The election....
Poll
 | 33 votes (51.56%) | ||
| | 31 votes (48.43%) |
64 members have voted
May 16th, 2012 at 11:10:13 AM
permalink
I believe President Obama, despite driving the country ever closer to economic ruin, will be re-elected. Here are my reasons....
African-Americans will vote for him no matter what.
He will harp on the 2% payroll tax cut which will resonate with the middle class, despite the fact that it moves Social Security that much closer to insolvency.
He will harp on taxing the "bad 1%" who are successful, while Romney will not. It's easy for the vast majority of the 99% to go along.
He is a better orator than Romney.
I expect the Republican Vice Presidential nominee to be an overall negative, but nothing can top Sarah Palin.
Anyway, I have bet Weaselman my $70 against his $30, and the Wiz my $180 against his $100.
I have Obama, they have Romney. In the event either one does not make it to the election I have the Democratic nominee, they have the Republican.
Who do you think will win in November, and why?
African-Americans will vote for him no matter what.
He will harp on the 2% payroll tax cut which will resonate with the middle class, despite the fact that it moves Social Security that much closer to insolvency.
He will harp on taxing the "bad 1%" who are successful, while Romney will not. It's easy for the vast majority of the 99% to go along.
He is a better orator than Romney.
I expect the Republican Vice Presidential nominee to be an overall negative, but nothing can top Sarah Palin.
Anyway, I have bet Weaselman my $70 against his $30, and the Wiz my $180 against his $100.
I have Obama, they have Romney. In the event either one does not make it to the election I have the Democratic nominee, they have the Republican.
Who do you think will win in November, and why?
May 16th, 2012 at 11:17:28 AM
permalink
I'm not so sure about that "African-Americans will vote for him no matter what" remark after his recent support of gay marriage. IIRC, African-Americans played a major part in California's Proposition 8.
However, I tend to agree about the result - Romney comes across as too conservative, and Obama as "not as liberal as first believed," for the moderate Republicans not to cross party lines. It will probably be closer than in 2008; will this be the first election since 1916 where the winner needed California's electoral votes?
However, I tend to agree about the result - Romney comes across as too conservative, and Obama as "not as liberal as first believed," for the moderate Republicans not to cross party lines. It will probably be closer than in 2008; will this be the first election since 1916 where the winner needed California's electoral votes?
May 16th, 2012 at 11:20:06 AM
permalink
The economy is screwed regardless of who gets elected, so give me the one that will stay out of my personal life: Obama.
I'll go back to not participating in political discussions now.
I'll go back to not participating in political discussions now.
A falling knife has no handle.
May 16th, 2012 at 12:06:27 PM
permalink
Put me down for Romney.
2012 is not 2008: many Independents and Republicans who took a chance and voted for Obama, having not done the research at the time, have buyer's remorse and will not make the same mistake again. And let's be honest, there was a perfect storm of factors that led to his election in 2008- today is different.
Here are a few points:
1. While I agree he will capture the great majority of African Americans, it will be less than last time. Most African-Americans do not believe in gay marriage and as a segment of society, they have been hit even harder under Obama. The enthusiasm that existed in 2008 will not be there in 2012- people will stay home.
2. The Economy will continue to not be robust- and people who gave him a chance will want change.
3. I disagree about the VP pick: I think whoever is chosen will only strengthen the ticket. There are a lot of good options out there- any of which will stand head and shoulders over Biden in the debates. People will see this and notice.
4. Eliminating Capital Gains taxes in the Romney plan for people making under 250k is a winner.
5. People don't like Obamacare. Romney has pledged to work toward its repeal- of course the Supreme Court may do that.
6. Current polls generally show Romney ahead NOW. All polls and prognostications are going to be skewed in Obama's favor. If Romney's polling about the same or ahead at election time, he will easily win. Everyone missed the landslide of 2010. 2012 will also be underestimated.
Just a few thoughts- time will tell...
2012 is not 2008: many Independents and Republicans who took a chance and voted for Obama, having not done the research at the time, have buyer's remorse and will not make the same mistake again. And let's be honest, there was a perfect storm of factors that led to his election in 2008- today is different.
