Support NeoGAF

[Clevinger]

So, vote yes on 121

Why?

 

[The Librarian]

looks like there's a 95% chance that todays polls will impact my ability to troll

by itself the abc tracker isn't too noteworthy, however when added with other data points such as obama's nearly 8% drop in early vote turnout in VA compared to 2008 i think we could be at a danger point.

So you were trolling with that first comment? Quaint.

 

[gcubed]

by itself the abc tracker isn't too noteworthy, however when added with other data points such as obama's nearly 8% drop in early vote turnout in VA compared to 2008 i think we could be at a danger point.

much better then earlier

 

[Duffyside]

Romney isn't running as a moderate.

He's abandoned his own health care bill
He's abandoned his belief on taxes
Etc etc etc

He has ran as a right wing conservative.

Should Romney lose, I expect one more go at far right stupidity before the party eats itself.

Sure, just like McCain shifted to the right when he ran. Then they all move to the middle, as best they can. It's just what happens. Get the base excited in the primaries, then try to appeal to everyone in the national election.

Again, he's a chameleon. He's the GOP's John Kerry.

 

[Black Mamba]

I think calling him right of Bush is a little extreme. Moreover, his history before wanting to win the GOP nomination for president was as moderate as it gets. Like I said; he has no real positions. He's a chameleon, doing whatever is convenient for him to be elected.

He is not right of Bush. He is Bush. He's running on nearly the exact same platform.

Bush ran on this 12 years ago

Tax cuts that mostly went to top 1%
Tax reform aka cutting deductions
increased military spending
Removing regulations
privatizing medicare and eventually SS to an extent

He's no different other than Bush was likeable and did throw some bones to the middle class (increase EITC and CTC).

Sure, just like McCain shifted to the right when he ran. Then they all move to the middle, as best they can. It's just what happens. Get the base excited in the primaries, then try to appeal to everyone in the national election.

He has NOT ran from the middle in the general election. He tried to fake an appearance in a debate by either lying or omitting facts but did not run from the center.

 

[Byakuya769]

He is not right of Bush. He is Bush. He's running on nearly the exact same platform.

Bush ran on this 12 years ago

Tax cuts that mostly went to top 1%
Tax reform aka cutting deductions
increased military spending
Removing regulations
privatizing medicare and eventually SS to an extent

He's no different other than Bush was likeable and did throw some bones to the middle class (increase EITC and CTC).




He has NOT ran from the middle in the general election. He tried to fake an appearance in a debate by either lying or omitting facts but did not run from the center.

He's running on cutting discretionary spending as well. Bush increased SNAP.

 

[Officerrob]

by itself the abc tracker isn't too noteworthy, however when added with other data points such as obama's nearly 8% drop in early vote turnout in VA compared to 2008 i think we could be at a danger point.

You need a reason in order to vote early in VA, unlike other states. I wouldn't take much from any kind of drop in early voting here

 

[NullPointer]

... I didn't think they could come more moderate than McCain, and then poof, here's Romney, a man so moderate he doesn't even have any positions.

Romney's not a moderate, he's a vacillate.

 

[mckmas8808]

Love how RCP has ignored all these state polls, but added all those national ones immediately.

I know RCP leans right, but why would they compromise themselves like this? They are too big of a name know to do stupid crap like this.

 

[jbug617]

I still can't believe the PPP polls from this morning.

 

[Aaron Strife]

I know RCP leans right, but why would they compromise themselves like this? They are too big of a name know to do stupid crap like this.

Because no one calls them out on this.

Frankly their credibility should have been tarnished after they projected Bush winning with over 400 EVs in 2000.

 

[Duffyside]

Romney's not a moderate, he's a vacillate.

Yup, and honestly? I like that about him. When I was younger and more idealistic (believe it or not) I hated that about politicians. But I've come to really appreciate it. "Hey, I'll do whatever works, because that will make me look good in the history books."

If Romney loses he'll be the GOP's Kerry, but if he can somehow win, he might be their Clinton. Complete with big DNC movement in the House in 2014, you lucky dogs you.

 

[Plinko]

Also asked if campaign gained votes after the abortion comment, Mourdock replied: "I know we did."

