednesday's debate and facepalmed. They will likely make changes.
Rani, you are also old enough to remember Reagan's disastrous performance during his first debate with Mondale back in '84, raising questions about whether he was "all there" and too old to run for re-election. Reagan, as we all know, came back roaring in the second debate and won the election in a historic landslide.
Will Obama be like Carter '80 or Reagan '84? Only time will tell. (Not that I see a Reaganesque landslide in the horizon, but I certainly don't discount the possibility that Obama will perform better in the next two debates).
I want people to know that peace is possible even in this stupid day and age. Prem Rawat, June 8, 2008
No, "they" said that Reagan was out of it. Reagan never appeared to ageNobody said that Reagan was a good guy who tried and failed, that it showed in how much he had aged during the presidency, etc etc. They did say that about Carter.
And no, I don't remember the Reagan/Mondale debates. Had other things going on that fall.
There appears to be a pattern of incumbent presidents f-uping the first debate for whatever reason "they" want to give. My guess is in general, sitting presidents have more to deal with on a day-to-day basis than their opponents. I recall in 1992, "they" (who I am assuming are pundits, the perennial "they") said how GHW Bush seemed miffed that he even had to do the dog and pony show.
The 1992 debate was the only debate which included 3 candidates: Bush, Clinton and Perot. I think it made things more interesting. In 1980, Carter refused to be in the first debate, which included John Anderson. That was an idiotic, insufferable move, although I have respect for Carter's post-presidential career (and the fact that he and Ford became buddies later.)
I'd like to see a debate with all reasonably viable presidential candidates on stage. It would make for a livelier discussion, perhaps bring up a wider range of issues and viewpoints. It might also keep the candidates on their toes, even if the inside the beltway types sneer at the extra-party types.
Why? Because the USis controlled by the Feds. They control the media and election machine. Theyselect the politicians to control the government. That's why even Clinton did agood job in his last term, Bush won the election. What the Feds needed was nota good economy, they need war and the Patriot Act. Several month after hiselection, 911 happened which satisfied what the Feds needed.Voters say they’re worse off after four years ofObama, so why is Romney struggling?
.By Chris Moody, Yahoo! News 9/19/2012
In the twilight ofPresident Barack Obama's first term, many polls, including a new QuinnipiacUniversity tri-state survey of likely voters, show that most Americans say theyare not better off than they were four years ago. But in those same polls, thepresident retains his edge over challenger Mitt Romney.
That's not normal,says Quinnipiac University pollster Peter A. Brown.
"Most times ifvoters think things haven't gone well, they say, 'Let's think of somebodyelse.' But at this point they're not saying that," Brown said."Clearly they think [Obama] is more in tune with their lives."
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/v...-election.html
This time, Obamawill give the Feds something Romney can't give. So you saw Romney is under thefire of media despite the life of Americans is worse off after four years reignof Obama.
I didn't particularly like Perot, but I thought he brought an important viewpoint.
It really doesnt matter if Obama does better in the next debate, as long as Romney continues to do well he will have met the test much like JFK in 1960. The conditions in 1984 were much much different, things were going well, Reagan would have won even if he lost the 2nd debate as well. His brilliant line however, relaxed the worry that he was too old.
In 1980, people were just looking to see if Reagan was not the caricature that the left created, he proved them wrong and won the election. Romney went a long way to doing the same last week. For many people it was their first exposure to him rather than negative ads and the liberal media's slanted coverage. 67 million watched the debate, the most since 1980. I doubt the rest of the debates get that many viewers.
There is one way Obama can do better though...
Have you read 538.com lately?
To be specific
IOW, there are about 2 days of pricing the Romney bounce left. The election is still three plus weeks away. A lot can happen especially if Obama confronts Romney at all about his claims.Mitt Romney continues to show improved numbers in polls published since the presidential debate in Denver on Wednesday and has now made clear gains in the FiveThirtyEight forecast. The forecast gives him roughly a 20 percent chance of winning the Electoral College, up from about 15 percent before the debate. Mr. Romney’s gains in the polls have been sharp enough that he should continue to advance in the FiveThirtyEight forecast if he can maintain his numbers over the next couple of days.
