Obama and Romney Hit the Final Stretch PT 2

  • Thread starter Thread starter qui_est_ce
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Never had either. But there’s always a first time. 🙂

All right, time to hit the sack, so I’ll catch you guys later!

Don’t forget tomorrow is a Holy Day of Obligation. Off to Mass ladies and gents!
If/when I return to the Semiconductor industry, I will share on my next trip out your way. 🙂
 
I don’t worry that Romeny may be lying in some campaign ad. My bigger worry is that Obama is telling the absolute truth. He truly advocates and believes in and intends to push for all the moral evils that are propounded in his party platform.
 
I don’t worry that Romeny may be lying in some campaign ad. My bigger worry is that Obama is telling the absolute truth. He truly advocates and believes in and intends to push for all the moral evils that are propounded in his party platform.
👍
 

Washington Post


Huff Post

It seems that there is a plan to open a plant in China to supply the Chinese market, and not move an existing operation to China thus costing Americans jobs.

And it is possible there’s a indebted feeling, but that’s speculation at this point, with the information we have before us. It is unusual to see auto makers come out against a Republican in the manner we are witnessing.

Again, hypothetically speaking, if a candidate is lying, doing evil, to be elected, so that good can come from it, what is the Church’s position in that scenario? Does that ‘obligation’ still exist?
The Washington Post article you linked above is dated 10/31.

There was a Bloomberg article dated over a week earlier (10/22) which appears to have been edited after the fact.

The leading sentence of this article says:

“Fiat SpA (F), majority owner of Chrysler Group LLC, plans to return Jeep output to China and may eventually make all of its models in that country, according to the head of both automakers’ operations in the region.”

Paragraph three says this:

"“We’re reviewing the opportunities within existing capacity” as well as “should we be localizing the entire Jeep portfolio or some of the Jeep portfolio.” "

Further down the article, we see this:

“Manley referred to adding Jeep production sites rather than shifting output from North America to China.”

… which seems at odds with what was written in paragraphs one and three. Interestingly enough, another HuffPo article says this:
"A line was added to the Bloomberg story after it was published stating that Mike Manley, chief operating officer of Fiat and Chrysler in Asia, was referring to “adding Jeep production sites rather than shifting output from North America to China.”

Personally, I don’t think it’s fair to call anyone a “liar” based on an after-the-fact clarification. 🤷
 
Romney Reaches Out to Students with Direct Funding; and
to Hispanics with promise of greater Latin American Trade

politico.com/news/stories/1012/83111.html

Mitt Romney was in Florida Wednesday restating his five point plan for economic recovery with help from former Florida Governor Jeb Bush.

Romney touted the work Bush had done in revamping Florida’s educational system and promised a similar model would be implemented at the Federal level, delegating the
administration of funds to the states and the students themselves, if he is elected.
To achieve these goals, the federal financial aid system must be simplified. Today it is unnecessarily complex, made up of multiple need-based grant programs, competing loan programs, and duplicative tax benefits, all of which include significant administrative costs. A Romney Administration will eliminate programs that are duplicative, inefficient, or ineffective and concentrate available funds directly on helping students. – A Chance For Every Child (“Mitt Romney’s Plan for Restoring the Promise of American Education” May 23, 2012
businessinsider.com/romney-ryan-student-loans-mitt-paul-new-hampshire-town-hall-2012-8

latino.foxnews.com/latino/opinion/2012/10/31/al-zapanta-what-about-latin-america/

mittromney.com/sites/default/files/shared/120523-Education%20White%20Paper%20FINAL%20for%20PDF.pdf
 
On Monday’s Obama call, campaign manager Jim Messina said of Pennsylvania, “We’re not going to take anything for granted.”
politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/31/romney-obama-camps-war-over-state-of-the-race
The Democratic game is about turnout. The president’s re-election campaign is a formidable operation. In a signal that Pennsylvania is not a closed deal, Mr. Obama last week gave an Oval Office interview to Michael Smerconish, a Philadelphia radio talk-show host who was born in Bucks County and has a following in the collar counties. Gov. Rendell sums up the mood among Democrats: “We’re nervous.”
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204840504578086744160686344.html?KEYWORDS=pennsylvania

Romney gains 7 points in one month in PA

Romney Campaign: The Fundamentals Favor Us

Polls: Romney Leads 50/47 in Colorado, Tied in Wisconsin

Karl Rove’s prediction
My prediction: Sometime after the cock crows on the morning of Nov. 7, Mitt Romney will be declared America’s 45th president. Let’s call it 51%-48%, with Mr. Romney carrying at least 279 Electoral College votes, probably more
He predicted Obama would win in 2008
 
Do a google news search ‘mitt romney chrysler GM China’. It appears to have coverage of a lot more than just MSNBC.

‘Even if it is a lie’, wouldn’t open doors to questioning whether or not other statements are only for the sake of being elected?
No more than the lies of the other candidtes to be elected. These issues are trivial compared to the real issues. You know the list, it doesn’t day for me to list them again.

This is my thought, none of these antics on either side will cause the Church, or clergy to come out and say, “Romney led, so we as Catholics cannot vote for him. This gives us proportionate reasoning to vote for the currect Presisdent. Just ignore the fact that he has proven in word and deed that he will go against Church teaching and directly against the Church with the HHS mandate.”

You’re grasping at staws…

What about the lies of Obama about Lybia??? Whose lies are worse? Not an argument either side can win.
 
I came late to the party. I saw a request by ringil asking for someone to come to his defense.

I’m a conservative Republican, but I can tell you that ringil is a straight up guy, the kind of guy you share fine Scotch and a few fine hand-rolled cigars with over reasonable political discourse. Perhaps he could then be convinced of the error of his liberal ways! 🙂
I would agree with this post100%. I had a short conversation by PM yesterday, much respect here for him.👍
 
So a candidate’s willingness to distort truth in one area, for the sake of being elected, does not take away any credibility in other areas and must be accepted as the lesser of two evils for the possibility he will do as he states?
Lets see, both lie repeadtedly, but only one matters?
 
**Christie Keeps His Priorities Straight During Sandy Ordeal **

One of the Trite Trio on Fox and Friends really got it handed to him when he tried to turn a disaster update into a Romney moment. Good for Gov. Christie…this may be a Republican I can vote for in 2016.

nation.foxnews.com/hurricane-sandy/2012/10/30/christie-keeps-his-priorities-straight-during-sandy-ordeal

John
Looks like a good governor doing a good job sticking to whats important. Why do you see polotics in this? Believe me, Christie is just as conservative today as he was yesterday. You are welcome to jump over to the right, but I doubt you and this Governor agree on much.:rolleyes:
 
I would agree with this post100%. I had a short conversation by PM yesterday, much respect here for him.👍
DIed in the wool Obamabots quickly earn a place on my “ignore” list (a really neat feature of the CAF software, by the way). There is no sense in attempting to have an intelligent conversation with them.

On the other hand, a person who is left-of-center for reasons of personal conviction and can defend his position with both logic and facts can make for an interesting discussion (even if there is little hope of him convincing me or me convincing him).

Ringil is in the second category.
 
_Abyssinia said:
Romney Campaign: The Fundamentals Favor Us

"The Romney campaign and conservative super PACs like American Crossroads and Restore our Future have begun purchasing airtime in Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Michigan, a move that Obama campaign manager Jim Messina Tuesday called a “desperate play.”

*Then why is the Obama campaign buttressing up its ad blitz and appearances in supposedly solidly ‘blue’ Pennsylvania?
*
 
***Rove: Sifting the Numbers for a Winner
A crucial element: the mix of Democrats and Republicans who show up this election.

By KARL ROVE

*It comes down to numbers. And in the final days of this presidential race, from polling data to early voting, they favor Mitt Romney.

He maintains a small but persistent polling edge. As of yesterday afternoon, there had been 31 national surveys in the previous seven days. Mr. Romney led in 19, President Obama in seven, and five were tied. Mr. Romney averaged 48.4%; Mr. Obama, 47.2%. The GOP challenger was at or above 50% in 10 polls, Mr. Obama in none.

The number that may matter the most is Mr. Obama’s 47.2% share. As the incumbent, he’s likely to find that number going into Election Day is a percentage point or so below what he gets.

For example, in 2004 President George W. Bush had 49% in the final Gallup likely-voter track; he received 50.7% on Election Day. In 1996, President Clinton was at 48% in the last Gallup; he got 49.2% at the polls. And in 1992, President George H.W. Bush was at 37% in the closing Gallup; he collected 37.5% in the balloting.

One potentially dispositive question is what mix of Republicans and Democrats will show up this election. On Friday last week, Gallup hinted at the partisan makeup of the 2012 electorate with a small chart buried at the end of its daily tracking report. Based on all its October polling, Gallup suggested that this year’s turnout might be 36% Republican to 35% Democratic, compared with 39% Democratic and 29% Republican in 2008, and 39% Republican and 37% Democratic in 2004. If accurate, this would be real trouble for Mr. Obama, since Mr. Romney has consistently led among independents in most October surveys.