Source: Indystar.com

 

[Officerrob]

I know RCP leans right, but why would they compromise themselves like this? They are too big of a name know to do stupid crap like this.

They added the ABC/Wash Post tracker poll almost immediately, but the PPP Colorado poll from over an hour ago still isn't up there

If Romney loses he'll be the GOP's Kerry, but if he can somehow win, he might be their Clinton. Complete with big DNC movement in the House in 2014, you lucky dogs you.

Yeah.......Ok

 

[jamesinclair]

Good news everyone!

With Sandy being labeled the storm of the century, the media no longer need to whore out the tied narrative for ratings!

 

[DasRaven]

Why?

Because our state is roughly 33%R/33%D/33%I by registration, but our legislature is supermajority R and increasingly Tea Party affiliated. Top-2 tends to generate more moderate candidates since they have to pull support from both the base and the Ind/Lbt/Grn/Una groups.

A hard-right candidate would lose regularly to a pragmatic centrist candidate here, but since it always ends up being the hard-right Republican versus the hard-left Democrat in the general, the Dem regularly loses and the state moves further right next cycle.

It takes some power from the established parties, which is why both the AZ Dem & GOP both urge no votes. But it allows for the candidates closer to the electorate's desires to make the general in each case. It isn't IRV, but it is better than what we have now.

 

[AlteredBeast]

Because no one calls them out on this.

Frankly their credibility should have been tarnished after they projected Bush winning with over 400 EVs in 2000.

whaaaaa???

They really projected that?

 

[Zen]

Yeah.......Ok

Presuming he doesn't manage to completely fuck up the impending recovery, I'd imagine.

 

[Angry Grimace]

Hey, guys, by the way:

 

[Souldriver]

Yup, and honestly? I like that about him. When I was younger and more idealistic (believe it or not) I hated that about politicians. But I've come to really appreciate it. "Hey, I'll do whatever works, because that will make me look good in the history books."

There's a difference between "doing whatever works" as in implementing policies that work, and "doing whatever works" as in saying whatever the crowd in front of you wants so you get their vote.

The former is pragmatism.
The latter is deception.

 

[Loudninja]

Good news everyone!

With Sandy being labeled the storm of the century, the media no longer need to whore out the tied narrative for ratings!

The storm is a outlier.

 

[NullPointer]

Yup, and honestly? I like that about him. When I was younger and more idealistic (believe it or not) I hated that about politicians. But I've come to really appreciate it. "Hey, I'll do whatever works, because that will make me look good in the history books."

I certainly don't mind a politician that changes their mind, or even one that moderates, but Romney is doing neither of those things. His shifts don't seem thoughtful, and don't provide any sense of guidance or principle beyond short term gain.

I see that as dangerous in a politician, as it leads me to believe they'll just rubber stamp whatever the party deems important at best, and or just act too re-actively at worst. We've seen Romney do both of these things several times over in this campaign.

 

[eBay Huckster]

whaaaaa???

They really projected that?

yep, 446-92

 

[Aaron Strife]

whaaaaa???

They really projected that?

Here's their write-up. It's great because it's the same bullshit the right is peddling about this year's polls:

November 6, 2000
RCP Electoral College Analysis:
Bush 446 Gore 92
Bush 51.2 Gore 41.8 Nader 5.7

CNN/USA Today/Gallup, MSNBC/Zogby and Newsweek have done a nice job closing the polls for Vice President Gore. All three polls now have Gore within two points and supposedly gaining. We'll see Tuesday whether the propaganda campaign to keep Democrats from becoming disillusioned and voting for Nader was successful in diluting the size of the Bush victory.

As we have said all along, Gore needed to close to within 2% in our RCP Composites to have a realistic chance to win. He has not done so. (RCP Tracking Composite Bush 47.3 Gore 41.2, RCP National Poll Composite Bush 47.0 Gore 42.8) George W. Bush will be elected President of the United States tomorrow by the American people. But the last minute Gore push in some polls has perhaps given enough liberal Democrats hope to not waste their vote on Nader.

The real debate is not who is going to win the election, but whether Bush will win 308 electoral votes or 474 electoral votes. The media's fantasy of Bush winning the popular vote and losing the electoral college is not going happen. The worst case scenario for a Bush victory will be a 2-3 point win in the popular vote and 10-20% more than the necessary 270 EC votes.