Here are a few points:
1. While I agree he will capture the great majority of African Americans, it will be less than last time. Most African-Americans do not believe in gay marriage and as a segment of society, they have been hit even harder under Obama. The enthusiasm that existed in 2008 will not be there in 2012- people will stay home.
2. The Economy will continue to not be robust- and people who gave him a chance will want change.
3. I disagree about the VP pick: I think whoever is chosen will only strengthen the ticket. There are a lot of good options out there- any of which will stand head and shoulders over Biden in the debates. People will see this and notice.
4. Eliminating Capital Gains taxes in the Romney plan for people making under 250k is a winner.
5. People don't like Obamacare. Romney has pledged to work toward its repeal- of course the Supreme Court may do that.
6. Current polls generally show Romney ahead NOW. All polls and prognostications are going to be skewed in Obama's favor. If Romney's polling about the same or ahead at election time, he will easily win. Everyone missed the landslide of 2010. 2012 will also be underestimated.
Just a few thoughts- time will tell...
Lack of prior planning on your part doesn't constitute an emergency on my part.
May 16th, 2012 at 12:11:11 PM
permalink
Quote: MoscaI'll go back to not participating in political discussions now.
Smart move. I'll join you ;)
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
May 16th, 2012 at 12:15:59 PM
permalink
Quote: NareedSmart move. I'll join you ;)
Why? What do you like to talk about?
I find political discussions almost as interesting as weight loss discussions.
I loved reading TheBigPayback's analysis.
Diametrically opposed to my point of view, but that's certainly more interesting than someone 'not participating'.
May 16th, 2012 at 12:22:22 PM
permalink
Are Mike and Weaselman taking more action?
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
May 16th, 2012 at 12:35:21 PM
permalink
Quote: rdw4potusAre Mike and Weaselman taking more action?
I'd take action against Obama winning all day! (Alright- most of the day- I mean he certainly could win!)
Lack of prior planning on your part doesn't constitute an emergency on my part.
May 16th, 2012 at 1:00:08 PM
permalink
God am I not looking forward to the next several months. If you may excuse the temporary thread drift, I would strongly encourage anyone who doesn't like either candidate to consider voting for a third party. They won't win this election, or the next one, or probably the next one. But if every year everyone just says "eh, a vote for a third party is just throwing a vote away" then a third party will never gain traction. If you don't like the current system, work against it!
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
May 16th, 2012 at 1:08:56 PM
permalink
Quote: AcesAndEightsGod am I not looking forward to the next several months. If you may excuse the temporary thread drift, I would strongly encourage anyone who doesn't like either candidate to consider voting for a third party. They won't win this election, or the next one, or probably the next one. But if every year everyone just says "eh, a vote for a third party is just throwing a vote away" then a third party will never gain traction. If you don't like the current system, work against it!
I was planning to vote for Romney, but he's proven to be too much of a tool. I hoped that Americans Elect could get something done, but that didn't happen. Now I'm torn between leaving the top of the ticket blank and voting for a random minor-party category.
Obama's almost a lock to be reelected, which is a real shame. He just has a big structural advantage in the electoral college given where polling currently is.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
May 16th, 2012 at 1:27:26 PM
permalink
Despite O'Bummer being the spawn of Satan and a certified Muslim, he's going to win the election.
Edit: I forgot to add Kenyan Commie.
Edit: I forgot to add Kenyan Commie.
Someday, joor goin' to see the name of Googie Gomez in lights and joor goin' to say to joorself, "Was that her?" and then joor goin' to answer to joorself, "That was her!" But you know somethin' mister? I was always her yuss nobody knows it! - Googie Gomez
May 16th, 2012 at 1:40:16 PM
permalink
Quote: SOOPOOI believe President Obama, despite driving the country ever closer to economic ruin, will be re-elected. Here are my reasons....
African-Americans will vote for him no matter what.
True but the black vote is always 90% democrat anyway. This does not really add much versus what any other liberal candidate could count on.
Obama will win, yes, because elections are popularity contests and Obama is much cooler than Romney.
Vote for Nobody 2020!
May 16th, 2012 at 1:40:51 PM
permalink
Quote: TheBigPaybak
6. Current polls generally show Romney ahead NOW. .
Here's how these things generally work. This early
in the race, the incumbent usually has a nice lead.
People know who he is and they don't know the
challenger. As the election nears, the polls tighten.