Gallup delivered some additional bad news to Mr. Obama on early voting. Through Sunday, 15% of those surveyed said they had already cast a ballot either in person or absentee. They broke for Mr. Romney, 52% to 46%. The 63% who said they planned to vote on Election Day similarly supported Mr. Romney, 51% to 45%.

Furthermore, in battleground states, the edge in early and absentee vote turnout that propelled Democrats to victory in 2008 has clearly been eroded, cut in half according to a Republican National Committee summary.

But doesn’t it all come down to the all-important Buckeye State? Here, too, the early voting news isn’t encouraging for the president.

Adrian Gray, who oversaw the Bush 2004 voter-contact operation and is now a policy analyst for a New York investment firm, makes the point that as of Tuesday, 530,813 Ohio Democrats had voted early or had requested or cast an absentee ballot. That’s down 181,275 from four years ago. But 448,357 Ohio Republicans had voted early or had requested or cast an absentee ballot, up 75,858 from the last presidential election.

That 257,133-vote swing almost wipes out Mr. Obama’s 2008 Ohio victory margin of 262,224. Since most observers expect Republicans to win Election Day turnout, these early vote numbers point toward a Romney victory in Ohio. They are also evidence that Scott Jennings, my former White House colleague and now Romney Ohio campaign director, was accurate when he told me that the Buckeye GOP effort is larger than the massive Bush 2004 get-out-the-vote operation.

Democrats explain away those numbers by saying that they are turning out new young Ohio voters. But I asked Kelly Nallen, the America Crossroads data maven, about this. She points out that there are 12,612 GOP “millennials” (voters aged 18-29) who’ve voted early compared with 9,501 Democratic millennials.

Are Democrats bringing out episodic voters who might not otherwise turn out? Not according to Ms. Nallen. She says that about 90% of each party’s early voters so far had also voted in three of the past four Ohio elections. Democrats also suggest they are bringing Obama-leaning independents to polls. But since Mr. Romney has led among independents in nine of the 13 Ohio polls conducted since the first debate, the likelihood is that the GOP is doing as good a job in turning out their independent supporters as Democrats are in turning out theirs.

Desperate Democrats are now hanging their hopes on a new Quinnipiac University/New York Times/CBS News poll showing the president with a five-point Ohio lead. But that survey gives Democrats a +8 advantage in turnout, the same advantage Democrats had in 2008. That assumption is, to put it gently, absurd.

In addition to the data, the anecdotal and intangible evidence—from crowd sizes to each side’s closing arguments—give the sense that the odds favor Mr. Romney. They do. My prediction: Sometime after the cock crows on the morning of Nov. 7, Mitt Romney will be declared America’s 45th president. Let’s call it 51%-48%, with Mr. Romney carrying at least 279 Electoral College votes, probably more.*
 
Do a google news search ‘mitt romney chrysler GM China’. It appears to have coverage of a lot more than just MSNBC.

‘Even if it is a lie’, wouldn’t open doors to questioning whether or not other statements are only for the sake of being elected?
Ok, I’ve searched, this is what I found…

youtube.com/watch?v=0dnfed-DjKo

Is this the ad in question? If so, what part of it is the lie? The deal is to produce Jeeps in China, it doesn’t say anything more than that.

I’m sure glad I went and found the ad for myself, i was starting to believe the hype as well.😊

There is only one thing certain in this race, only one thing that has been consistent; everything Romney does, says, or even thinks is a lie, just ask Barrack Obama and any of his surrogates in the mainstream media. None of these sources are credible if this is the ad you are talking about.
 
When one offers information about themselves, they might be opening themselves up for being stalked, but they can hardly stalk others based upon that information. So no, it is not open for discussion.
So from the get-go, you are okaying breaking the rules so your point of view does not seem valid. Your stance is noble in defending others, however I think stalkers and potential stalkers do not deserve a break and should not be making other people pay for their crimes and should acknowledge this. Stalking is a Predatory Act. Forcing certain things into discussion could be predatory in itself as well as intimidating. It also puts others who are respectful of others into a risky situation. No one is already starting things by being way way off topic. If one is not doing this in the first place, not respecting the rules for everyone, their motives are already dubious. Your point of view from the get-go is okaying the breaking of rules from some people so your view does not seem valid and okaying the breaking of rules could be okaying wrongs against other people. Wrongs that indeed, may not even be legal but oh boy, when others act out of line when their is provocation.

So to conclude, your judgment is not valid because you are okaying someone who is bending and possibly breaking the rules to begin with. Let alone if intentional, may not even be legal. And if intentional towards someone, then someone has to live with being wrongfully criminally abused!
 