For those who still maintain Mr. Gore has a chance of winning, consider the scenarios under which this is possible. If Gore does not win Florida (the evidence indicates he will not), he must run the table, taking IL, CA, PA, MI, MN, WI, WA, OR, TN, AR, WV and DE along with his base 92 votes for a 273-265 EC win. It won't happen. Even with a victory in Florida, Gore must win at least 70% of the remaining battleground states to eke out a victory. The truth is that George W. Bush has a better chance of carrying New Jersey and Vermont than Al Gore does of becoming the next President of the United States.

When you sift through the haze of polls and media disinformation, the anecdotal facts are clear. Bush and Gore are fighting it out in Democratic Iowa, West Virginia, Minnesota and even Gore's home state of Tennessee. Bush is reaching out to moderate Democrats and independents while Gore is frantically trying to energize his base. The media openly acknowledges Bush's base is more energized and that Gore faces a significant threat from Nader on his left. Yet the pundits still talk as if the election is too close to call and could go either way.

On Tuesday night the talking heads will all be abuzz with their exit poll analyses showing how Bush destroyed Gore in the male vote, broke even with women, carried over 40% of the Hispanic vote, and the surprising strength of Ralph Nader. All of this is clear today, but it will take the network exit polls to make it clear to the national press.

We continue to see a landslide of over 400 electoral votes and a Bush win by 7-10 points. We will have to wait until tomorrow to see whether the "tightening polls" may have worked to save Illinois, California, Minnesota and a few others for the Vice President.

An explanation of each critical battleground state can be found on the Critical Battleground State page.

Bush 446 Gore 92

 

[gcubed]

I had no idea RCP was the original unskewer

 

[Y2Kev]

ReallyUnclearPolitics!

 

[Plinko]

The media's fantasy of Bush winning the popular vote and losing the electoral college is not going happen.

LOL...wow...sure, it was switched, but still.

 

[mavs]

Presuming he doesn't manage to completely fuck up the impending recovery, I'd imagine.

Greg Mankiw will be his Fed chairman, so there's little chance of that. Dude will do whatever it takes to make Republicans look good.

 

[Cubsfan23]

Obama's odds have gone up 30% at pinnaclesports.com

 

[-Kees-]

Here's their write-up. It's great because it's the same bullshit the right is peddling about this year's polls:

Dick Morris was running RCP?

 

[apana]

Romney seems to be doing well in the national polls right now but still lagging in the most important states. Election day is going to be interesting, I bet a lot of these pollsters are nervous about it.

 

[AlteredBeast]

Here's their write-up. It's great because it's the same bullshit the right is peddling about this year's polls:

WOW!! That is insanity! How the hell were they trying to push that nonsense? I love the popular vote/electoral college vote tip, too

 

[pigeon]

Just a thought, and I'm not sure anyone here would care, but what would a Romney defeat mean for the future of the Republican party? I didn't think they could come more moderate than McCain, and then poof, here's Romney, a man so moderate he doesn't even have any positions.

If even Romney can't win, do they try a moderate again? Or do they go down the scarier path?

Personally, I think it will be Christie/Rubio in 2016, and if even that fails, then the party moves towards a more libertarian platform, getting away from their poisonous anti-gay agenda, and even some of their religious foundations, though not entirely.

The Atlantic had a fascinating article on this yesterday. Well, technically it was about Romney winning and how that could destroy the GOP, but I feel like it had some interesting stuff to say either way:

When new presidents take office, they face not only the country's existing domestic and international problems but also the political regime created by their predecessors. That regime consists of the interests, assumptions, and ideologies that dominate public discussion, and the relative strength of the parties' electoral coalitions. Our current political regime emerged in the wake of Ronald Reagan's election in 1980, and it has continued even through the Democratic presidencies of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. It is politically conservative and skeptical of government, at least in contrast to the New Deal/civil-rights regime that preceded it. And the Republicans have been the dominant party.

Skowronek's key insight is that a president's ability to establish his political legitimacy depends on where he sits in "political time": Is he allied with the dominant regime or opposed to it, and is the regime itself powerful or in decline?...

