Support NeoGAF

[RustyNails]

This is just a really lazy argument--if you can even call it an argument. All you can come up with when a candidate loses is that the electorate is stupid? And when your candidate wins, are they suddenly intelligent again?
Maybe these stupid people feel duped by Obama's hope/n change bullshit and don't want to be fooled again. Or maybe they want to try someone/something different. Or maybe, just maybe, they're intelligent enough to understand that Obama's policies haven't brought this country back on it's feet again. You're asking people to stick with someone whose policies haven't noticeably improved their lives. That's asking a lot, especially considering his lackluster attitude and debate performance. There is no hope this time. There is no change. He's abandoned those slogans. There's no urgency in his message whatsoever. He just wants to proceed "forward" as if where we are going is positive or has any kind of certainty. Obama could be running against a fish and the fish would have a pretty damn good chance of winning. Trout.

But Obama's policies did land the country on it's feet, as opposed to landing on it's butt. Do you really see Obama's policies worsening the country? Sure the debt is high, but the biggest contributor of that is the bailout (signed under Bush), promoted by Obama. And how many people are just voting NOBAMA as opposed to qualifying Mitt Romney's vision, which is the same dead horse that's been beated for the past 30 years?

 

[Y2Kev]

The electorate probably is demonstrably stupid, but I'm not sure that the Obama machine-- which was really effective at communicating to stupid people four years ago-- is as effective this time around.

Maybe he should hand out free dvds of here comes honey boo boo at his rallies

 

[PhoenixDark]

The electorate was stupid in 2008 when Obama won, too. But being in a huge recession led to them voting for Obama. The electorate is always stupid. Doesn't mean they're always wrong.

Fine. Still that's no excuse for losing races you should win. Obama should have a solid Ohio lead due to the auto rescue and improved economy there, and should be competing better in Florida (even Silver thinks Florida is done).

Romney's favorables have gone up all month...

 

[Black Mamba]

This is just a really lazy argument--if you can even call it an argument. All you can come up with when a candidate loses is that the electorate is stupid? And when your candidate wins, are they suddenly intelligent again?
Maybe these stupid people feel duped by Obama's hope/n change bullshit and don't want to be fooled again. Or maybe they want to try someone/something different. Or maybe, just maybe, they're intelligent enough to understand that Obama's policies haven't brought this country back on it's feet again. You're asking people to stick with someone whose policies haven't noticeably improved their lives. That's asking a lot, especially considering his lackluster attitude and debate performance. There is no hope this time. There is no change. He's abandoned those slogans. There's no urgency in his message whatsoever. He just wants to proceed "forward" as if where we are going is positive or has any kind of certainty. Obama could be running against a fish and the fish would have a pretty damn good chance of winning. Trout.

To add to my previous response that the electorate is always stupid, even when Obama won.

Hope & Change - Obama has done a lot. What he couldn't do the GOP has intentionally blocked him from doing as a strategy for 4 years. A smart electorate notices this.

Something different - Romney is not different, it's a return to the previous admin which everyone hates.


Not improving their lives - again, wrong. From the bottom of the recession to now we've improved better than we could have thought and even better than almost all the other 1st world nations from this recession. 5.2 million sector jobs grown in 3 years. And if the GOP didn't block everything to make Obama lose, the public sector wouldn't have shrunk and we'd be below 6.5% unemployment right now and growing over 2% per year GDP.

We are moving positively and it's only as slow as it because of the GOP. And yet some want to hand it right back to them. Running on the same policies that put us in a debt mess and unregulated disaster in the financial markets.

It's astonishing how stupid the electorate is. Look at how much Romney gets away with lying about medicare funding, taxes, etc.

Hell, look at how many people complain about the 47% who don't pay income taxes...

 

[Loudninja]

Indeed, if the tightening were from Obama dropping much below 50, I'd be a bit concerned.. but it's mainly been from Romney's gains.

This is what we've seen over the past week for Ohio:
SUSA - Obama +3
FOX News - Obama +3
Rasmussen - Obama +1
PPP - Obama +1
Gravis - Tie
Marist - Obama +6
CNN - Obama +4

Obama's still got Ohio.

Yougov had him up 4 as well
http://today.yougov.com/news/2012/10/16/ohio/

 

[B-Dubs]

Fine. Still that's no excuse for losing races you should win. Obama should have a solid Ohio lead due to the auto rescue and improved economy there, and should be competing better in Florida (even Silver thinks Florida is done).

Romney's favorables have gone up all month...

