Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

Romney landslide is possible

RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 9:55:04 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Some important political prediction guy said recently that either (a) Obama will win by a very small margin or (b) Romney will win by a landslide. He thought (a) and (b) were equally likely. Somehow this seems like a good assessment to me.

Dick Morris wrote "Rasmussen is the only pollster who tests likely voters, and his latest tracking poll has Romney ahead by 48-43.
... a study of the undecided voters in the past eight elections in which incumbents sought a second term as president reveals that only Bush-43 gained any of the undecided vote. Johnson in '64, Nixon in '72, Ford in '76, Carter in '80, Reagan in '84, Bush in '92 and Clinton in '96 all failed to pick up a single undecided vote. .. So when polls show President Obama at 45 percent of the vote, they are really reflecting a likely 55-45 Romney victory, at the very least." http://www.dickmorris.com...

President Obama ran on empty promises. He was going to run an open government, usher in a new era of bipartisanship, create millions of green jobs, and get the economy going in short order. None of that happened. So the question is whether he can sell the same promises again.

I see signs that people are now seeing everything he does as political theater. Support for gay marriage, travel to Afghanistan, and everything else are viewed as campaign tactics rather than governing. I think even the liberal media are tired of it. Liberals believe that government can solve all problems, and the problems aren't being solved.

There is a long road to the election yet, but I'm surprised where Romney is so early in the game.
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 9:55:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Anything is possible, if you use your IMAGINATION!

=P

But, seriously this does gimme some hope.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
cbrhawk1
Posts: 588
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 10:08:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
If this is accurate, then maybe Romney does have a chance of winning. I am voting for him, that's for sure.

Out with this usur*cough*Failure in Chief!
"All science is 'wrong.'" ~ drafterman
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 10:25:10 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I think it's unfortunate but Barack Obama is likely to win. I think the fact that the economy is doing bad is a major upset for Obama. But the people most affected are the young people, who are more likely to vote for Obama anyways. Even a 10% unemployment rate, means only 10% are severely affected from it.

I also think Barack Obama is going to get a lot of independent votes on gay marriage. Independents are more likely to favor gay marriage and might vote for him just based on that.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 11:41:02 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
A poll this morning showed support for Obama by young voters dropped from 66% at this point in the last election to 51% now. Apparently being unemployed and living at home grates. But social issues could revive that support. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama came out for the legalization of marijuana. That would get the youngsters going, and more important it would be something other than the economy to talk about.

Ben Stein thinks Obama will win because money will pour into his campaign from his many wealthy supporters, and because Obama is so brilliant a campaigner. It could happen.
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 3:02:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 11:41:02 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
A poll this morning showed support for Obama by young voters dropped from 66% at this point in the last election to 51% now. Apparently being unemployed and living at home grates. But social issues could revive that support. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama came out for the legalization of marijuana. That would get the youngsters going, and more important it would be something other than the economy to talk about.

Legalization of marijuana? Sounds good.

Ben Stein thinks Obama will win because money will pour into his campaign from his many wealthy supporters, and because Obama is so brilliant a campaigner. It could happen.

Wall Street is Romney's largest contributor, more than it gives to Obama. By almost a 2-1 ratio I believe (I can't remember the exact numbers).
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 3:06:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I very much doubt that the variable that is our next President (Romney or Obama) is going to be a very important in any respect at all. The amount of hoopla going into talking about these men probably outweighs their effects on the nation.
Rob
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 3:28:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 11:41:02 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
A poll this morning showed support for Obama by young voters dropped from 66% at this point in the last election to 51% now. Apparently being unemployed and living at home grates. But social issues could revive that support. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama came out for the legalization of marijuana. That would get the youngsters going, and more important it would be something other than the economy to talk about.

Ben Stein thinks Obama will win because money will pour into his campaign from his many wealthy supporters, and because Obama is so brilliant a campaigner. It could happen.