If Mitt Romney is elected, he will be the fourth Republican president in the Reagan regime. That regime is no longer in its glory days. Demographic shifts have weakened the Republican electoral coalition, while Republican politicians have grown increasingly radical and ideological. At best, Romney will be an affiliated president attempting to revive the Republican brand after it has been badly tarnished by George W. Bush; at worst, he will be a disjunctive president, unable to keep his party's factions together, and presiding over the end of the Reagan coalition.

Throughout his career, Romney has presented himself as a pragmatic, data-driven, hands-on problem-solver. In this respect he resembles our two last disjunctive presidents, Herbert Hoover and Jimmy Carter. Yet in order to secure his party's nomination, Romney has had to twist his positions to conform to the most radical demands of the Republican base.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...s-a-romney-presidency-would-be-doomed/263918/

Personally, I don't agree exactly with some of the framing here -- for example, I think it's somewhat inaccurate to call Carter the end of the New Deal coalition. I think it's more correct to situation the rise of the Southern/Reagan coalition in 1968 -- which is why Carter, ten years behind the times, seemed so unready, and why he had to be Southern to win. (I'd note that you can see the intensification of radicalism and distrust of the existing state -- signs, in my view, of a decaying coalition -- both in the 1968 protests and in the Tea Party Revolution.)

However, in the general sense, I think the framing of national coalitions is an insightful one, and I think it's reasonable to say that the GOP is still running with its Southern/Reagan strategy (social reactionaries, mild and extreme libertarians, Randians, interventionists, working-class whites, and Southern cultural voters) against the increasingly ascendant Democratic coalition of women, minorities, GLBT, anti-interventionists, and social technocrats, the latter two groups heavily represented in the Millenials. Carville calls this the Rising American Electorate. I think of us as the Goonies. In either case, I would say it's clear that the Republicans will keep losing harder if they keep running as the party of the past -- but I also think it's hard for a party to reinvent itself quickly.

So, in answer to your question, I think it depends on where in the five stages of grief you think the GOP is. Either they'll run a Carter in 2016 -- that means, in this case, a person of color such as Rubio -- or they'll run a Mondale, which means Paul Ryan, basically. The question is how quickly they accept that their coalition is fragmenting. If Obama's successful in forcing tax increases using the fiscal cliff, I suspect it'll be sooner rather than later, which means Rubio.

 

[Oblivion]

I had no idea RCP was the original unskewer

I had no idea RCP was around in 2000.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Perhaps I shouldn't be so hard on RCP. After all, my prediction in 2010 was pretty outlandish, yet I would like to think I could be taken seriously in the future by changing my perspective to not be so optimistic/cheerleading for my side.

Then again, I simply gave Democrats every toss-up. Any analysis that gives Republicans Minnesota or even has it as a toss-up is worthless.

 

[Cloudy]

If the Marist poll of CO is good for Obama, he'll probably be over 50% on Intrade to win that state tonight

 

[RDreamer]

Really kind of worried/angry about the national polling still showing Romney up. I really really don't want him to win the popular vote. I'm pretty confident in Obama winning electorally, but even so... I really don't want any part of the Republican worldview coming true, and Obama losing the popular vote would really justify their future provocation.

And aside from that I think if he were to lose a popular vote I could definitely see another goddamned wave election coming up in 2014, and that's the last thing I want is more obstructionist Republicans taking over...

 

[Tim-E]

Fox News reports that Romney is surging... In the Twitter Election Index!

 

[Oblivion]

So one of my pro-choice, uber feminist co-workers says she's worried that Romney may reverse Roe v. Wade if he becomes president, but is thinking about voting for him anyway cause she thinks he'll be better with the economy on account of him being a businessman.

We all got our priorities, I guess.

 

[Cloudy]

Really kind of worried/angry about the national polling still showing Romney up. I really really don't want him to win the popular vote. I'm pretty confident in Obama winning electorally, but even so... I really don't want any part of the Republican worldview coming true, and Obama losing the popular vote would really justify their future provocation.

And aside from that I think if he were to lose a popular vote I could definitely see another goddamned wave election coming up in 2014, and that's the last thing I want is more obstructionist Republicans taking over...