They've had no where to go but up. The first debate showed that he wasn't a slack-jawed moron. His favorables were always going to go up at some point, it was just a matter of when and by how much. The only way they could have gone down was if he took a shit on-stage, like actually dropped trow and shit on the podium.

 

[DragonSworne]

Fine. Still that's no excuse for losing races you should win. Obama should have a solid Ohio lead due to the auto rescue and improved economy there, and should be competing better in Florida (even Silver thinks Florida is done).

Romney's favorables have gone up all month...

Not to long ago people bought snake oil thinking it will cure cancer.

Most people have not gotten smarter since then.

 

[Puddles]

Interesting. I feel the same way about BO. He's all "Hope and Change" and "bringing people together" with no substance or record.

And thats just it. There are smart people left, right, and center who feel that an informed electorate will see it their way. Welcome to politics.

Now, lets get back to how a candidate wins.

The right in 2012 doesn't have smart people.

 

[Forever]

If I can take the personal attacks, you kids can take a little joke about Obama.

You have never been personally attacked. A real personal attack with the material available would probably get people banned.

Conservatives need thicker skin.

 

[DragonSworne]

You have never been personally attacked. A real personal attack with the material available would probably get people banned.

Conservatives need thicker skin.

Disagreeing with him or pointing out his lies is a personal attack. Just look at Obama, nothing but personal attacks on Romney.

 

[Y2Kev]

Anihawk, what's up with the early voting figures in PPP's ohio poll. Last week it said 19% of people surveyed voted early, this week it's 21% of the total electorate? What are the figures?

 

[Black Mamba]

Fine. Still that's no excuse for losing races you should win. Obama should have a solid Ohio lead due to the auto rescue and improved economy there, and should be competing better in Florida (even Silver thinks Florida is done).

Romney's favorables have gone up all month...

There is nothing that will convince a lot of people.

The GOP has successfully hammered home the "welfare state" bullshit even though they are the ones who created it.


Obama's problem is that he comes off like an intellectual (because he is one). Clinton, for contrast, was like a country bumpkin and could talk to you. You want to blame that on the messenger but I think it speaks more to us about our ability to comprehend shit.

I mean, in the 2nd debate Romney literally argued "The numbers work, trust me I ran a business." Anyone with half a brain would realize they're being sold snake oil.

But these are the same people who put $0 money down on a $800k house with $45k income and thought they were okay. The same people who send money to a Nigerian prince. The same people who still think Obama is muslim.

Our electorate is uninformed and gullible. This is simply a fact.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Anihawk, what's up with the early voting figures in PPP's ohio poll. Last week it said 19% of people surveyed voted early, this week it's 21% of the total electorate? What are the figures?

Last week it was 74-26 Obama. This week 66-34 Obama.

 

[AniHawk]

Anihawk, what's up with the early voting figures in PPP's ohio poll. Last week it said 19% of people surveyed voted early, this week it's 21% of the total electorate? What are the figures?

not sure what you mean, but going of the 5.6m who voted last time, it's about a 112k increase in a week, for a 1.176m total right now.

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

But Obama's policies did land the country on it's feet, as opposed to landing on it's butt. Do you really see Obama's policies worsening the country? Sure the debt is high, but the biggest contributor of that is the bailout (signed under Bush), promoted by Obama. And how many people are just voting NOBAMA as opposed to qualifying Mitt Romney's vision, which is the same dead horse that's been beated for the past 30 years?

We're in purgatory right now, imo.
I think most people are probably voting NOBAMA, but I think Romney's debate performance really boosted his chances. People saw a sense of urgency and interest. I think that's what they really reacted to. I won't be upset if Obama wins. I think he's been pretty decent overall and I definitely agree with him on the social issues of the day. But, I think he shows way too much complacency. I think you guys would probably agree with that too.

 

[TacticalFox88]

The fact that a guy as slimy as Romney even has a chance to win the Presidency should be ALL the proof you need at the overall mental capacity of a good percentage of Americans.

 

[jbug617]

Even the Republican pollsters say Romney is down in Ohio.

They said Obama is +4 in Ohio.

 

[AniHawk]

Last week it was 74-26 Obama. This week 66-34 Obama.

that's a gigantic difference. look at it in numerical terms (using the 5.6m number):

last week: 787360
this week: 776160

obama lost 100,000 votes cast between this week and last week.

i really think last saturday was an outlier, or there's something fucked with the sample size

 

[coldfoot]

There are smart people left, right, and center who feel that an informed electorate will see it their way. Welcome to politics.

Incorrect. Being right of the center is linked with low IQ.

 

[Y2Kev]

Last week it was 74-26 Obama. This week 66-34 Obama.

not sure what you mean, but going of the 5.6m who voted last time, it's about a 112k increase in a week, for a 1.176m total right now.

I mean, what percentage of the total "likely" vote do they think has already voted? Last week I remember seeing 19% had already voted. I read through it but wanted your opinion...are they saying now 21% has voted? Is that 21% of people polled or 21% of the expected total (or am I making up 21%)?

I am trying to figure out if the increase in the actual #s is in line with what they expect the total turnout to be. That is, are they understating how many people have already early voted?

that's a gigantic difference. look at it in numerical terms (using the 5.6m number):

last week: 787360
this week: 776160

obama lost 100,000 votes cast between this week and last week.

i really think last saturday was an outlier, or there's something fucked with the sample size

Is the sample smaller? If you poll 100 early voters, the difference between 3:1 and 2:1 is very small...

 

[Black Mamba]

We're in purgatory right now, imo.
I think most people are probably voting NOBAMA, but I think Romney's debate performance really boosted his chances. People saw a sense of urgency and interest. I think that's what they really reacted to. I won't be upset if Obama wins. I think he's been pretty decent overall and I definitely agree with him on the social issues of the day. But, I think he shows way too much complacency. I think you guys would probably agree with that too.

I don't care much for Obama. But the GOP needs to get the message that it's not okay to be backwards socially and that it's not okay to obstruct and that it's not okay to keep pushing failed economic policies that are crippling the economies of the countries doing what they propose right now.

The GOP needs to be forced to reform because their party will fuck this country over bad if it gets their way.

 

[HylianTom]

Even the Republican pollsters say Romney is down in Ohio.

They said Obama is +4 in Ohio.

Folks aren't going to relax until it's over.

Honestly, the tension makes the victory all that much more savory. And the tears all that much more delectable.

Gotta find my skimmer hat for Election Day. It's in storage somewhere.

 

[Aaron Strife]

that's a gigantic difference. look at it in numerical terms (using the 5.6m number):

last week: 787360
this week: 776160

obama lost 100,000 votes cast between this week and last week.

i really think last saturday was an outlier, or there's something fucked with the sample size

The only thing is that other polls have backed up the first poll that had Obama winning 3-to-1.

 

[DragonSworne]

We're in purgatory right now, imo.
I think most people are probably voting NOBAMA, but I think Romney's debate performance really boosted his chances. People saw a sense of urgency and interest. I think that's what they really reacted to. I won't be upset if Obama wins. I think he's been pretty decent overall and I definitely agree with him on the social issues of the day. But, I think he shows way too much complacency. I think you guys would probably agree with that too.

I agree. Obama just blew his chance at governing the US effectively during the first few years of his term.

The whole nonpartisan intitative he had a hard on for failed him. Republicans never wanted to work with him and he is paying for it now. He should have pushed his agenda and offered his own plans to congress. The outcome might have been the same, but people wouldn't have anything to attack him on.

 

[AniHawk]

I mean, what percentage of the total "likely" vote do they think has already voted? Last week I remember seeing 19% had already voted. I read through it but wanted your opinion...are they saying now 21% has voted? Is that 21% of people polled or 21% of the expected total (or am I making up 21%)?

I am trying to figure out if the increase in the actual #s is in line with what they expect the total turnout to be. That is, are they understating how many people have already early voted?




Is the sample smaller? If you poll 100 early voters, the difference between 3:1 and 2:1 is very small...

sample size a week ago was 880.
that's about 167 who said they voted early (127 for obama, 40 for romney)

this week the sample size was 532
112 said they voted early (74 for obama, 38 for romney)

 

[coldfoot]

This is just a really lazy argument--if you can even call it an argument. All you can come up with when a candidate loses is that the electorate is stupid? And when your candidate wins, are they suddenly intelligent again?

Incorrect. The electorate is always stupid, but sometimes they vote for the right candidate. Think about how stupid the average person is and remind yourself that 50% of all people are dumber than that. I will never forgive anyone who voted for W, let alone voted for him twice. In my eyes, they are accessories to murder and I will always treat them that way until they repent.

Maybe these stupid people feel duped by Obama's hope/n change bullshit and don't want to be fooled again. Or maybe they want to try someone/something different. Or maybe, just maybe, they're intelligent enough to understand that Obama's policies haven't brought this country back on it's feet again.

Anyone who thinks like that is obviously not in the above-average intelligence category. There are small steps but this country is better than where it was 4 years ago.

You're asking people to stick with someone whose policies haven't noticeably improved their lives.

This is objectively false. Now they can get health insurance that covers their pre-existing conditions. That is a noticable improvement.

 

[RustyNails]

We're in purgatory right now, imo.
I think most people are probably voting NOBAMA, but I think Romney's debate performance really boosted his chances. People saw a sense of urgency and interest. I think that's what they really reacted to. I won't be upset if Obama wins. I think he's been pretty decent overall and I definitely agree with him on the social issues of the day. But, I think he shows way too much complacency. I think you guys would probably agree with that too.

Yeah, Romney's first debate was the October Surprise no doubt. A normal 1-2 point bump translated into 4 point bump because Obama shat the bed instead of at least remotely making the case.

But as for purgatory, Obama's policies have turned around the boat from heading towards hell at least. Sure we're in a purgatory, but by the look of things, we are heading towards heaven/land/good fortune rather than back to hell. I just wish people saw this in a wholesome view.

 

[Y2Kev]

Yeah, that sample is so small. If just five people answered differently, you'd have a big change....in either sample, really.

I also think Obama will get a boost in early voting the last weekend (two weekends from today).

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

Think about how stupid the average person is and remind yourself that 50% of all people are dumber than that.


This is objectively false. Now they can get health insurance that covers their pre-existing conditions. That is a noticable improvement.

That IS a scary thought : )

But Obamacare really hasn't gone into effect yet.

Yeah, Romney's first debate was the October Surprise no doubt. A normal 1-2 point bump translated into 4 point bump because Obama shat the bed instead of at least remotely making the case.

But as for purgatory, Obama's policies have turned around the boat from heading towards hell at least. Sure we're in a purgatory, but by the look of things, we are heading towards heaven/land/good fortune rather than back to hell. I just wish people saw this in a wholesome view.

I hope so. I'd much rather see a good recovery than Romney in the White House.

 

[Red Blaster]

There's always the chance Romney will go back to being Moderate Massachusetts Mitt but after being slimey cunt Mitt for this entire campaign I wouldn't take that chance.

But it's all hypothetical since he's going to lose.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Gallup out yet?

 

[gcubed]

There's always the chance Romney will go back to being Moderate Massachusetts Mitt but after being slimey cunt Mitt for this entire campaign I wouldn't take that chance.

But it's all hypothetical since he's going to lose.

I have no real problem if Romney wins. I highly doubt he repeals Obamacare day 1. I would expect him to become moderate when he went in, a partisan would get his party destroyed in 2 years, its always a show. My biggest problem is with giving Paul Ryan even an ounce of national credibility. He's a straight fucking clown and I loathe him

 

[coldfoot]

The whole nonpartisan intitative he had a hard on for failed him. Republicans never wanted to work with him and he is paying for it now. He should have pushed his agenda and offered his own plans to congress. The outcome might have been the same, but people wouldn't have anything to attack him on.

Completely agree that Obama and the Democrats should have done in the ~6 months that they had full control of the Senate and the House. This country is more divided than most people think and our representation clearly shows this divide. I am not in favor of working with the Republicans, they should be given no quarter and terminated (from politics) with extreme prejudice.

 

[DragonSworne]

There's always the chance Romney will go back to being Moderate Massachusetts Mitt but after being slimey cunt Mitt for this entire campaign I wouldn't take that chance.

But it's all hypothetical since he's going to lose.

He had to be a moderate in Mass...

Surrounded by super conservatives, he'll push his pro rich anti middle class plans without anyone stopping him legislatively.

 

[Black Republican]

Gallup out yet?

gaf gave it a break for today

 

[Stinkles]

If I can take the personal attacks, you kids can take a little joke about Obama.

See? How hard was that? I was even able to take your post seriously this time.

 

[HylianTom]

There's always the chance Romney will go back to being Moderate Massachusetts Mitt but after being slimey cunt Mitt for this entire campaign I wouldn't take that chance.

But it's all hypothetical since he's going to lose.

The other big thing I'm watching is Senate composition. I would guess that, in the very freakish event that Romney were to win, they'd fight him tooth and nail on court nominees, perhaps even forcing him to be "Moderate Mitt" for that issue.

Heck, this could kill GOP turnout in 2016. Imagine the base revolting over another Souter.

The Dems need to run-up the Senate tally this time around; it'd be great as insurance/cushion for potential seat losses in 2014.

 

[Y2Kev]

The Democrats in the senate would fold and give Romney whatever. That's just how it works.

 

[DragonSworne]

The other big thing I'm watching is Senate composition. I would guess that, in the very freakish event that Romney were to win, they'd fight him tooth and nail on court nominees, perhaps even forcing him to be "Moderate Mitt" for that issue.

Heck, this could kill GOP turnout in 2016. Imagine the base revolting over another Souter.