Oh Yes He Can. Same convergent pattern of same-sex marriage and marijuana legalization. The majority favor both of them.:

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com...

http://graphics8.nytimes.com...

This actually seems like an interesting wager. I'm betting that he's going to advocate legalization of marijuana during the campaign.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 5:17:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 3:28:47 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Oh Yes He Can. Same convergent pattern of same-sex marriage and marijuana legalization. The majority favor both of them.:

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com...


http://graphics8.nytimes.com...

This actually seems like an interesting wager. I'm betting that he's going to advocate legalization of marijuana during the campaign.

Keep in mind that marijuana legalization just lost in a referendum in California. In California marijuana is practically mandatory in grade schools, but it still lost. The demographics of actual voters is different from the demographics of poll responders. Stoned slackers vote less.

Nonetheless, it would energize a part of Obama's base and get them to contribute -- and it is not talking about the economy. Obama needs to sell the idea that North Korea would be a cool place if only they had pot and gay marriage. It's visionary.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 5:24:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 5:17:51 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
At 5/18/2012 3:28:47 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Oh Yes He Can. Same convergent pattern of same-sex marriage and marijuana legalization. The majority favor both of them.:

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com...


http://graphics8.nytimes.com...

This actually seems like an interesting wager. I'm betting that he's going to advocate legalization of marijuana during the campaign.

Keep in mind that marijuana legalization just lost in a referendum in California. In California marijuana is practically mandatory in grade schools, but it still lost. The demographics of actual voters is different from the demographics of poll responders. Stoned slackers vote less.

Nonetheless, it would energize a part of Obama's base and get them to contribute -- and it is not talking about the economy. Obama needs to sell the idea that North Korea would be a cool place if only they had pot and gay marriage. It's visionary.

The poll is done via phone rather than online. I don't know how different californians feel about marijuana laws compared to the US. Yes there's a ton of open weed smoking, but I don't necessarily think there are necessarily more week smokers.

Maybe one of the reasons it failed is that people feel like it should be a federal issue rather than a state issue.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 5:50:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 5:26:17 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Oh, and on North Korea:

http://www.quickmeme.com...

ha ha
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2012 11:43:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
There is more to the North Korea meme than a simple joke. Liberals have trouble explaining why North Korea is not an economic success. the first explanation is that they are a dictatorship. That's true, but South Korea and Taiwan became economically successful while being run by dictators. The difference is that the free market were allowed despite social repression.

On the economic side, North Korea controls everything: no profits for greedy capitalists, control over what and how things are produced, and no waste on foolish products foisted upon people through manipulative advertising. Well then, either the North Koreans are too stupid to know what to produce or they do not want the country to be economically successful. They are not stupid, they are just as smart as the South Koreans. Obviously they want success, because ruling a successful country is more fun than ruling a failed state.

Therefore the North Korean economic failure is inexplicable by modern progressive theory.
unitedandy
Posts: 1,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 8:31:23 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/18/2012 11:43:15 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
There is more to the North Korea meme than a simple joke. Liberals have trouble explaining why North Korea is not an economic success. the first explanation is that they are a dictatorship. That's true, but South Korea and Taiwan became economically successful while being run by dictators. The difference is that the free market were allowed despite social repression.

On the economic side, North Korea controls everything: no profits for greedy capitalists, control over what and how things are produced, and no waste on foolish products foisted upon people through manipulative advertising. Well then, either the North Koreans are too stupid to know what to produce or they do not want the country to be economically successful. They are not stupid, they are just as smart as the South Koreans. Obviously they want success, because ruling a successful country is more fun than ruling a failed state.

Therefore the North Korean economic failure is inexplicable by modern progressive theory.

Does this mean conservatives have to explain why the price of bread rose from around 14% to 74% of people's income in "liberated" Chile under Pinochet?

Seriously though, any regime which is so flagrantly undemocratic has nothing to do with liberalism. I don't get why you would equate the two.