Well it's possible the LV models are underestimating Obama's support

 

[Stinkles]

So one of my pro-choice, uber feminist co-workers says she's worried that Romney may reverse Roe v. Wade if he becomes president, but is thinking about voting for him anyway cause she thinks he'll be better with the economy on account of him being a businessman.

We all got our priorities, I guess.

He is not a "businessman." He does not create, invent or manufacture anything. He takes advantage of corporate tax and business code loopholes to create apparent equity and then cash it in, often at the expense of the company.

He is a one-trick pony.

 

[RDreamer]

So one of my pro-choice, uber feminist co-workers says she's worried that Romney may reverse Roe v. Wade if he becomes president, but is thinking about voting for him anyway cause she thinks he'll be better with the economy on account of him being a businessman.

We all got our priorities, I guess.

That pisses me off so much. I mean not just throwing your own ideals under the bus, but that people still latch onto this stupid fucking view that Romney as a businessman can help this country. You should ask her exactly what part of his business history is translatable to a presidency. Wasn't his success rate far lower than the success rate for the stimulus that the idiot right wing blasts?

Well it's possible the LV models are underestimating Obama's support

Yeah, I think it is definitely, and I think there's still a possibility of Obama winning the popular vote, obviously. I just don't like it to be close, because I really don't want it to happen. I'd rather have a nice buffer.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Really kind of worried/angry about the national polling still showing Romney up. I really really don't want him to win the popular vote. I'm pretty confident in Obama winning electorally, but even so... I really don't want any part of the Republican worldview coming true, and Obama losing the popular vote would really justify their future provocation.

And aside from that I think if he were to lose a popular vote I could definitely see another goddamned wave election coming up in 2014, and that's the last thing I want is more obstructionist Republicans taking over...

Exactly. If Obama won hands down, there's a small chance some of the moderate members of the party would say "Perhaps we can work with him on some things."

If he lost the popular vote he could win every swing state and it wouldn't change a damn thing, their resolve to obstruct his presidency would increase a hundredfold.

 

[Byakuya769]

So one of my pro-choice, uber feminist co-workers says she's worried that Romney may reverse Roe v. Wade if he becomes president, but is thinking about voting for him anyway cause she thinks he'll be better with the economy on account of him being a businessman.

We all got our priorities, I guess.

I know, "LOL, Bush!", but Bush was a business man too. How does that convince people so much that he's good for the economy?

 

[Link]

So one of my pro-choice, uber feminist co-workers says she's worried that Romney may reverse Roe v. Wade if he becomes president, but is thinking about voting for him anyway cause she thinks he'll be better with the economy on account of him being a businessman.

We all got our priorities, I guess.

He's not a businessman and she's not a feminist.

 

[AniHawk]

I already OD'd at PPP-VA.

the demographics are less in favor for him in that poll than they were in the 2008 exit polls, although the split by race is almost exact. not sure where the support is coming from to give him such an edge.

 

[apana]

I think Bob Beckel on Fox News said that Obama's people think his ground game is worth a good 2-3 points. If so I am very hopeful.

 

[kaching]

The consequences are the woman's to bear. That's the whole reason this is a big issue. If men had to bear the consequences, there wouldn't even be an abortion argument.

Obviously I'm talking consequences beyond the pregnancy itself. If legislators are trying to encourage every pregnancy to come to term, then there should be as much discussion about what happens after they've guilted or coerced women into bring those children to term, and what happens to ensure that this so sacred and precious act isn't for naught.

I'm just trying to understand our role amidst God's great will and grace here. If He picked a particular woman _and_ a particular man to bring this gift into the world, surely we shouldn't just be focusing on the woman's responsibility alone.

 

[AniHawk]

Again, I'll wait for non-PPP firm polls. Their dem lean/house effect is what, 1-2%?

nate silver had them at +3

that was june though.

 

[RDreamer]

I think Bob Beckel on Fox News said that Obama's people think his ground game is worth a good 2-3 points. If so I am very hopeful.

That seems a bit too generous. I'd probably hope for a point, maybe slightly more. I really doubt he gets 3 points overall from his ground game.