• 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.

PolliGaf 2012 |OT5| Big Bird, Binders, Bayonets, Bad News and Benghazi

Status
Not open for further replies.

Angry Grimace

Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
I think it just reinforces my view that the guy is too emotional and quick to anger to be in the office.

Where would you get the idea Romney is emotional? He's practically a robot.
 
Man, what does Rove say to his investors if Romney loses, dems keep the senate, and dems gain 5-10 seats? The PAC money was apparently useless, as was Romney's. Seems like people have an opinion one way or the other about Obama/last four years
 
David Frum on why he is voting for Romney, some fairly selected and completely representative quotes


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/01/why-i-ll-vote-for-romney.html

The country's most pressing economic problem IS the break-down of the old middle-class economy. Wages are stagnating at the middle, class lines are hardening, and more and more of the benefits of growth are claimed by the very wealthiest. President Obama delivered his answer to this problem in his important speech in Osawatomie, Kansas, a year ago: more direct government employment (at higher wages), more government contracting (to enforce higher wages), and more government aid to college students (in hope that expanding the number of degree holders will raise their average wage).

I find his reason to vote Romney a bit odd. More direct government employment is just wrong, the public sector has been shrinking under Obama. Mitt plans to bloat the military and that would grow public sector employment. Yes, Obama wants more government contracting but that is as an infrastructure-building stimulus program, not to enforce higher wages. And yes, Obama supports students with aid but I don't tie that so much to the economy.
 
Bloomberg is a weasel because he took the time to get in the obammunism rant before actually endorsing the candidate. The GOP never ever gave Obama any room to negotiate in good faith any of his major measures, and believe me-he tried and tried and tried. Much to the dismay of the liberals that wanted him to just ramrod through a sweeping new deal-esque agenda in 2008-2010 when we controlled Congress.

By far, my worst fear about Obama during the '08 campaign was that he actually believed his own post-partisan rhetoric, and it was saddening but completely unsurprising to see that fear vindicated. Most anyone looking at the actions of the congressional GOP in the 110th Congress alone should have been able to predict that there was absolutely nothing that could get them to negotiate in good faith with a Democratic president, but noooooo....
 

Iksenpets

Banned
David Frum on why he is voting for Romney, some fairly selected and completely representative quotes


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/01/why-i-ll-vote-for-romney.html

Ugh, I like Frum and actually agree with a lot of his points here, but he's completely ignoring the fact that Romney has zero history of ever standing up to extremism in his own party. There is no evidence he would do anything other than bend over whatever way Congressional Republicans tell him to. I agree that deep down Mitt is a sensible, pragmatic guy, and that if he could govern in a vacuum he would be at least tolerable, but I think he's also profoundly weak and would basically be a rubber stamp for congressional Republicans.

And then all the benefit of the doubt he extends to Romney he denies to Obama. Mitt won't repeal Obamacare, but Obama's gonna have most of the country working for the government in no time!

I think The Economist's endorsement today looked at the same issues with the same center-right lens that Frum is looking through, but without Frum's emotional attachment to the Republican party and comes to the right conclusion because of it. Not to say that its lines about Obama not understanding business weren't laughable, but at least it came to the right conclusion in the end.

Speaking of which, The Economist and Mike Bloomberg both endorsing Obama on the same day has to be causing some serious cognitive dissonance in the rich people community.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Man, what does Rove say to his investors if Romney loses, dems keep the senate, and dems gain 5-10 seats? The PAC money was apparently useless, as was Romney's. Seems like people have an opinion one way or the other about Obama/last four years

He'll say Romney wasn't conservative enough, duh.
 
This video just reinforces the feeling I have that when Romney is in the public eye, he is hiding a big portion of himself. For a job like president of the United States I'd rather have a guy who can be "whole" and himself in any capacity.

Also, his enthusiasm about the second coming of Christ is not really reassuring to me.

It's just nice to hear him speak with conviction, even if his passion is misguided.
 

Tim-E

Member
I think Obama genuinely wanted to make an impact on how policy is formed at the federal level and that he really wanted to be bi-partisan, by I think after year 3 of his first term he realized that's not going to happen. I expect that he's learned his lesson and that he will approach policy with a different attitude in a second term.
 
Is it a weird thing that I find following political reporters is far more entertaining than celebrities? The twitter exchange between Sam Stein and BB today was hilarious. Celebrities/actors/directors/whatever never really have anything interesting to say.
 

Slime

Banned
Unemployment's probably going to rise back to 7.9, which doesn't mean much, but the visual alone might hurt Obama. Probably not by a lot, but it would be nice if it stayed the same.
 

Cloudy

Banned
No one cares about jobs reports, good or bad.

It's not about the people. It's what the media elite cares about which drives the news cycle. If the jobs report is okay or good, Sandy coverage will drown it out. If it's bad, it will get decent play and help Romney a bit
 

Angry Grimace

Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
A bad news cycle for Obama and something for Romney to hammer over the last few days

Again, the jobs numbers tend to be closely tied with the economic numbers, so I don't see anything other than a very mild gain or loss.
 
CNN/Orc

Colorado - Obama 50 - Romney 48 LV

iCqLlW6PwM0HU.jpg
 
So I caught the footage of Morning Joe with Chuck Todd talking about Ohio and he says the auto ad was sort of like a hailmary and the way the Romney camp is acting in Ohio says they are down in Ohio.

That hail mary was intercepted by Chysler, GM, and the media.
 
Every time I get nervous about Tuesday, I remind myself: Obama only needs WI, OH, and either IA or NV to get 271 EVs. He can lose every other battleground state and still win.

By almost all indications, he's doing fine in all four of those states.
 

DasRaven

Member
an actual job LOSS will be bad news, lets be real. When was the last negative month?

Feb. 2010. And with ADP already reporting 158K jobs added and BLS reporting fewer UE claims, positive jobs growth is a lock.
The only way even U3 goes up is due to hopeful new entrants to the job seeking pool. I expect we'll be flat @ 7.8% tomorrow.
 

ezrarh

Member
Who got banned? and whatttt?

Re: my left comment: that picture seemed like it wanted to "unite" Americans, but instead it just blasted the right. Seemed strange to me, that is all.

I don't see what's wrong with that. They're all prominent members of the party that's very far right. You can put Michael Moore up there if you want, but he's not really relevant.

And once again, people are so used to the crazed GOP that any semi decent video or act from a Republican gets more praise than it deserves.
 
What are the internals? The top line tells you almost nothing without including the internals.

I can see that train of logic on weird outliers (IE, gallup, that Obama +8 in iowa, or -3 in ohio) but if you are within the mainstream, paying too much attention to internals is going to give you excuses to dispute the quality of polls even if they are fine.
 

HylianTom

Banned
Every time I get nervous about Tuesday, I remind myself: Obama only needs WI, OH, and either IA or NV to get 271 EVs. He can lose every other battleground state and still win.

By almost all indications, he's doing fine in all four of those states.
Precisely. Anything beyond those three (of four) is bonus.

I'd love some cushion so that the asshat Husted knows that his efforts to flip Ohio are in vain, and Obama getting that cushion is looking more and more likely.

... and a side note: it seems like, in the past two or three days or so, the "ultra-crazy" switch has been hit over on the right side of the aisle. I'm most definitely enjoying it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom