Obama and Romney hit the final stretch

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tampa_Dave
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Luigi_Daniele said:
40+% of the country self identifies as conservative.

Only 20% as liberal.
Click to expand...
Then why are the liberals mostly in control of our institutions such as courts and colleges, etc.?

What people call themselves and how that translates into action are two different things.
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
Then why are the liberals mostly in control of our institutions such as courts and colleges, etc.?

What people call themselves and how that translates into action are two different things.
Click to expand...
I could answer the college thing, but I don’t want to offend anyone. 😃

As to the courts, I am in no way sure that they are all liberals politically. I will admit that even some conservatives are judicial activists.
 
Schmoo said:
Its theft when they** take **from one and give to another IMO. And just up and moving can be next to impossible. Most ppl can’t do that… becuz if I could… I would already be out of this lib state.
Click to expand...
So you agree that Social Security recipients are the receivers of stolen goods?
 
_Abyssinia said:
What polls are electoral-vote.com and electoralprojection.com basing their predictions on? Most of the polls oversample democrats by using a 2008 turn out model. Enthusiasm is down among Obama’s key voter groups that came out in huge numbers in 2008; Hispanics, women, young people etc. If those prediction models use polls that oversample democrats they create an inaccurate prediction model

Nate Silver who writes for fivethirtyeight is a liberal partisan and has a flawed model

Nate Silver’s Flawed Model
Click to expand...
Electoral-vote.com uses the most recent of the following:
The Gallup Poll
Mason-Dixon
Quinnipiac University Polling Institute
Rasmussen Reports
SurveyUSA
PPP

as stated in their faq - electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Info/polling-faq.html
Electionprojection.com seems to take all polls as stated in their faq - electionprojection.com/2012elections/formulas12.php
Where the owner at least claims the following:

“II. Objectivity
In developing the formula, I made every effort to be objective, rather than biased toward the GOP. Yes, I am Republican, but this formula does not, in any way, falsely inflate the GOP’s standing.”
To be honest, it’s nice to hear some criticism of these guys. This certainly looks like the end all of correct modeling at first glance. But you’ve already pointed out errors in the NewYork Times’s methodology and it is also fair to say that two prior elections isn’t a great amount of data sampling.
 
TTins said:
I’ve lurked here for ages but finally had to register to fight some misconceptions about how much of a lock Romney has on this election.

A nationwide poll may predict who will win the popular vote, but state by state polls to predict who will win the most electoral votes (and the presidency) has been historically accurate for the last 2 elections from the following site:

electoral-vote.com/ -
That site predicts Obama winning 294 electoral votes to Romney’s 244. They update states that have new polls daily and adjust the numbers to reflect that.

Another site: fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/ predicts 290 (D) to 247 (R)

And still a third electionprojection.com/2012elections/president12.php shows a more reasonable 277 (D) to 261(D)

I’m not saying Romney can’t win, but going in with unmitigated self assurance that he already has it carries the risk of making one’s head explode.
Click to expand...
Romeny is going to win and win big. you can bet the house on it.
 
Schmoo said:
Its theft when they** take **from one and give to another IMO. And just up and moving can be next to impossible. Most ppl can’t do that… becuz if I could… I would already be out of this lib state.
Click to expand...
The Church does teach that taxes are all right, you may recall a remark by our Church’s Founder: Render unto Caesar… and since then the Church has taught that taxation is a part of being an organized society.

Moreover, the Church teaches that there is a social obligation to help the poor and that the government as the institutionalization of the society needs to be involved in ensuring that that happens.

(Note: before the Protestant Revolt and the subsequent theft of the Church’s properties, those in need were cared for by those who had given their lives to this endeavor: nuns and monks. After the Protestant Revolt, where could the poor turn if not to the government which had stolen their safety net?)
stinkcat_14 said:
So you agree that Social Security recipients are the receivers of stolen goods?
Click to expand...
I notice that we now call Social Security and Medicare portions of the money removed from our paychecks “payroll taxes.” What baloney. They used to be called FICA: Federal Insurance **Contributions **Act. The whole point was and is that we are not paying taxes with that money, we are *contributing *to fund (in part) our own retirement. This is a far cry from a teenager getting pregnant and moving into her own place funded by the government.
 
Thank you & God bless you!👍
Tampa_Dave said:
Why Romney Doesn’t Need a Poll Lead in Ohio
By Josh Jordan (National Review Online) October 26, 2012 7:00 A.M.

The race for Ohio is slowly tightening, but Mitt Romney does not hold a lead in a single poll in the current Real Clear Politics average (he is tied in two). Two polls from Time and CBS/Quinnipiac have grabbed headlines by showing Obama a five-point lead in each. Romney is chipping away at Obama’s poll lead, but the Democratic advantage in party-ID has increased across these polls. When looking at the polls in Ohio, it is becoming entirely possible that Mitt Romney should be able to win Ohio without ever showing a consistent lead in the polls, or any lead at all.
…
  • is increasingly difficult for Romney to show an lead in the Ohio polls. But even with Obama currently enjoying a 2.1 point lead, Romney is still in great shape to win Ohio on Election Day.* Here are some of the reasons for the optimism coming from Boston these days:
Romney’s strength with independents keeps growing: Last week when Obama led the Real Clear Politics average by 2.5 points, Romney led among independents by an average of 8.7 points. Romney has since increased that lead with independents to 12.3 points, which is why he’s been able to cut Obama’s overall lead even as the polls have leaned more Democratic. In 2008 Obama beat McCain with independents by eight points. It would be almost impossible for Obama to win Ohio while suffering a 20-point swing among independents.

The polls give Democrats a better turnout advantage than they had in 2008: As I explained in my last Ohio post, in 2008 Democrats beat Republicans in turnout by five points. The current polls show an average of D+6.6. A D+5 turnout in 2008 gave Obama a 4.5-point victory, while he is currently leading by only 2.1 points on an even greater D+6.6 turnout. Again, we know it should be very difficult for Democrats to match their 2008 turnout, let alone increase it.

History suggests late deciders will break against the incumbent: This is a rule that always receives some skepticism, but it’s very likely to benefit Romney at least some on Election Day. In 2004, late deciders broke against George W. Bush heavily, even though he was a wartime president. John Kerry beat Bush by 25 points among voters who decided in the last month, 28 points among voters that decided in the three days prior to Election Day, and 22 points among day-of deciders. Those voters were 20 percent of the Ohio electorate; while this year there are expected to be fewer late deciders, Obama cannot afford to lose among by those margins and still win.

In Ohio, Republicans tend to outperform their share of the national vote: In the last nine elections, the GOP has outperformed in Ohio. With Romney currently running just ahead of Obama nationally, it seems much more likely that Obama’s lead in Ohio has more to do with the higher party-ID advantage than a dramatic shift in Ohio from the past nine elections.

Strength with crossover voters in Ohio: In addition to Romney’s strength with independents, in the past two elections the GOP candidate has won over more Democrat votes than he’s lost Republican ones. Obama’s Ohio win in 2008 was based entirely on his strength with independents and the wave turnout, both of which are highly unlikely to be repeated in 2012. If Romney wins with independents by anywhere near the current average he has and takes more crossover voters than Obama does, Obama would need to exceed 2008 turnout greatly to win.

So, with less than two weeks until Election Day we will all know the results soon enough, but as more Ohio polls come in, it is important to remember that the picture for Romney in Ohio is better than many pundits would have us believe. It only takes a quick look at Romney’s rallies to remind us it’s not 2008 anymore, as Republicans have reclaimed the enthusiasm advantage that led to such sweeping 2008 victories for Democrats. That GOP enthusiasm has become contagious since the debates, and it is exactly what has Team Obama so afraid these days. All they have left to hang their hopes on is a slim lead in the polls, and even that might not be enough on Election Day.
Click to expand...
 
St_Francis said:
I notice that we now call Social Security and Medicare portions of the money removed from our paychecks “payroll taxes.” What baloney. They used to be called FICA: Federal Insurance **Contributions **Act. The whole point was and is that we are not paying taxes with that money, we are *contributing *to fund (in part) our own retirement. This is a far cry from a teenager getting pregnant and moving into her own place funded by the government.
Click to expand...
But of course, current recipients are not being paid with their own money, they are being paid with my money and others like me who actually work for a living. There is no contribution to social security, it is a tax pure and simple and the people who receive it have no right to expect that I should sacrifice for them, especially when so many of them are able bodied and can work. Also, Medicare parts B and D are paid out of general tax revenues, so once again we have a pure redistribution program that goes to the undeserving.
 
epan said:
I’m sure it’s too much to hope for the Florida vote not to be rigged again. We really need a national election commission to run our elections. There are several states which are known to try to fix the electoral results, both republican and democrat. Just depends on who is in power in that state.
Click to expand...
You do realize that there is no such thing as a national election, right? There are state elections that are called for by the Constitution, but there is no actual national election.
 
