Electoral Math...

[oldr_n_wsr]

A dead heat in the polls has faded to a slight but broad lead for Barack Obama

Um,,, Uh,,, How can one have a "slight but broad" lead?
Either it is a close race (slight lead) or it is a not so close race (broad lead). Can't have both.

* Some of us wish there were more stories about what each of these two unimpressive presidential candidates would do in the next four years to deal with the serious problems facing us, rather than the trivial stories and horse race angle that the media thinks sells.

Count me in as "some of us" Long Run.

[Guinevere]

* Some of us wish there were more stories about what each of these two unimpressive presidential candidates would do in the next four years to deal with the serious problems facing us, rather than the trivial stories and horse race angle that the media thinks sells.

Color your own candidate with that brush, but not mine, please.

And by the way, you've been doing pretty much the same thing as Mitt -- trashing the President, without articulating what should be done to solve the problems we are all facing. So how about it Long Run or oldr -- what is Mittens' solution? What will the Republicans do to turn around the economy, to bring back jobs, to help Americans rise out of poverty and no longer need public assistance? What's the plan, stan?

[oldr_n_wsr]

So how about it Long Run or oldr -- what is Mittens' solution? What will the Republicans do to turn around the economy, to bring back jobs, to help Americans rise out of poverty and no longer need public assistance? What's the plan, stan?

I will ask you the same, What's Obama's plan Ann?

I can only talk for myself but that is what I am asking of BOTH Mitt and Barry. I here soundbites of how the other doesn't have a clue how to do it, or will do it wrong, but no plan from either. I know Barry has not done much, if anything, on the job front in the last four years. Granted he inherited a shit storm, but in his time at the helm he has not produced. Are we going to get more of the same with Barry, with Mitt?

I am not for either, but as a general rule when I can't make up my mind, if things are not better off (and they certainly are not) I have gone in the past with, whoever is in, vote em out.
And as I have said before, NY will go to Obama so I do need to start looking into third party just because.

[rubato]

So how about it Long Run or oldr -- what is Mittens' solution? What will the Republicans do to turn around the economy, to bring back jobs, to help Americans rise out of poverty and no longer need public assistance? What's the plan, stan?

I will ask you the same, What's Obama's plan Ann?

I can only talk for myself but that is what I am asking of BOTH Mitt and Barry. I here soundbites of how the other doesn't have a clue how to do it, or will do it wrong, but no plan from either. I know Barry has not done much, if anything, on the job front in the last four years. Granted he inherited a shit storm, but in his time at the helm he has not produced. Are we going to get more of the same with Barry, with Mitt?

I am not for either, but as a general rule when I can't make up my mind, if things are not better off (and they certainly are not) I have gone in the past with, whoever is in, vote em out.
And as I have said before, NY will go to Obama so I do need to start looking into third party just because.

Obama put forward the jobs act which the Republicans in the House and Senate killed because they will routinely hurt the country to get elected. Obama tried to get a larger stimulus passed; nixed also by the party of treason.

We are a lot better off compared to 4 years ago especially when you look at England which is employing the Republican 'all austerity' policies and in the longest recession ever, worse than the great depression in duration.

Republicans caused the median income to go down for 8 years (the only two presidential terms where that has happened since the depression) and that was BEFORE the complete collapse they created.





Only a masochist would choose them.


yrs,
rubato





yrs,
rubato

[oldr_n_wsr]

We are a lot better off compared to 4 years ago

I disagree. More are unemployed/underemployed compared with 4 years ago especially if you take into account those no longer on unemployment who have given up looking which basically erases them from the unemployment count.
I only have to look around at the people I know to see we are not better off.
I know I am not, taxes up, inflation up, gas prices up, salary down (salary is partly self inflicted) but average wages are down also. Net worth is down, everythign is down but costs. This is better off?

ETA
I am not argueing for Romney, just that Obama had his first two years with teh house and didn't do much. And I don't agree with those who say the only thing they want to do is make sure Obama fails as a president, to me that is treasonist. I would like nothing better for the nation to be better off, but from what I see it is not.

[rubato]

Obama did less than he would have liked in the first 2 years because the party of treason blocked all legislation unless he had 60 votes in the Senate.

Romney has promised to cut your benefits, cut taxes for the rich, and raise the deficit.

yrs,
rubato

[Crackpot]

Gas is just nearing on where it was before the crash. I know I was buying it 3x a week back then. As for the recovery (and there is one) it has been very uneven. What bodes bad from Romney is that the manufacturing sector is better than it's been in a decade effectively blunting his chances in the upper midwest. (Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan etc.)

I won't disagree that the first two years was a disaster (up until the lame duck session Where the Republicans learned that they could deal with the president at the expense of making them both look good and therefore decided to abandon the strategy)

THe problem is over the past decade or so party has began to trump country in politics. Its more about the next election and Party Power than working for the people. I really hope next cycle Americans Elect manages to get off the ground because this country needs a good shake-up in party politics to get them to refocus on doing their job rather than serving party interests.

[Scooter]

Um,,, Uh,,, How can one have a "slight but broad" lead?
Either it is a close race (slight lead) or it is a not so close race (broad lead). Can't have both.

It's slight because it's only a few percentage points. It's broad because Obama is ahead in almost all of the swing states (the exception being NC, which only became a swing state because Obama managed to win it last time), and most of those states have been in his column for the entire campaign. And that has held up even when there have been national polls putting Romney ahead. So the conventional wisdom at this point is that there would need to be a pretty hefty swing towards Romney for him to pick up enough of the swing states such that Obama would lose.

[oldr_n_wsr]

Thank you for that scooter, my brain didn't process it that way, but now I can see the logic.

Romney has promised to cut your benefits, cut taxes for the rich, and raise the deficit.

yrs,
rubato

What are those benefits is he cutting for me (aka "your")? Health care? I get it from my employer (after having paid for it myself while unemployed and until my new jobs beni's kicked in (which may go away if we go to ObamaCare. I have talked to the owner and he is considering eliminating health care). Schools? I pay 70% of my property taxes on schools, the feds give us next to nothing.

The rich?? If you took every dollar from the rich you might be able to run the government for what, a week?. Taking a percentage of their money every week would allow you to run it for what?

And I am totally opposed to raising the defecit and so far we are 5+ TRILLION more in debt since Obama took office and I don't see where Obama is commited to reducing the total debt let alone the yearly debt. I read where we are borrowing $0.40 for every dollar spent by the feds. That is totally ridiculous. Try doing that in your household finances.

[Gob]

A USA Today/Gallup survey of 885 registered voters taken on Tuesday found 36 per cent saying they were less likely to vote for Mr Romney as a result of his taped comments, with 20 per cent saying they were more likely to back him and 43 per cent saying his remarks would make no difference.

In the Pew poll, Mr Obama had a 56 per cent to 38 per cent advantage among likely women voters. Mr Romney led among men, 48 per cent to 46 per cent.

Among registered voters, two-thirds said Mr Obama connected well with average Americans, compared with 23 per cent who said the same about Mr Romney.

Registered voters said Mr Obama would do a better job than Mr Romney on healthcare, 52 per cent to 39 per cent, and on Medicare, 51 per cent to 38 per cent.

[Scooter]

The entire Pew poll is interesting reading. There are precious few bright spots in it for Romney.

Of course some will take that as a cue to dismiss it as bullshit out of hand.

[Long Run]

The entire Pew poll is interesting reading. There are precious few bright spots in it for Romney.

Of course some will take that as a cue to dismiss it as bullshit out of hand.

Someone has to take the bait on this! No doubt, Romney seems to swing and miss more than a decent candidate should, but the Pew poll is an outlier among polls (it may be valid for what it was measuring but it clearly is not trying to be predictive of the election if it has Obama at +8). Plus, even yesterday when you posted it, the last calls on it were 4 days old so it is way out of date in this bouncing election season. The more recent Rasmussen and Gallup tracking polls have it even or 1%. It will be interesting to see how the polling looks after a full week of coverage of Romney's 47%. I will say that having 36% say they are less likely to vote for Romney as a result of his comments means nothing since we know that 47% will not under any circumstances vote for him. My prediction is that by November, those that are paying attention now will consider as old news, if not have totally forgotten, this video (which may or may not fairly represent what he said since the next couple of minutes are apparently/conveniently missing from Carter's grandson's recording).

[Gob]

My prediction is that by November, those that are paying attention now will consider as old news, if not have totally forgotten, this video

I'm sure they will, I'm sure Mitt will have gaffs aplenty to eclipse his; "half of America's citizens are worthless scroungers who vote Obama," jibe.