And as for me, I currently see the race within the 4 point margin of error. Before the date I estimated Obama's advantege to be at about 6 or 2 points above the margin.
IOW, my "nowcast was at an Obama win of between 2 and 6 points. Now of course I don't expect that anyone can have a relable number for about two more days. But we are likely somewhere near a mathematical tie. However Romney still needs to win more of the so called purple states because Obama starts out with about a 240-190 advantege because the blue states are generally more populus than the red ones.
There is a long way to go.
And I hope that Romney prepares for it with your sense of bravado.
To me, it says he already has. If he just took a dive on the first big hit, he could probably save himself the scars.
I dunno, Romney ain't no Reagan, and even if he was Reagan that ain't the kinda guy we need right now.
Those words, "temperate and moderate", are words either of political cowardice, or of cunning, or seduction. A thing, moderately good, is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper, is always a virtue; but moderation in principle, is a species of vice.
'82 - Once & always independent
It's worth noting that President Obama was dumbfounded by the prevarications and position shifts of Mitt Romney. It's worth noting that the Obama campaign has been using Romney's words from the debate against him. The Obama campaign would not do so if such didn't look so fruitful.
Ir is hard to imagine a Pyrrhic victory out of what was at first seemed a stunning win in a debate. Such would be without precedent.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
RCP's electoral college projection had Obama at something like +156 on 9/30. It's now down to Obama +68. VA and CO are on the verge of flipping, which would shift it to Obama +24. At that point it would come down to OH, which two polls now show as tied. The other two states most likely to flip to Romney are NV and IA, but those two without OH would leave him 1 electoral vote short. If Ohio flips those could easily go with it, giving Romney a 36 vote electoral margin. Almost none of the state polling is post-debate however, and some states that seem safe for Obama could be much closer than they have appeared.
"I see you got your fist out, say your peace and get out. Yeah I get the gist of it, but it's alright." - Jerry Garcia, 1987
You've got an awful lot of confedence that nothing is going to change the general trajectory currently seen in the poll numbers over the next three weeks.
Of course before the debate some Obama supporters sounded about the same as you do now.
The weeks is an eternity in an election campaign.
If the debate went so well for Mitt Romney, then why is the Obama campaign using material from it against Romney? Romney succeeded at making new lies for which nobody is well prepared to refute. He also showed his character.
He is as much a flip-flopper and flim-flam artist as ever. Such has been a losing proposition before and will be so again.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
Well, a Univ of Denver poll now shows Obama +4, so so much for CO "flipping." Most of the polls out so far since the debate have been conservative leaning ones, if their record on RCP is any indication.
Obama is +70 in the electoral college, and that includes MO as a toss up which hasn't "flipped back" to Romney yet. The only flip so far has been Ohio back to toss up, so Obama was never ahead by +136. He was at 269 to 181 before the debate; now it is 251-181.
Obama could lose more, but since the economy is showing modest improvement, and Obama is answering Romney's lies, Rmoney's debate boost could be short-lived. He's unlikely to get another one either.
Last edited by Eric the Green; 10-07-2012 at 11:41 AM.
Breaking my Boomer embargo one more time to interject a little factual insight. I looked up the poll you're referring to and found this article, which says:
...the poll was conducted on Oct. 4 and 5 via telephone with 604 Colorado residents who are 18 years of age or older. To qualify as likely Colorado voters, respondents had to say that they live in Colorado and would definitely vote in the upcoming Presidential election. Responses were adjusted by age, race, and educational attainment to reflect the general population based on recent Census data.
What they did is to take a sample of "all adults", used a likely voter screen, and then weighted the results to turn it back into a poll of "all adults". Not even registered voters. It's nuts what these pollsters do, the media picks it up, and they get away with it despite their methodology being totally screwed up.
The RCP average has CO rated as a tie. Two other polls in the past week have shown Romney leading there by 3 and 4 points. FYI.
Last edited by JustPassingThrough; 10-07-2012 at 03:20 PM.
"I see you got your fist out, say your peace and get out. Yeah I get the gist of it, but it's alright." - Jerry Garcia, 1987
I wasn't talking about the end result. I was talking about the next week or so.
"I see you got your fist out, say your peace and get out. Yeah I get the gist of it, but it's alright." - Jerry Garcia, 1987