***Rove: Sifting the Numbers for a Winner
A crucial element: the mix of Democrats and Republicans who show up this election.

By KARL ROVE

*It comes down to numbers. And in the final days of this presidential race, from polling data to early voting, they favor Mitt Romney.

He maintains a small but persistent polling edge. As of yesterday afternoon, there had been 31 national surveys in the previous seven days. Mr. Romney led in 19, President Obama in seven, and five were tied. Mr. Romney averaged 48.4%; Mr. Obama, 47.2%. The GOP challenger was at or above 50% in 10 polls, Mr. Obama in none.*

The number that may matter the most is Mr. Obama’s 47.2% share. As the incumbent, he’s likely to find that number going into Election Day is a percentage point or so below what he gets.

For example, in 2004 President George W. Bush had 49% in the final Gallup likely-voter track; he received 50.7% on Election Day. In 1996, President Clinton was at 48% in the last Gallup; he got 49.2% at the polls. And in 1992, President George H.W. Bush was at 37% in the closing Gallup; he collected 37.5% in the balloting.

One potentially dispositive question is what mix of Republicans and Democrats will show up this election. On Friday last week, Gallup hinted at the partisan makeup of the 2012 electorate with a small chart buried at the end of its daily tracking report. Based on all its October polling, Gallup suggested that this year’s turnout might be 36% Republican to 35% Democratic, compared with 39% Democratic and 29% Republican in 2008, and 39% Republican and 37% Democratic in 2004. If accurate, this would be real trouble for Mr. Obama, since Mr. Romney has consistently led among independents in most October surveys.

Gallup delivered some additional bad news to Mr. Obama on early voting. Through Sunday, 15% of those surveyed said they had already cast a ballot either in person or absentee. They broke for Mr. Romney, 52% to 46%. The 63% who said they planned to vote on Election Day similarly supported Mr. Romney, 51% to 45%.

Furthermore, in battleground states, the edge in early and absentee vote turnout that propelled Democrats to victory in 2008 has clearly been eroded, cut in half according to a Republican National Committee summary.

But doesn’t it all come down to the all-important Buckeye State? Here, too, the early voting news isn’t encouraging for the president.

Adrian Gray, who oversaw the Bush 2004 voter-contact operation and is now a policy analyst for a New York investment firm, makes the point that as of Tuesday, 530,813 Ohio Democrats had voted early or had requested or cast an absentee ballot. That’s down 181,275 from four years ago. But 448,357 Ohio Republicans had voted early or had requested or cast an absentee ballot, up 75,858 from the last presidential election.

That 257,133-vote swing almost wipes out Mr. Obama’s 2008 Ohio victory margin of 262,224. Since most observers expect Republicans to win Election Day turnout, these early vote numbers point toward a Romney victory in Ohio. They are also evidence that Scott Jennings, my former White House colleague and now Romney Ohio campaign director, was accurate when he told me that the Buckeye GOP effort is larger than the massive Bush 2004 get-out-the-vote operation.

Democrats explain away those numbers by saying that they are turning out new young Ohio voters. But I asked Kelly Nallen, the America Crossroads data maven, about this. She points out that there are 12,612 GOP “millennials” (voters aged 18-29) who’ve voted early compared with 9,501 Democratic millennials.

Are Democrats bringing out episodic voters who might not otherwise turn out? Not according to Ms. Nallen. She says that about 90% of each party’s early voters so far had also voted in three of the past four Ohio elections. Democrats also suggest they are bringing Obama-leaning independents to polls. But since Mr. Romney has led among independents in nine of the 13 Ohio polls conducted since the first debate, the likelihood is that the GOP is doing as good a job in turning out their independent supporters as Democrats are in turning out theirs.

Desperate Democrats are now hanging their hopes on a new Quinnipiac University/New York Times/CBS News poll showing the president with a five-point Ohio lead. But that survey gives Democrats a +8 advantage in turnout, the same advantage Democrats had in 2008. That assumption is, to put it gently, absurd.

In addition to the data, the anecdotal and intangible evidence—from crowd sizes to each side’s closing arguments—give the sense that the odds favor Mr. Romney. They do. My prediction: Sometime after the cock crows on the morning of Nov. 7, Mitt Romney will be declared America’s 45th president. Let’s call it 51%-48%, with Mr. Romney carrying at least 279 Electoral College votes, probably more.
Before anyone says Karl Rove would predict a win for Romney because he is partisan consider that he predicted Obama would win in 2008 by 338 electoral votes to John McCain 200. Result was 173 for McCain, 365 Obama
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top