• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2012 |OT4|: Your job is not to worry about 47% of these posts.

Status
Not open for further replies.

codhand

Member
An estimated 65.6 million people tuned in to watch the second debate between incumbent President Barack Obama and Republican candidate Mitt Romney on Tuesday, October 16. [...]

The second presidential debate, and third overall, in this political season’s debate quartet netted 2.4 million more viewers than the second presidential debate between then Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain in 2008.

http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire...ewers-watched-the-second-presidential-debate/

All Households
40.4
Oct 3rd
46,242,000


40.0
Oct 16th
45,589,000
 
I don't believe NC was ever a lock for Obama due to the horrible economy there.

Seems like Obama has given up on Florida too, which again reflects that Ryan's budget is not as toxic as advertised. Now the focus is on CO or VA. I think Romney can win both unless the Hispanic vote is super high, which is a possibility according to Silver.

Still, I can't really complain about polls until we get a new wave of them

They are still spending money on staff in NC and FL. So, you will still see a GOTV effort, just no official campaign time. Unless polls change drastically again for these two. Maybe they believe Obama has hit a ceiling there and its all down to GOTV anyway.
 

Tim-E

Member
I just want clarity on the national popular vote situation. I'm sick of these tracking polls, and it's mostly unknown whose ahead nationwide right now. A wave of national polls from Pew, NBC/Wall Street Journal, and others would help us make sense of the State polls too. For example if Obama was ahead by +2 nationally, would he really be ahead by only 1 in Wisconsin?

National popular vote does not matter at all. National popular vote does not win Presidential elections.
 

kirblar

Member
I just want clarity on the national popular vote situation. I'm sick of these tracking polls, and it's mostly unknown whose ahead nationwide right now. A wave of national polls from Pew, NBC/Wall Street Journal, and others would help us make sense of the State polls too. For example if Obama was ahead by +2 nationally, would he really be ahead by only 1 in Wisconsin?
Romney is overperforming in States that he's already winnning.
 

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
National popular vote does not matter at all. National popular vote does not win Presidential elections.

Much to the chagrin/joy of liberals depending on the election, amirite?

Not that I think it will come down to that, President Obama will get the majority of both.
 
They are still spending money on staff in NC and FL. So, you will still see a GOTV effort, just no official campaign time. Unless polls change drastically again for these two. Maybe they believe Obama has hit a ceiling there and its all down to GOTV anyway.

Still, it suggests Obama's Florida internals aren't good. He doesn't need the state but winning it would make everything easier. And again, maybe Hispanic voting saves his ass there
 

Ecotic

Member
National popular vote does not matter at all. National popular vote does not win Presidential election.
Everyone knows this, I don't know why you bothered to repeat it. I want to know the popular vote situation to make sense of the State polls.

Also while I'll take any Obama win at this point, I'd really prefer it not to be by winning the electoral college without having the popular vote. It's forever a tainted win, even without a recount controversy like in 2000. There's no claim to it being a rejection of tea party Republicanism. It's a win with an asterick.
 

kirblar

Member
Still, it suggests Obama's Florida internals aren't good. He doesn't need the state but winning it would make everything easier. And again, maybe Hispanic voting saves his ass there
He avoided Florida last time until late in the cycle. But given its geography avoiding it's the right call.
 

codhand

Member
SBLoe.png
 

Tim-E

Member
Much to the chagrin/joy of liberals depending on the election, amirite?

Not that I think it will come down to that, President Obama will get the majority of both.

He will, but his margin will definitely be smaller this time around.

I think it's silly for either side to complain about losing the EV but winning the PV; it's how our system works and if you don't like the results, oh well cause dems da rules.
 

HylianTom

Banned
He will, but his margin will definitely be smaller this time around.

I think it's silly for either side to complain about losing the EV but winning the PV; it's how our system works and if you don't like the results, oh well cause dems da rules.
Yup yup! A win is a win. I compare it to a football score where the losing team outgained in yards by a shit-ton, but lost due to turnovers. Scoreboard!

I can't complain too much about it; this mechanism will most definitely benefit the Dems over the next few decades, haha!

Part of me would love to see it happen, if only for the head-explosion fireworks it'd produce. A popular mandate would be nice, but the GOP will act like asses regardless.
 
Doesn't a Warren win kind of fuck up Kerry's sec of state aspiration? Brown could run for Kerry's seat next November and win given the weak dem bench there. Thus potentially losing another super safe senate seat...

Voters don't like losers but Brown is popular enough to win without Obama on the ticket
 

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
I'd probably pop a vein from laughing so hard at the republican response if Obama won the EV but lost the PV.

I would, too. It would be really delightful. The amount of outrage would be a true delight.

I am hoping that one day we get away from a FPtP system.
 

Tim-E

Member
Doesn't a Warren win kind of fuck up Kerry's sec of state aspiration? Brown could run for Kerry's seat next November and win given the weak dem bench there. Thus potentially losing another super safe senate seat...

Voters don't like losers but Brown is popular enough to win without Obama on the ticket

I don't think Kerry would turn down that position for that reason.
 

pigeon

Banned
Doesn't a Warren win kind of fuck up Kerry's sec of state aspiration? Brown could run for Kerry's seat next November and win given the weak dem bench there. Thus potentially losing another super safe senate seat...

Voters don't like losers but Brown is popular enough to win without Obama on the ticket

I've been hearing that -- and the argument about Senate control will be somewhat weaker since we'll know who will have control too.

On the other hand, I think that there would be some bad juju about winning a special election, losing a real election and then turning around to run in another special election. Remember that voter idiosyncrasy about special elections is the cause of Scott Walker.
 

TommyT

Member
Does he actually talk like that?

I wouldn't doubt it. I'd always imagined that how he talks when on TV would be how he talks in person. He doesn't particularly seem like the person that switches it on and off. Then again, neither did Steve Martin but he's the complete opposite.
 
hmm, change of heart?

LEESBURG, Va. — In the post-debate spin room Tuesday night, Romney campaign aides and surrogates tried to make up for a botched exchange on the Libya attacks by promising to aggressively prosecute President Obama's handling of the situation — but 36 hours later, no such prosecution has materialized.

Instead, Mitt Romney spent the next day on the stump criticizing the president for his lack of a second-term agenda, and conspicuously avoiding the Libya issue.

Asked why the issue was absent from Romney's public remarks, senior adviser Kevin Madden told BuzzFeed the campaign decided to focus their post-debate Virginia swing on exposing Obama's lack of specific proposals, and challenge him on gas prices and the economy.

"We used [Wednesday] to remind voters that if President Obama had a record to run on he would do so, but he doesn't so he can't," senior Madden, adding, "Voters have a choice between Governor Romney, who has a plan to fix the economy and address concerns like gas prices, and President Obama, who hasn't even presented voters a second term agenda. We want to continue to drive that fact with swing voters."

But another campaign official, granted anonymity to discuss strategy, said their plan to re-litigate the Libya issue was postponed when instant polls and focus groups immediately after the debate showed Romney winning exchanges about the economy, deficit, and gas prices. In the time between the Tuesday night spin room, and the candidate's Wednesday morning rally, Romney's team decided they would build on their momentum in those areas, rather than play defense on foreign policy, the official said.

Madden said Libya will "remain an issue because of the unanswered questions about the attacks on our consulate are there."

And, indeed, the first signs of pushback appeared Wednesday night, when the Romney campaign released a web video arguing that it took Obama two weeks to fully embrace the notion that the Libya attacks were an act of terror.

And a campaign official also said Romney would come to next Monday's foreign policy debate prepared to question Obama on his version of events, and challenge the administration's reaction in the aftermath.

But one Obama campaign aide dismissed the fledgling efforts as "weak," and called Romney's avoidance of the issue on the stump a clear concession that it's a losing argument for him.

“It was foolish, and a sign of panic when the Romney campaign said that they’d go on the offensive on Libya — all it would do is highlight the weakest moment of the debate for Romney," the aide said, adding, "You'd think an 'offensive' would include more than a web video."

Im sure "Please proceed Governor" is still ringing in Romney's ears
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/why-the-romney-campaign-stopped-talking-about-liby
 

massoluk

Banned
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/ben-stein-stuns-fox-friends-all-due-respect-to-fox-but-taxes-are-too-low/

“I hate to say this on Fox – I hope I’ll be allowed to leave here alive – but I don’t think there is any way we can cut spending enough to make a meaningful difference,” said Stein. “We’re going to have to raise taxes on very, very rich people. People with incomes of, say, $2, $3, $4 million a year and up. And then slowly, slowly, slowly move it down. $250,000 a year, that’s not a rich person.”

Has hell frozen? Why is Ben Stein making sense?
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
How no one is tying Romney's surge to the skyrocketing gas prices is just beyond me. There is no single thing economic indicator that moves the needle on the electorate like gas prices.