To have the challenger ahead this early in so many
important polls is ominous to say the least for the
incumbent. Obama is losing women supporters also,
thats frightening to a Democrat. Saying black voters
support Obama is a yawner, they always support
the Dem, no matter who he is, big deal.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
May 16th, 2012 at 1:59:56 PM
permalink
Quote: SOOPOOI believe President Obama, despite driving the country ever closer to economic ruin, will be re-elected.
Who do you think will win in November, and why?
The website 270towin.com has only 20.4% of the electoral votes in play. They show Obama as 26 electoral votes ahead of Romney, and 46 ahead if you count Pennsylvania. PA is only marginally a battle ground state.
CNN is one of the most conservative estimators, so they have 34% of the electoral votes listed as in play, but Obama is still shown as 37 electoral votes ahead.
Given the better funding and the natural advantages of incumbency, I agree that Obama is the more likely winner.
-
In the 20th century, of incumbents who have run for another term, how many have lost?
- HW Bush lost in 1992 because he Perot ran as 3rd party
- Jimmy Carter lost in 1980
- Gerald Ford lost in 1976 because he was never elected, and reneged on his agreement not to run for a full term
- Hoover lost in 1932 because of the recession.
-
Taft lost in 1912 because Teddy Roosevelt ran as an independent
Incumbents that ran and won re-election outnumber losers 2 to 1- GW Bush
- Clinton
- Reagan
- Nixon
- Lyndon Johnson
- Eisenhower
- Truman
- F.D. Roosevelt
- C. Coolidge
- W. Wilson
- Teddy Roosevelt
Really only Carter (1980) and Hoover (1932) lost re-election as an incumbent to an office they had been elected to, when there was no significant 3rd party candidate.
May 16th, 2012 at 2:30:13 PM
permalink
Talking about elections in May is as ridiculous
as talking about next winters snowfall in July.
People typically don't pay attention to elections
before Labor Day, and this year will be no
different. So ta ta , I'm not getting involved till
then either.
as talking about next winters snowfall in July.
People typically don't pay attention to elections
before Labor Day, and this year will be no
different. So ta ta , I'm not getting involved till
then either.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
May 16th, 2012 at 2:32:08 PM
permalink
8/5 Bob will be back on this thread before Labor day.
May 16th, 2012 at 2:39:17 PM
permalink
Quote: buzzpaff8/5 Bob will be back on this thread before Labor day.
I won't be reading this thread after today, so thats doubtful.
Or any other political thread. Politics bore the hell out of me.
Everybody has an opinion and they'll scream it at you all day
long. No thanks. When I was in college, we had a rule that
in the dorm nobody could discuss religion or politics. It went
a long way towards keeping the peace.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
May 16th, 2012 at 2:42:11 PM
permalink
LOL I won
May 16th, 2012 at 2:44:46 PM
permalink
Quote: pacomartinThe website 270towin.com has only 20.4% of the electoral votes in play. They show Obama as 26 electoral votes ahead of Romney, and 46 ahead if you count Pennsylvania. PA is only marginally a battle ground state.
CNN is one of the most conservative estimators, so they have 34% of the electoral votes listed as in play, but Obama is still shown as 37 electoral votes ahead.
My two cents on poll aggregators and models:
Nate Silver's model is historically excellent, but not up yet at the NY Times (www.fivethirtyeight.com). Mark Blumenthal does top-notch work over at Huffington Post (www.pollster.com). www.realclearpolitics.com is a tad gun shy on their race classifications (lots of "toss-ups" have systemic leads in one direction or the other). I'm a big fan of the user controllable maps at 270towin.com.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
May 16th, 2012 at 2:58:08 PM
permalink
Don,t you hate how the boards at Politico are flooded with gambling threads. I must say that was the most unbiased poll question in ages. I do appreciate that you refrained from instinct and used the term 'blacks'.
I have a bewitched egg that I use to play VP with and I have net over 900k with it.
May 16th, 2012 at 3:08:54 PM
permalink
Quote: Wavy70Don,t you hate how the boards at Politico are flooded with gambling threads. I must say that was the most unbiased poll question in ages. I do appreciate that you refrained from instinct and used the term 'blacks'.
