Is there really any debate here???

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by swizzlee, Aug 8, 2012.

  1. swizzlee
    Offline

    swizzlee RedWhiteAndBlue

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    727
    Thanks Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    on a mountain
    Ratings:
    +124
    Every 4 years right about this time, I find myself sick of it all.

    I'm sick of the ugly ads [by both sides should you wish to argue this] and I live in a state where we rarely see them.

    I'm sick to death of the media analyzing every single word uttered by any candidate anywhere.. Will this ad hurt Obama? Romney? Who will be VP? When will we know? Where are his tax returns? OMG, Mitt and Bain killed a woman!

    Paul Ryan. What the hell - why not?

    I'm sick of the spin. I'm sick of the repetition.

    I knew whom I'd be voting for long before I could spell out all the reasons.

    The relevant polls point the way.

    The economic stats are all negative for the O - 8.3 UE, GDP below 2.0 for past 2 qtrs, retail sales down, foreclosures still ongoing, job creation in the ditch and well below population growth for endless months, yada, yada, yada. And not getting better. Stagnant.

    Pub enthusiasm is UP. Dem enthusiasm is DOWN. And that translates in to voting or not voting. The O loses that game.

    It doesn't matter if the O is "more popular" than Mitt. It does matter that more people trust Mitt to handle the economy better than O.

    It doesn't matter if the O has the Hispanic vote when he's losing young people, blacks, blue collar men and, oh yeah, the Indies.

    It doesn't matter if the O is "leading" in this poll or that poll. They're dead even, neck and neck and inside the margin of error.

    After the VP pick, I anticipate Mitt will focus on laying out his "plan" in greater detail and as the election draws closer, that "plan" will only draw greater attention to the fact that the O has NO plan.Hit him right between the eyes when it counts. Not now.

    The Undecideds will call this game. They're not committing yet. Altho they know Mitt is a helluva lot more competent than the O, they're not sure they really like him. So they'll wait until the very last minute, waiting to see if some thunderbolt event will occur that will make up their mind for them.

    It won't happen. The only thing that will happen is that the October jobs report will come out the Friday before the election. And they'll hold their noses and vote for Mitt.

    I'm interested, of course, in the VP pick. I'll be interested in watching the conventions [both] and then the debates.

    But it's over. Mitt will win this. No, it won't be a landslide. But neither do I think it will be a repeat of 2000. I really don't believe this is nearly as close as some would have you believe.
     
  2. auditor0007
    Offline

    auditor0007 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    12,566
    Thanks Received:
    2,255
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Toledo, OH
    Ratings:
    +3,218
    You might be right about Mitt winning, but he is going to need more votes in the right places to pull it off. What you are wrong about is that there is any real excitement about Mitt. There are very few people who really like him. I thought he was a great candidate four years ago and I was supporting him enthusiastically, but he lost me and now I'm supporting Romney. I just don't see what you are seeing.
     
  3. FA_Q2
    Offline

    FA_Q2 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    14,227
    Thanks Received:
    2,075
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Washington State
    Ratings:
    +4,271
    You seem quite sure that Mitt is going to win this one. I just don’t see that his chances are that good. It is quite possible that he will win this but I don’t see that the likely outcome has tilted in either of their favors yet.

    Has Obama screwed the pooch on the economy? Sure. That does not mean people are going to trust Mitt to fix it though. If Obama is good at anything it would be politics and getting people to vote for him whether or not he has any real plans or ideas. You do remember ‘hope and change’ right. Obama won the first election on nothing. There is also this inate hate for the right that came from Bush that has not entirely dissipated. In all honesty, it was Bush that won the election for Obama the first time.

    Are you actually serious when you say that Obama is losing the black vote? If you actually think that is happening then I don’t know what to say…
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. candycorn
    Offline

    candycorn Alis volat propriis

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    37,499
    Thanks Received:
    4,541
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +12,045
    Actually, popularity is one of the few things that does matter.

    Obama is not losing the black vote. Nor the Hispanic vote. Rust Belt states are leaning Obama who is up big in PA, MI, WI and doing very well in Ohio.

    In some states yes; in most states it's well outside the margin of error and has given Obama an insurmountable electoral vote lead.


    The plan is known already:
    * Cut all regulation so Wall street can get "creative" again.
    * Cut taxes on the rich, increase taxes on everyone else
    * Repeal Obamney care and replace it with nothing
    * Repeal Roe v. Wade
    * Reduce any workers rights as much as possible

    I heard today that 9 out of 10 are already decided (yesterday actually). There aren't enough undecideds left that will allow the billion dollars the Governor has raised to have much effect. He waited too late to campaign.

    Obama will have this sewn up quite quickly on election night. If he holds his lead in Florida, it will be over by 4:00 PST. If not, the drama will last a few hours longer.

    The real fun on Election Night is that the networks are not calling races early any longer; only as the polls close. So there will likely be a 2 hour window between the East Coast and the California (Obama up huge), Oregon (Obama up huge) and Washington (Obama up even more huge-er lol) returns to come back. They'll dilly-dally around because they can't call it until that block of 80 electoral votes (counting NV) come in.

    Obama' win will be a foregone conclusion but it will be fun to see Fox hosts immolate Cronkite's announcement that Kennedy was shot; voice breaking, tear in their eyes. By 10:00 PM the discussion on Fox will be to see if electors can change their votes. Maybe even more birther hysteria and a discussion on how we need to change the electoral college.
     