The Dems need to run-up the Senate tally this time around; it'd be great as insurance/cushion for potential seat losses in 2014.

Democrats will bow down once we go to war with Iran.


The reason why is that Democratic supporters will suffer more than republican supporters will if the federal government shuts down.

 

[norinrad]

The Democrats in the senate would fold and give Romney whatever. That's just how it works.

No backbone what so ever

 

[Measley]

Obama's leading in the majority of swing states and poligaf is in panic mode. Too funny.

 

[Juice]

Maybe they just want divided government.

Divided government made sense back when Republicans were willing to vote yes on bills with bipartisan support. The last congress is such a tremendous failure that it'd be ridiculous to want it now.

 

[syllogism]

That timing

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/w...alk-to-us-about-nuclear-program.html?_r=2&hp&

WASHINGTON — The United States and Iran have agreed for the first time to one-on-one negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, according to Obama administration officials, setting the stage for what could be a last-ditch diplomatic effort to avert a military strike on Iran.

Iranian officials have insisted that the talks wait until after the presidential election, a senior administration official said, telling their American counterparts that they want to know which American president they would be negotiating with.

News of the agreement — a result of intense, secret exchanges between American and Iranian officials that date almost to the beginning of President Obama’s term — comes at a critical moment in the presidential contest, just two weeks before Election Day and a day before the final debate, which is to focus on national security and foreign policy.

 

[The Lamonster]

That timing

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/w...alk-to-us-about-nuclear-program.html?_r=2&hp&

Wow, this had better come up on Monday.

 

[pigeon]

That timing

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/w...alk-to-us-about-nuclear-program.html?_r=2&hp&

Surprise!

 

[DragonSworne]

That timing

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/w...alk-to-us-about-nuclear-program.html?_r=2&hp&

Just in time for Obama to aplogize directly to Iran.

Iranian officials have insisted that the talks wait until after the presidential election, a senior administration official said, telling their American counterparts that they want to know which American president they would be negotiating with.

Iran supports Obama

 

[Aaron Strife]

That timing

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/w...alk-to-us-about-nuclear-program.html?_r=2&hp&

Wowzers. Would be a huge boost for the foreign policy debate.

The only thing to top it would be Obama announcing he's personally negotiated a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine.

 

[Piecake]

That timing

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/w...alk-to-us-about-nuclear-program.html?_r=2&hp&

Makes sense for Iran wanting to wait until the election is over

 

[Drek]

I agree. Obama just blew his chance at governing the US effectively during the first few years of his term.

Obama will be fine if he wins. The guillotine of continuing resolution and the expiration of the Bush tax cuts hanging overhead at the same time, coupled with the POTUS having more or less direct control of the treasury will allow Obama to dictate terms like no POTUS since FDR if he's re-elected.

The Senate will still be blue and Congress will be in a no win situation. Watch taxes go up and the economy tank at the expense of a second term POTUS who isn't running again, while burning your own constituency, or make a deal with the "devil" to save your own hide.

If Romney wins its a true doomsday scenario. The Dems likely still hold the senate, Harry Reid will still be Majority Leader, and his last election proved pretty clearly that he's got teflon skin at home. They'll do to Romney what the GOP Congress did to Obama, make him a one term POTUS by blocking everything and anything. On the upswing, they get to keep Obamacare in place and get to raise taxes across the board without taking blame. Then when Romney's first term is an economic disaster he will be entirely to blame as we are currently on a shallow but steady upswing.

Then the GOP has to trot him back out for 2016 instead of a more compelling candidate like Christe, Jeb Bush, etc. while the Dems can roll out damn near anyone and recapture the White House.

Meanwhile middle America will burn in the fires of hell, but hey, Washington has traditionally not been too concerned with that.

There's always the chance Romney will go back to being Moderate Massachusetts Mitt but after being slimey cunt Mitt for this entire campaign I wouldn't take that chance.

But it's all hypothetical since he's going to lose.

Romney has never actually been a moderate, he just doesn't give a fuck about social issues. His primary goal has and will always be redistribution of wealth from the middle to the top. He's in politics because he is power hungry and his goals are the same as the Koch brothers, Rupert Murdoch, etc.. Consolidate all the wealth among them and only them, remove all checks on the power that money gives them, then dictate terms to everyone else from on high.

You wonder how feudalism started? Same exact way. Consolidation of power by a select few at the expense of the many. Instead of doing it with a sword these guys are doing it with a pen, but the end goal is the same.

 

[Black Mamba]

Iran is obviously being forced into this by Obama's thugs from chica...

wait a minute...

hm..