I feel like I'm missing something here. The first sentence is clearly sarcasm. The second sentence is true, as far as I can tell. The poll question contains no lead or other flaw. If the name at the top of the poll could rotate, it'd be perfect. The third sentence gets me. SOOPOO said African-Americans, so I'm totally lost on that line...
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
May 16th, 2012 at 3:08:59 PM
permalink
Just so everyone knows, I'm about to not take a dump. Hopefully everyone feels suitably informed about my non-actions as well.
....
Back on the subject... Hoover and Carter both lost in more clear circumstances. If Hoover lost due to the depression, and Carter's loss was partly due to the worsening economy, would that not be a factor for Obama whose certainly presiding during a recession? It's the economy, stupid :)
....
Back on the subject... Hoover and Carter both lost in more clear circumstances. If Hoover lost due to the depression, and Carter's loss was partly due to the worsening economy, would that not be a factor for Obama whose certainly presiding during a recession? It's the economy, stupid :)
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
May 16th, 2012 at 3:13:29 PM
permalink
Quote: AcesAndEightsGod am I not looking forward to the next several months. If you may excuse the temporary thread drift, I would strongly encourage anyone who doesn't like either candidate to consider voting for a third party. They won't win this election, or the next one, or probably the next one. But if every year everyone just says "eh, a vote for a third party is just throwing a vote away" then a third party will never gain traction. If you don't like the current system, work against it!
Assuming nothing crazy happens in Tampa (as in - assuming Ron Paul or another actual conservative doesn't win the nomination) I will be voting for Gary Johnson.
Then again, I am a Libertarian (I don't really think Johnson is a strong Libertarian, but he has actual executive experience, he's miles ahead of Romney or Obama in terms of policy and he, IMO, can appeal to all of the electorate, except socialists.)
As for who I think would win between Obama and Romney, I think it'd be Obama. Things have been looking good for Romney right now, I just don't think he can excite Conservatives enough, and I don't think Independents or Liberals would vote for him. I know most Libertarians won't vote for him.
May 16th, 2012 at 3:15:40 PM
permalink
Quote: thecesspitJust so everyone knows, I'm about to not take a dump. Hopefully everyone feels suitably informed about my non-actions as well.
....
Back on the subject... Hoover and Carter both lost in more clear circumstances. If Hoover lost due to the depression, and Carter's loss was partly due to the worsening economy, would that not be a factor for Obama whose certainly presiding during a recession? It's the economy, stupid :)
But Hoover presided during the start of the depression, and Carter presided over a worsening economy. Obama is presiding over an unbelievably-awful-but-improving-at-a-snail's-pace economy. And I think the recession line needs to be past-tense. Just because the economy is pathetic doesn't mean it's a recession. That technically ended years ago.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
May 16th, 2012 at 3:28:13 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobTalking about elections in May is as ridiculous
as talking about next winters snowfall in July.
People typically don't pay attention to elections
before Labor Day, and this year will be no
different. So ta ta , I'm not getting involved till
then either.
It's not ridiculous to talk about, but you're right. The polls now don't matter anywhere near as much as the polls that'll happen in a few months, after Obama and Romney debate.
Oh god - we're going to have to watch a socialist debate a robot.
May 16th, 2012 at 3:32:23 PM
permalink
Quote: Boney526It's not ridiculous to talk about, but you're right. The polls now don't matter anywhere near as much as the polls that'll happen in a few months, after Obama and Romney debate.
Oh god - we're going to have to watch a socialist debate a robot.
Are they televising the Canadian elections from last year then? :)
Obama is about as socialist Tony Blair was.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
May 16th, 2012 at 3:53:15 PM
permalink
Quote: Boney526Oh god - we're going to have to watch a socialist debate a robot.
I wish it was that exciting. We have to watch two men debate about which 1.7 percent of the status quo needs to be changed.
Vote for Nobody 2020!
May 16th, 2012 at 4:32:10 PM
permalink
Quote: bigfoot66I wish it was that exciting. We have to watch two men debate about which 1.7 percent of the status quo needs to be changed.
What is interesting in the 2013 President's budget is the huge decrease in defense spending, matched with a huge increase in "net interest" payments. They will be nearly equal in 2017.
| Year | National Defense | Net interest | Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1980 | $133,995 | $52,533 | 255% |
| 1981 | $157,513 | $68,766 | 229% |
| 1982 | $185,309 | $85,032 | 218% |
| 1983 | $209,903 | $89,808 | 234% |
| 1984 | $227,411 | $111,102 | 205% |
| 1985 | $252,743 | $129,478 | 195% |
| 1986 | $273,373 | $136,017 | 201% |
| 1987 | $281,996 | $138,611 | 203% |
| 1988 | $290,360 | $151,803 | 191% |
| 1989 | $303,555 | $168,981 | 180% |
| 1990 | $299,321 | $184,347 | 162% |
| 1991 | $273,285 | $194,448 | 141% |
| 1992 | $298,346 | $199,344 | 150% |
| 1993 | $291,084 | $198,713 | 146% |
| 1994 | $281,640 | $202,932 | 139% |
| 1995 | $272,063 | $232,134 | 117% |
| 1996 | $265,748 | $241,053 | 110% |
| 1997 | $270,502 | $243,984 | 111% |
| 1998 | $268,194 | $241,118 | 111% |
| 1999 | $274,769 | $229,755 | 120% |
| 2000 | $294,363 | $222,949 | 132% |
| 2001 | $304,732 | $206,167 | 148% |
| 2002 | $348,456 | $170,949 | 204% |
| 2003 | $404,744 | $153,073 | 264% |
| 2004 | $455,833 | $160,245 | 284% |
| 2005 | $495,308 | $183,986 | 269% |
| 2006 | $521,827 | $226,603 | 230% |
| 2007 | $551,271 | $237,109 | 232% |
| 2008 | $616,073 | $252,757 | 244% |
| 2009 | $661,049 | $186,902 | 354% |
| 2010 | $693,586 | $196,194 | 354% |
| 2011 | $705,625 | $229,968 | 307% |
| 2012 estimate | $716,300 | $224,784 | 319% |
| 2013 estimate | $701,767 | $247,715 | 283% |
| 2014 estimate | $599,295 | $309,136 | 194% |
| 2015 estimate | $572,464 | $390,417 | 147% |
| 2016 estimate | $578,305 | $482,803 | 120% |
| 2017 estimate | $589,464 | $565,486 | 104% |
May 16th, 2012 at 4:42:45 PM
permalink
i have known socialists. socialists are friends of mine. obama is no socialist!
In a bet, there is a fool and a thief.
- Proverb.
May 16th, 2012 at 4:50:28 PM
permalink
Quote: SOOPOOI believe President Obama, despite driving the country ever closer to economic ruin, will be re-elected. Here are my reasons....
African-Americans will vote for him no matter what.
I am African-American. I voted for Obama in the previous election. I will NOT be voting for him in this upcoming election.
Craps is the most "Jekyll and Hyde" casino game ever invented!
May 16th, 2012 at 4:52:47 PM
permalink
Quote: SOOPOOWhy? What do you like to talk about?
I find political discussions almost as interesting as weight loss discussions.
I loved reading TheBigPayback's analysis.
Diametrically opposed to my point of view, but that's certainly more interesting than someone 'not participating'.
Oh, I'll take a bet against Obama, a flea-sized one. But political discussions tend to degenerate in bitter flame wars. I'd just as soon stay out of it.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
May 17th, 2012 at 9:12:54 AM
permalink
Quote: CrapsForeverI am African-American. I voted for Obama in the previous election. I will NOT be voting for him in this upcoming election.
Joe Rickets has announced a plan to defeat Barack Obama by "exposing" the depth of his relationship with Jeremiah Wright. He claims that if John McCain had allowed him to run this campaign in 2008, Obama would have been defeated.
Supposedly he uses the phrase metrosexual black Abraham Lincoln is used in the campaign.
The term, "metrosexual" originated in an article by Mark Simpson published on November 15, 1994, in The Independent. Simpson wrote:
Metrosexual man, the single young man with a high disposable income, living or working in the city (because that’s where all the best shops are), is perhaps the most promising consumer market of the decade. In the Eighties he was only to be found inside fashion magazines such as GQ, in television advertisements for Levi's jeans or in gay bars. In the Nineties, he’s everywhere and he’s going shopping.
The term is clearly an insult to most people, but could be almost descriptive. It doesn't seem very descriptive of Barack Obama, who is not seen as particularly materialistic. He is very "urban" and an intellectual.
I also don't get black Abraham Lincoln. That sounds like a high compliment to me.
May 17th, 2012 at 9:16:04 AM
permalink
i am so glad we ended up with the black abraham lincoln rather than the white john mccain.
In a bet, there is a fool and a thief.
- Proverb.
May 17th, 2012 at 9:24:40 AM
permalink
I couldn't cast a vote because we need a 3rd option on this poll; NEITHER.
Some people say you should always vote..regardless of how you feel about the candidates in an election. I don't believe in "voting for the lesser of two evils". I'd rather not vote at all if I am not a strong believer in either candidate.
Some people say you should always vote..regardless of how you feel about the candidates in an election. I don't believe in "voting for the lesser of two evils". I'd rather not vote at all if I am not a strong believer in either candidate.
Craps is the most "Jekyll and Hyde" casino game ever invented!
May 17th, 2012 at 9:55:54 AM
permalink
Quote: CrapsForeverI couldn't cast a vote because we need a 3rd option on this poll; NEITHER.
Some people say you should always vote..regardless of how you feel about the candidates in an election. I don't believe in "voting for the lesser of two evils". I'd rather not vote at all if I am not a strong believer in either candidate.
My understanding of the original post is you are supposed to vote for who you "think will win". Not who you "think should win". The original poster said that he was not in favor of Barack Obama, but he thought he would win.
May 17th, 2012 at 10:24:20 AM
permalink
Voting for Romney, but thinking Obama will win again. Too many people out there looking for something for nothing and Obama is "likeable" and says what they want to hear.
Not everyone by any means, but there is a large portion of the electorate that does not want to look at how broke we are and how we cannot afford our debt. They don't want to hear about it and would rather listen to Obama blame people for not paying their fair share. And last but not least, they never want to look in the mirror and see how choices they made in life have affected their situation.
Not everyone by any means, but there is a large portion of the electorate that does not want to look at how broke we are and how we cannot afford our debt. They don't want to hear about it and would rather listen to Obama blame people for not paying their fair share. And last but not least, they never want to look in the mirror and see how choices they made in life have affected their situation.
May 17th, 2012 at 10:31:51 AM
permalink
Situations like this make my blood boil:
I was in my local grocery store checking out and ahead of me was an obnoxious man talking on his iPhone. Cashier asks, "Cash or Credit" and he responds, "EBT"- which for those who don't know is the "credit card" version of food stamps in Ohio.
When people can be on public assistance and own iPhones, with the size of our national debt, something ain't right:
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
I was in my local grocery store checking out and ahead of me was an obnoxious man talking on his iPhone. Cashier asks, "Cash or Credit" and he responds, "EBT"- which for those who don't know is the "credit card" version of food stamps in Ohio.
When people can be on public assistance and own iPhones, with the size of our national debt, something ain't right:
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
Lack of prior planning on your part doesn't constitute an emergency on my part.
May 17th, 2012 at 10:34:38 AM
permalink
Quote: pacomartinMy understanding of the original post is you are supposed to vote for who you "think will win". Not who you "think should win". The original poster said that he was not in favor of Barack Obama, but he thought he would win.
pacomartin, thanks for the clarification.
I hope neither man wins, lol.
Craps is the most "Jekyll and Hyde" casino game ever invented!
May 17th, 2012 at 10:56:11 AM
permalink
I see Romney taking it for a few reasons. Obama has never maintained >50% approval, ever. He has had a >-10% enthusiasm gap (Rasmussen "strong" polls) since right after he was elected. The economy is slowing and his schemes to buy time are unraveling. For example, masking unemployment is ending extended benefits in many places. Finally, nothing is taking hold for him. He decided all women care about is free birth control and abortions and that has backfired. He has played the race cars with Zimmerman and that is starting to look bad for him. Every week he tries something new, and each time it fizzles.
Meanwhile, Romney is last year's NY Giants. Play smart, hang around, hang close, strike when you can. Romney is up in many polls even with the media still giving Obama as much push as the WWE will give to the next Ric Flair. Heck, the media is even starting to hedge as they realize how silly they are looking.
Blacks don't vote GOP, they stay home.
The "yute vote" from 2008 are now looking for jobs, the new freshmen will look for their own cause.
A financial crash or other economic slowdown is all Obama's, and he cannot play defense well.
Wait until the Supremes rule for AZ Immigration Law and against Obamacare. He will self-destruct in a hissy-fit.
Meanwhile, Romney is last year's NY Giants. Play smart, hang around, hang close, strike when you can. Romney is up in many polls even with the media still giving Obama as much push as the WWE will give to the next Ric Flair. Heck, the media is even starting to hedge as they realize how silly they are looking.
Blacks don't vote GOP, they stay home.
The "yute vote" from 2008 are now looking for jobs, the new freshmen will look for their own cause.
A financial crash or other economic slowdown is all Obama's, and he cannot play defense well.
Wait until the Supremes rule for AZ Immigration Law and against Obamacare. He will self-destruct in a hissy-fit.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
May 17th, 2012 at 11:06:23 AM
permalink
Quote: AZDuffmanHe will self-destruct in a hissy-fit.
I think that is entirely an Appalachian phrase. Your west-coasters and foreigners have probably never heard it. I suppose it is from the sound an angry cat makes, but it is primarily a "tantrum".
May 17th, 2012 at 11:19:26 AM
permalink
Quote: AZDuffman
Romney is up in many polls even with the media still giving Obama as much push as the WWE will give to the next Ric Flair. Heck, the media is even starting to hedge as they realize how silly they are looking.
Romney's up in the national trackers (and one self-selecting YouGov internet poll), but not gaining much ground in state level polling. That's an indication that the trackers are poorly weighted or poorly selected as much as it is an indication that Romney is actually ahead or gaining. I don't envy the folks polling this year's race. Not one bit. Rasmussen seems to be quite a bit farther right than most on their polls this year. I wonder what demographic splits they're using. Usually their model is solid, but I'm having a hard time thinking that they're right and PPP and AP/GfK and CNN and NYT and the Post are all wrong. I'd guess that Rasmussen is using 2010's exits as a baseline, while the others have started with 2008's demographic splits. I'd also guess that the 2012 turnout will be demographically between those two years in terms of ideological and race/gender/economic splits.
And, from an electoral standpoint, Obama just has too many EVs to bleed away relative to 2008's tally to be anything but a very heavy favorite in this race.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
May 17th, 2012 at 11:23:53 AM
permalink
Quote: pacomartinI think that is entirely an Appalachian phrase. Your west-coasters and foreigners have probably never heard it. I suppose it is from the sound an angry cat makes, but it is primarily a "tantrum".
This foriegner has... it's a common enough term where I grew up in deepest, darkest Surrey.
I am following the polls and bookie's prices, hoping to make some decent bets. I got good middles on the exchanges in Bush's re-election (there were some stupid prices right after the polls closed, giving Bush as a 3-1 under dog... my only regret wasn't having more money to bet).
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
May 17th, 2012 at 12:06:41 PM
permalink
Quote: pacomartinI think that is entirely an Appalachian phrase. Your west-coasters and foreigners have probably never heard it. I suppose it is from the sound an angry cat makes, but it is primarily a "tantrum".
Never knew it was regional nor gave any thought where it comes from. I will admit it is an older generation saying
To the Rasmussen comment on being biased right it is addressed on his site. Rasmussen uses likely voters and has a higher screening standard. As a casual observer I notice Rasmussen gets to the same conclusion but before the others.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
May 17th, 2012 at 12:12:10 PM
permalink
Quote: AZDuffmanNever knew it was regional nor gave any thought where it comes from. I will admit it is an older generation saying
To the Rasmussen comment on being biased right it is addressed on his site. Rasmussen uses likely voters and has a higher screening standard. As a casual observer I notice Rasmussen gets to the same conclusion but before the others.
Rasmussen's always maybe 2 or 3 points farther right than most. But he's spread by 6 or 7 points with PPP in this cycle, and that's a very big difference. Not saying that PPP is correct, but they're closer to the polling average than Rasmussen is so far this year.
Rasmussen blew 2008 pretty badly, but called 2010 spot on perfectly (same with 2004 and 2006). Is this year more like 2008 or 2010? I'd go with 2008, but expect 2012 to come in pretty close to the middle of the two years.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
May 17th, 2012 at 1:19:23 PM
permalink
Quote: thecesspitThis foriegner has... it's a common enough term where I grew up in deepest, darkest Surrey.
A quick google search reveals hundreds of uses of the phrase in British forums and news media. I always associated it with Appalachia, as did Senator Hatch in the NY Times article: On Language; Hissy Fits and Golden Oldies, By William Safire.
It is commonly believed that Appalachian English has many roots in 17th and 18th century colonial English. The word "hissy" has only been recorded in the past 80 years, so it's actual origin is uncertain.
May 17th, 2012 at 2:35:57 PM
permalink
Quote: pacomartinA quick google search reveals hundreds of uses of the phrase in British forums and news media. I always associated it with Appalachia, as did Senator Hatch in the NY Times article: On Language; Hissy Fits and Golden Oldies, By William Safire.
It is commonly believed that Appalachian English has many roots in 17th and 18th century colonial English. The word "hissy" has only been recorded in the past 80 years, so it's actual origin is uncertain.
For what it's worth, I grew up with the phrase in Idaho as well.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
May 17th, 2012 at 4:17:06 PM
permalink
Quote: WongBoi have known socialists. socialists are friends of mine. obama is no socialist!
Well, he's more like a National-Socialist. In other words - it'd be more accurate to describe him as a corporatist (or a lighter form of fascist), if that's an ideology.
May 17th, 2012 at 4:53:03 PM
permalink
Quote: Boney526Well, he's more like a National-Socialist. In other words - it'd be more accurate to describe him as a corporatist (or a lighter form of fascist), if that's an ideology.
You could possibly extend Obama's views to (neo)-corporatism (the idea of each area of the economy organizing into a group and working as a whole together... government, companies and unions, for a managed economy, rather than liberal Capitalism), but I think calling him a National Socialist is very very wide of the mark. The National Socialist worked to use nationalism of the -working- classes (note this is the working class, not those unemployed) along with old conservative political/economic elite to effectively side-step the Weimar Republic and the German Constitution.
Not just a small step (as Obama may be doing with Obama-care (*)) but a whole lock, stock and a billion smoking barrels to create a effective one-party dictatorship. I don't think the American Constitution has it's own downfall written within it, while the Weimar Constitution had several holes that were exploitable with emergency powers. Plus, Obama and the US don't have a real, external or internal threat that the Communists were perceived of by many.
Corporatism comes in many flavours...
(*) Different topic, but I kinda understand the position of the anti-Obamacare's movement with respect to the Constitutionality of enforced medical payments.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
May 17th, 2012 at 5:22:53 PM
permalink
Although I've just booked two bets with forum members on Romney at +180, I still think Obama will win. +180 implies a probability of 35.7% chance Romney will win, and I think it is a bit higher. More like 40%.
The reason I think Obama is over 50% is that he is simply more charismatic. Look at every presidential election since the television age (Nixon vs. Kennedy) and the one that came off better on television won. Granted sometimes it is debatable who is more charismatic, but I think Obama clearly shines brighter than Romney.
Ultimately, I think it will come down to Ohio, and Obama will carry it by about 5,000 votes.
The reason I think Obama is over 50% is that he is simply more charismatic. Look at every presidential election since the television age (Nixon vs. Kennedy) and the one that came off better on television won. Granted sometimes it is debatable who is more charismatic, but I think Obama clearly shines brighter than Romney.
Ultimately, I think it will come down to Ohio, and Obama will carry it by about 5,000 votes.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
May 17th, 2012 at 5:36:25 PM
permalink
Quote: WizardAlthough I've just booked two bets with forum members on Romney at +180, I still think Obama will win. +180 implies a probability of 35.7% chance Romney will win, and I think it is a bit higher. More like 40%.
The reason I think Obama is over 50% is that he is simply more charismatic. Look at every presidential election since the television age (Nixon vs. Kennedy) and the one that came off better on television won. Granted sometimes it is debatable who is more charismatic, but I think Obama clearly shines brighter than Romney.
Ultimately, I think it will come down to Ohio, and Obama will carry it by about 5,000 votes.
I take it that means that you expect Romney will carry several 2008 blue states. I'd be willing to bet separately on NM, NV, CO, VA, FL, IA, and/or WI. I'd probably also bet on NC, AZ, or MO with the right line.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