I'm not saying that the Denver debate wasn't huge, it was...but I would seriously theorize that the skyrocketing gas prices have cost Obama at least 2 to 3 points nationally and it's what is causing Romney to maintain his surge. If the price at the pump was 50 cents lower right now, the post 1st debate bump would have dramatically faded.

The prices here in Texas have started to go down over the last 4 days.
 

Clevinger

Member
"Kevin Madden told BuzzFeed the campaign decided to focus their post-debate Virginia swing on exposing Obama's lack of specific proposals"

lol

90% of Romney's campaign has literally been "No, U!"
 

gcubed

Member
Doesn't a Warren win kind of fuck up Kerry's sec of state aspiration? Brown could run for Kerry's seat next November and win given the weak dem bench there. Thus potentially losing another super safe senate seat...

Voters don't like losers but Brown is popular enough to win without Obama on the ticket

Brown is popular enough to win against a paper bag. As you would said they would need a living breathing human to run against him.
 

KingGondo

Banned
"Kevin Madden told BuzzFeed the campaign decided to focus their post-debate Virginia swing on exposing Obama's lack of specific proposals"

lol

90% of Romney's campaign has literally been "No, U!"
To be fair, neither campaign has offered compelling policy proposals, especially with regard to taxes and the deficit.

I'm mainly in favor of Obama because Mitt's plans are patently insane, whereas Obama's are merely non-specific.
 
I don't think Kerry would turn down that position for that reason.

But will it even be offered, that's the question. I think Susan Rice is probably out, given her Libya comments; the issue may be dead, but the GOP could get her scalp during confirmation hearings and call it a victory.
 

pigeon

Banned
Brown is popular enough to win against a paper bag. As you would said they would need a living breathing human to run against him.

Yeah, that's the other thing. According to my Masshole friends, Coakley ran the worst political campaign in American history. She didn't know the name of the winning pitcher from the only Red Sox team to win the pennant in the last EIGHTY YEARS. I mean, I'm not saying we should care about sports, but COME ON. If you don't know who Curt Shilling is*, I would have trouble voting for you in California.

I suspect that that Kennedy on the sidelines might run for the open Senate seat and that's why he didn't make a move for the general. I think a Kennedy can beat Scott Brown.

* He's the guy who defrauded Rhode Island out of $20 million or so, right?
 

Tim-E

Member
Romney really has no ground to stand on during the FP debate. He'll likely just spend the entire time shouting his gloriously stupid China ideas. His "big" FP speech was nothing more than a wet fart.
 

demon

I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
Yeah, that's the other thing. According to my Masshole friends, Coakley ran the worst political campaign in American history. She didn't know the name of the winning pitcher from the only Red Sox team to win the pennant in the last EIGHTY YEARS. I mean, I'm not saying we should care about sports, but COME ON. If you don't know who Curt Shilling is*, I would have trouble voting for you in California.

what the fuck does a baseball pitcher have to do with anything.
 

DasRaven

Member
what the fuck does a baseball pitcher have to do with anything.

In Boston, a whole damn lot. Especially when it is the home team winning for the first time in most of the electorate's life.

Yeah, that's the other thing. According to my Masshole friends, Coakley ran the worst political campaign in American history. She didn't know the name of the winning pitcher from the only Red Sox team to win the pennant in the last EIGHTY YEARS. I mean, I'm not saying we should care about sports, but COME ON. If you don't know who Curt Shilling is*, I would have trouble voting for you in California.

I suspect that that Kennedy on the sidelines might run for the open Senate seat and that's why he didn't make a move for the general. I think a Kennedy can beat Scott Brown.

* He's the guy who defrauded Rhode Island out of $20 million or so, right?

Yes, through glorious, free-market, video game creation failures!
 

pigeon

Banned
what the fuck does a baseball pitcher have to do with anything.

You need to know basic cultural facts to be a politician. If you didn't know who Bill Cosby was, I wouldn't vote for you either. I'm not expecting you to know every stat, but you should know about the Red Sox breaking the Curse, at the very least because it was national news.
 

jbug617

Banned
Coakley campaign was kinda of arrogant in the sense she felt she should win because she was a democrat.

Brown was also benefited by the Tea Party movement when it came to funds. A lot of his money came from outside the state.
 

jbug617

Banned
Massachusetts. Go into an interview or job with no way to relate to your superiors: it won't work well.

Also Curt Schilling (a known Republican) interjected himself into the race and campaigned for Brown. Also something like this doesn't work this time around because the Red Sox are hated right now in MA.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom