So, what do you think? Obama or Romney? Make your prediction now.
My guess, unfortunately Obama, although it is going to be closer than I thought it would be.
Who's gonna win?
Re: Who's gonna win?
The switch to Romney among women has been massive since the first debate - a 12 point swing. Women went in to the first debate expecting to see a misogynist and came out having seen an affectionate husband and father and competent leader. Team Obama over-did the demonization. And the snap poll results from this Tuesday were schizo - a marginal win to Obama on points, but Romney either beat him or blew him away on all specific issues save foreign policy. Then you have to factor in the already-banked early voting...seedload wrote:So, what do you think? Obama or Romney? Make your prediction now.
My guess, unfortunately Obama, although it is going to be closer than I thought it would be.
Too close to call.
This election has a replay of 2004 in many ways for months. A failed incumbent and a challenger who couldn't quite make the sale. Obama's no-show in the first debate changed that - he gifted credibility to Romney, and that gong will not be unrung. Whether its enough for a Romney victory... the electoral college decides, not the popular vote. A split where Romney wins the popular but Obama the electoral, or even a 269-269 tie, looks increasingly probable.
Vae Victis
-
GIThruster
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
I think too we're likely to see delayed poll results of the whole scandal concerning the White House misleading on the Libya issue. There are lots of people who had no idea they'd been lied to until the debate and now 65 million viewers have reason to check the facts. Perhaps only a small number will bother, but most of those are likely to be the undecided in the middle.
Personally, I don't think there was a worse way the administration could have shot themselves in the foot than by lying about the attack in Benghazi. I do expect POTUS will manufacture a military response to Benghazi just before the election, but at this point it doesn't seem enough to hide the fact he's a liar.
For the first time in more than a year I think OBama has a real challenge on his hands. Too close to call.
Personally, I don't think there was a worse way the administration could have shot themselves in the foot than by lying about the attack in Benghazi. I do expect POTUS will manufacture a military response to Benghazi just before the election, but at this point it doesn't seem enough to hide the fact he's a liar.
For the first time in more than a year I think OBama has a real challenge on his hands. Too close to call.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
Purposely or inadvertently, Obama has managed to personally insulate himself rather well on Benghazigate. The admin in general still takes the hit for deceiving the American people, but State and as of today the DNI will be the patsies.GIThruster wrote:I think too we're likely to see delayed poll results of the whole scandal concerning the White House misleading on the Libya issue. There are lots of people who had no idea they'd been lied to until the debate and now 65 million viewers have reason to check the facts. Perhaps only a small number will bother, but most of those are likely to be the undecided in the middle.
Vae Victis
Recent jobless rate called into question by new stats
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-1 ... ised-aberr
The above article describes the 46k jump in initial jobless claims from last week to this week. It is starting to look more and more like the 7.8% unemployment rate will turn out to be bogus. Given the narrative surrounding Libya and the mis-information pushed out by the administration, people who are so inclined will feel that this is also government managed false reporting.
In any case, these updated statistics destroy the Obama storyline that the economy is finally improving. This could be an additional nail in the coffin for the issue of the economy under Obama.
The momentum is shifting to Romney, though the press seems to be doing what it can to hold that back. It will be interesting to see if the sudden jump in jobless claims gets anywhere near the same level of reporting as the 7.8% unemployment rate.
Right now things look too close to call. A relatively small number of battleground states will determine the outcome. The advertising in those states is quite different from what will be experienced in the rest of the nation. This makes it hard to evaluate the state of the campaigning and effectiveness of the ads as an individual from a non-battleground state.
No matter which way it goes, the result is likely to at least initially be divisive. The way the winner behaves will set the tone for either further confrontation or cooperation and team work.
If the momentum continues in Romney's favor, the press may begin to jump ship from the Obama campaign because they want to be right and to protect what ever shreds of credibility remain to them.
Interesting times, interesting times.
The above article describes the 46k jump in initial jobless claims from last week to this week. It is starting to look more and more like the 7.8% unemployment rate will turn out to be bogus. Given the narrative surrounding Libya and the mis-information pushed out by the administration, people who are so inclined will feel that this is also government managed false reporting.
In any case, these updated statistics destroy the Obama storyline that the economy is finally improving. This could be an additional nail in the coffin for the issue of the economy under Obama.
The momentum is shifting to Romney, though the press seems to be doing what it can to hold that back. It will be interesting to see if the sudden jump in jobless claims gets anywhere near the same level of reporting as the 7.8% unemployment rate.
Right now things look too close to call. A relatively small number of battleground states will determine the outcome. The advertising in those states is quite different from what will be experienced in the rest of the nation. This makes it hard to evaluate the state of the campaigning and effectiveness of the ads as an individual from a non-battleground state.
No matter which way it goes, the result is likely to at least initially be divisive. The way the winner behaves will set the tone for either further confrontation or cooperation and team work.
If the momentum continues in Romney's favor, the press may begin to jump ship from the Obama campaign because they want to be right and to protect what ever shreds of credibility remain to them.
Interesting times, interesting times.
-
GIThruster
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
Re: Recent jobless rate called into question by new stats
I agree with everything above except this. I'm uncertain whether there is anything a POTUS can do to thwart division at this point. The camps are completely divided and unwilling to wrk with each other, and it seems to me the cause is the switch we've had over the last 20 years away from attempts toward objective reporting in the media.SheltonJ wrote:The way the winner behaves will set the tone for either further confrontation or cooperation and team work.
Back in the day, news sources at least pretended to be objective and it was utterly unheard of for a nationally known and respected newscaster to take sides in an election. That's all over with. We have a Senate that feels it can operate the country without a budget for how many years? Every pretense toward cooperation is gone and unless the Senate suffers the same shakeup the House got 2 years ago, we can expect gridlock and no movement no matter who wins the presidential election.
Just IMHO, but I think the real battle is going to be for the senate.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
Re: Who's gonna win?
seedload wrote:So, what do you think? Obama or Romney? Make your prediction now.
My guess, unfortunately Obama, although it is going to be closer than I thought it would be.
Reagan Beats Carter.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
Re: Recent jobless rate called into question by new stats
GIThruster wrote: I agree with everything above except this. I'm uncertain whether there is anything a POTUS can do to thwart division at this point. The camps are completely divided and unwilling to wrk with each other, and it seems to me the cause is the switch we've had over the last 20 years away from attempts toward objective reporting in the media.
Back in the day, news sources at least pretended to be objective and it was utterly unheard of for a nationally known and respected newscaster to take sides in an election.
The Media are a threat to the nation and need to be torn down utterly and then rebuilt. Thankfully, technology is Democratizing the Media Monopoly, and I think the influence of these Socialist propagandists will continue to wane.
¡Viva la Revolución!
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
The American Socialist Media is calling this race a toss up, and to me that means their Dear Leader is going to lose Carter style. When pro Obama Care fools are the ones on the fence, that is grim and just last stages of their denial of how bad this guy is. The second debate was just so Obama could save face and look like he showed up, strategically he sunk further behind due to missing badly on the key issues.
I suspect if he has any hope it is to rig the polls Chicago style.
I suspect if he has any hope it is to rig the polls Chicago style.
Counting the days to commercial fusion. It is not that long now.
-
palladin9479
- Posts: 388
- Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:22 am
Obama, Mitt failed to sell himself to the independents a long time ago.
Republicans / Conservatives vote for Republicans / Conservatives, Democrats / Liberals vote for Democrats / Liberals, that's just how it is. Mitt could be a pedo ex-con and Conservatives would still vote for him. President Obama could be a socialist revolutionary from the DPRK and Liberals would still vote for him. Both sides will make tons of excuses using various selected data for their champion.
Ultimately it falls to the independent moderates to chose which way to vote, and most of those are in the Obama camp.
Now if Mitt wouldn't of tried to be "more righteously conservative" during the primary's (when his election campaign really starts) then he might of won over more independents.
Republicans / Conservatives vote for Republicans / Conservatives, Democrats / Liberals vote for Democrats / Liberals, that's just how it is. Mitt could be a pedo ex-con and Conservatives would still vote for him. President Obama could be a socialist revolutionary from the DPRK and Liberals would still vote for him. Both sides will make tons of excuses using various selected data for their champion.
Ultimately it falls to the independent moderates to chose which way to vote, and most of those are in the Obama camp.
Now if Mitt wouldn't of tried to be "more righteously conservative" during the primary's (when his election campaign really starts) then he might of won over more independents.
I predict a win for Socialism.
A comment on another site (not named for good reason) sums up my thoughts on the 2nd debate:
So Romney is against tax cuts for job creators,[the top 5% will STILL pay 60% of federal income taxes] favors affirmative action,[for women, but not gays of course] is proud of getting the uninsured down to near zero with a mandate,[the original Romneycare] loves Mexicans, favors protectionism,[China only, but free trade with South America - a kind of expanded Nafta] and wants more money for people to go to school.[Pell Grants] We are all Democrats now.
http://classicalvalues.com/2012/10/the- ... ment-68581
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/10/1 ... nd-debate/palladin9479 wrote:Obama, Mitt failed to sell himself to the independents a long time ago.
Republicans / Conservatives vote for Republicans / Conservatives, Democrats / Liberals vote for Democrats / Liberals, that's just how it is. Mitt could be a pedo ex-con and Conservatives would still vote for him. President Obama could be a socialist revolutionary from the DPRK and Liberals would still vote for him. Both sides will make tons of excuses using various selected data for their champion.
Ultimately it falls to the independent moderates to chose which way to vote, and most of those are in the Obama camp.
Now if Mitt wouldn't of tried to be "more righteously conservative" during the primary's (when his election campaign really starts) then he might of won over more independents.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.