  5. midcan5
    Offline

    midcan5 liberal / progressive

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    10,774
    Thanks Received:
    2,361
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    Ratings:
    +3,284
    Sounds like what you are tired of is democracy and the politics that comes along with it. Life is complicated and that is why we argue and fight over what we value, in the end it makes a big difference as Lincoln, FDR, LBJ, and Reagan proved. For me Reagan is the bad guy in that list. Politics have real consequences: http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/186726-republican-ideology-through-history.html

    "We do face an entitlement crisis, then. But it is not the one identified by Fox News and the Neoliberal Right. It is the one concealed by the nomenclature and attacks by the Right. What’s more, as the recent economic meltdown in 2008 demonstrated, these entitlements are not only unjust, they are extremely dangerous. A class entitlement to escape regulation while putting at risk a whole society, and indeed world, is nothing to sneeze at. And as we have seen most recently, even if a world wide depression is avoided after such a meltdown, its costs and sacrifices gradually trickle down the social ladder until they, too, reach those at the middle and bottom layers of society. So, the rich and the superrich feel entitled to monopolize the largesse when growth occurs and to pass down the costs of their adventurism when the bottom falls out. That is a hell of a lot of entitlement. That is precisely why so many are so eager to publicize the false version of “the entitlement society” today, within state legislatures controlled by the Republican Party, through Superpacs allowed by the gang of five neoliberals on the Supreme Court, and on the 24 hour News Media. Reduce the deficit, they chant, by curtailing programs supporting the middle and poor classes. Quietly accept the double-trickle down process. But don’t you dare touch the entitlements of the rich that put everyone else at risk." William E. Connolly The Contemporary Condition: The Real Entitlement Crisis

    [​IMG]


    "A final word on politics. As in economics nothing is certain save the certainty that there will be firm prediction by those who do not know. It is possible that in some election, near or far, a presidential candidate will emerge in the United States determined to draw into the campaign those not now impelled to vote. Conceivably those so attracted - those who are not threatened by higher taxes and who are encouraged by the vision of a new governing community committed to the rescue of the cities and the impacted underclass - could outnumber those lost because of the resulting invasion of contentment. If this happens the effort would succeed." John Kenneth Galbraith 'The Culture of Contentment'
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  6. Moonglow
    Offline

    Moonglow Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    81,437
    Thanks Received:
    7,982
    Trophy Points:
    1,870
    Location:
    sw mizzouri
    Ratings:
    +29,295
    If Mittens don't win there is always a way to express your disdain;
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 9, 2012
  7. swizzlee
    Offline

    swizzlee RedWhiteAndBlue

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    727
    Thanks Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    on a mountain
    Ratings:
    +124
    I think you need to revie your post......

    and make some corrections.

    I'm not wrong about "any real excitement" about Mitt. I didn't claim anyone was excited about him on a personal level.

    Who "lost you" and who are you supporting? :)
     
  8. swizzlee
    Offline

    swizzlee RedWhiteAndBlue

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    727
    Thanks Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    on a mountain
    Ratings:
    +124
    A diversionary tactic on your part?

    My post has nothing to do with democracy as a whole.

    Being sick to death of the spin meisters within the political system has no relationship to democracy in the larger definition.
     
  9. swizzlee
    Offline

    swizzlee RedWhiteAndBlue

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    727
    Thanks Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    on a mountain
    Ratings:
    +124
    It's all about perception.............

    The current status of the race hasn't changed - it appears to be dead even, more or less. No tilt at all, at least on the surface. It's only about how you interpret the signals that are there for all to see. I've laid out what I think those signals are and how they will ultimately affect the election in November.

    Except an abundance of polls show Mitt IS trusted more on the economy and by a healthy margin in most polls. And the question on most polls on this subject is usually "who do you trust more ON the economy" or "who do you think is MORE LIKELY to be able to fix the economy" The question is never "who CAN" fix it.
    Absolutely correct. Do you really believe there are enough people [non-Dems] who still believe in "hope and change" after seeing what that has brought in his first term? Do you really believe the undecideds and/or the Indies are really going to prefer a man who has "screwed the pooch" on the economy when the economy is by far the major issue? You are correct that Bush won the first election for the O. But that's not going to happen this time around. The O is being evaluated on HIS performance, not Bush's.

    Of course I'm saying he is losing black voters. Many polls have shown that to be true. Perhaps your mistake is in interpreting that to mean they're walking away in huge numbers. They are not. What you need to look at are comparison charts that show the actual % of blacks who voted for him in 2008 against polls of blacks who will vote for him today. The polls on average seem to show a 3-4% drop - from about 95% in 2008 to about 91-2% today.

    When you take all the various voting blocks with whom he's lost support and analyze it by the demographics for each group, it spells big problems for the O.

    His biggest problem IMHO is not the black voter loss but the blue collar whites who make up far greater numbers and will have a far greater impact on the eventual outcome.
     
  10. swizzlee
    Offline

    swizzlee RedWhiteAndBlue

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    727
    Thanks Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    on a mountain
    Ratings:
    +124
    Popularity in presidential elections.......

    is only popular as a deciding factor among the true partisans or the truly brain-dead.

    The people who are serious about their politics and the people who will decide this election decide on the issues and who is felt to be more capable of dealing with them. Popularity won't fix our economy.

    Obama is indeed losing a percentage of the black vote along with loses by various percentages in other voting blocs. If he were holding on to all those who voted for him in 2008, he would be running on average 3 pts ahead of Romney. He isn't. Because he's lost about 2-3% of his base. And it doesn't matter at all what the polls show in any of the states today.

    You are trying to make an argument over statistics as they exist today. Tomorrow is never the same as today.

    Romney's "plan" straight from the Dem playbook and swallowed whole by a brain-dead partisan living in la-la land?

    Actually the rest of your post is also coming straight from la-la land.

    You have presented your argument,what there is of it, based on today's reality being tomorrow's reality. And that never works.
     

Share This Page