Neck and Neck

Discussion in 'Politics' started by beretta304, Sep 6, 2012.

  1. beretta304
    Offline

    beretta304 BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Messages:
    8,664
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    A Saner Place
    Ratings:
    +73
    For all practical purposes the race is still too close for either to claim victory.

    The question is why?

    If Obama is a man of the people and Romney out of touch...

    If Obamacare is wanted by so many Americans.

    If Michelle is Mrs. Wonderful but Ann Romney is a Stepford Wife.

    If Obama is likable, Romney is not.

    If Dems are the future and Republicans are the past.

    If there are more registered Dems than Republicans.

    If Obama was a successful Senator and Romney a failed Governor.

    I could go on...

    So why isn't a so called great President neck and neck with a so called weak candidate.

    BTW, Obama said after Eastwood's speech Republicans are living n the past YET he drags out Clinton whose shoes he isn't fit to shine.

    He should be way out in front especially since the Dems swear up and down that his policies are working.
     
  2. Shelzin
    Offline

    Shelzin Equal Opportunity Asshole

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    2,575
    Thanks Received:
    355
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings:
    +356
    That is a great question.

    I think it's because a bunch of republicans chose the wrong candidate to run against him.
     
  3. beretta304
    Offline

    beretta304 BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Messages:
    8,664
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    A Saner Place
    Ratings:
    +73
    If the Republicans chose the wrong candidate then why isn't Obama way ahead. That's my point.
     
  4. JoeB131
    Offline

    JoeB131 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2011
    Messages:
    80,617
    Thanks Received:
    6,875
    Trophy Points:
    1,815
    Location:
    Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
    Ratings:
    +15,091
    Actually, it's probably not going to be close at all, and the media is doing its best to make it look close to keep interest.

    The last thing they want is 1996 where no one was paying much attention. That doesn't sell time on the newschannels.

    Fact is, Romney is trailing in 10 of 11 "Swing States" and he needs to take at least 8 of those back to have any real chance of winning.

    And the MSM Hasn't even gotten started on this guy yet.
     
  5. JoeB131
    Offline

    JoeB131 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2011
    Messages:
    80,617
    Thanks Received:
    6,875
    Trophy Points:
    1,815
    Location:
    Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
    Ratings:
    +15,091
    By all math, they should be way ahead, that's the point.

    Unemployment is too high. And that's usually a deal-killer even if everything else is going kind of well.

    But people don't like or trust Romney, for good reason. Slimy business practices, bizarre religion, lack of human empathy.

    When you have to spend your convention humanizing your robotic nominee, you are on the wrong track.
     
  6. Mac1958
    Offline

    Mac1958 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Messages:
    30,286
    Thanks Received:
    6,510
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    Independent Ave.
    Ratings:
    +20,527
    .

    Well, I'd try to break it down like this:

    • The economy is still in the shitter, but some blame Obama for that and some don't
    • Unemployment is still over eight, but some blame Obama for that and some don't
    • Obama is far more "likeable" than Romney
    • Obama has failed to deliver on his promises of "bringing people together"
    • Obama has failed to extricate us from Iraq & Afghanistan
    • A Republican president put us there in the first place
    • Romney is creepy
    • Obama's question about whether we want to go back to "what put us here" is perfectly fair
    • Tough to blame Obama for not getting things done when the GOP paralyzes everything
    • The Dems are jumping on the abortion issue to divert from the economy and that may work
    • The GOP are jumping on the God issue, we'll see if that works
    • The undecideds don't give two shits about what Rush, Rachel or their sheep are saying
    • The undecideds have a very low opinion of politicians in general, so partisan BS doesn't work on them

    Toss all that into a blender, set on high for 30 seconds, and you get a draw.

    .
     
  7. Shelzin
    Offline

    Shelzin Equal Opportunity Asshole

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    2,575
    Thanks Received:
    355
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings:
    +356
    Oh... No... See... *I* think that 4 years of a shit presidency that Obama has shown should mean whoever ran against him would basically be a shoe in.

    But this is just like Bush's second term when Kerry ran against him. What the fuck were the democrats thinking by going with Kerry?

    Well... Here it's the same way I think. What the fuck were the republicans thinking when they went with Willard?
     
  8. beretta304
    Offline

    beretta304 BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Messages:
    8,664
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    A Saner Place
    Ratings:
    +73
    However if an incumbent... truly is a great success, then there would not be such a divide. Hence he should be way ahead.
     
  9. Mac1958
    Offline

    Mac1958 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Messages:
    30,286
    Thanks Received:
    6,510
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    Independent Ave.
    Ratings:
    +20,527

    But I thought he should be way behind because unemployment is over 8%.

    Consider both sides.

    .
     
  10. beretta304
    Offline

    beretta304 BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Messages:
    8,664
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    A Saner Place
    Ratings:
    +73
    That much I agree with you on. After 4 years the Republicans should have had a stronger candidate.

    But again, if he's so weak and the incumbent so succesful as the Dems claim..why not a bigger margin?
     

Share This Page