TTins said:
Electoral-vote.com uses the most recent of the following:
The Gallup Poll
Mason-Dixon
Quinnipiac University Polling Institute
Rasmussen Reports
SurveyUSA
PPP

as stated in their faq - electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Info/polling-faq.html
Electionprojection.com seems to take all polls as stated in their faq - electionprojection.com/2012elections/formulas12.php
Where the owner at least claims the following:

“II. Objectivity
In developing the formula, I made every effort to be objective, rather than biased toward the GOP. Yes, I am Republican, but this formula does not, in any way, falsely inflate the GOP’s standing.”
To be honest, it’s nice to hear some criticism of these guys. This certainly looks like the end all of correct modeling at first glance. But you’ve already pointed out errors in the NewYork Times’s methodology and it is also fair to say that two prior elections isn’t a great amount of data sampling.
Click to expand...
Rasmussen used a democrat plus 3, and all the others I think are oversampling democrats, particularly ppp which is democrat pollster
 
i.imgur.com/BdYhJ.png

Barack Obama votes early in Chicago, is asked to show ID [VIDEO]

President Barack Obama was asked for photo identification before he could cast his ballot Thursday in Chicago.
Obama voted at 4:20 p.m. local time, “punching his choices into a touch-screen machine after signing forms and showing his driver’s license,” according to the White House press pool report.
“Now ignore the fact that there’s no gray hair on that picture,” he told the elections official. “I’m just glad I renewed my driver’s license.”

Somebody needs to contact Eric Holder, quick! The President’s vote was suppressed!

😉
 
markomalley said:
o gray hair on that picture,” he told the elections official. “I’m just glad I renewed my driver’s license.”

Somebody needs to contact Eric Holder, quick! The President’s vote was suppressed!

😉
Click to expand...
Hahahahahahaha:D:thumbsup:
 
mary_bobo said:
Bob, I frequently agree with you,but I think you are giving the electorate too much credit. You know me well enough to know what I think about that. And don’t leave out the equation of the thuggish Chicago machine. This is one election that has me scared to death.
Click to expand...
Ditto!😦
 
mary_bobo said:
Bob, I frequently agree with you,but I think you are giving the electorate too much credit. You know me well enough to know what I think about that. And don’t leave out the equation of the thuggish Chicago machine. This is one election that has me scared to death.
Click to expand...
Believe me you don’t have to plan on staying up late N November 6 and on November 7 you can tell me how wise I am:)
 
From Politico: **President Obama: Bain Capital is fair game

**President Barack Obama said in an interview that aired Friday “it is entirely appropriate” to further scrutinize Mitt Romney’s time at Bain, adding that “there are questions that have to be asked” about the Republican’s record at the private-equity firm.

Obama said that since Romney’s “main calling card” for the White House is his private-sector experience, it’s important for American voters to know exactly what his work at Bain involved.
So it doesn’t sound like Obama likes venture capitalists.

He used to. When it was convenient for him.

In 2003, State Senator Obama introduced the following resolution (SR 89):
WHEREAS, The State is in need of substantial support for private equity, technology and economic development; and

WHEREAS, Private equity is a vital aspect of the Illinois economy providing needed private capital to early and late stage companies in various industries, including but not limited to: retail, restaurant, manufacturing, biotechnology, pharmaceutical, medical devices, homeland security, software, wireless communications, transportation, and agriculture; and

WHEREAS, The development of the private equity sector of the Illinois economy offers the best opportunity for long-term economic vitality, for the expansion of jobs, for the improvement of productivity and a quality standard of living, and for providing the greatest number of citizens with genuine opportunity…
He also made the following speech on the Senate Floor (related to the above resolution) (p164):
Thank you very much, Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate. This bill forms a Private Equity Task Force. As many of you know, venture capital and private equity is one of the key mechanisms by which we finance new businesses in the State of Illinois. For a variety of reasons, Illinois has been lagging behind some of our competitor states in the formation of venture capital and its deployment in terms of seeding and funding new companies. This is an issue that has piqued the interest of various persons in the industry and so they have asked that we form this Private Equity Task Force to examine these issues. I would ask for an affirmative roll call.
So I guess private equity / venture capitalism is OK…unless you are an Obama opponent.
 
CatholicGuy22 said:
So the life a poor person and undocumented is not as important?
Click to expand...
I sympathize greatly with your position, but I must point out, with respect, that it is not currently legal to dismember someone because (s)he’s poor or undocumented. It is currently legal to do so to someone if (s)he is unborn…

If Romney wanted to do something horrific like make literally hunting illegal immigrants legal, then we’d have a proportionate issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top