Neck and Neck

[beretta304]

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.

 

[Shelzin]

That is a great question.

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

 

[beretta304]

That is a great question.

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

If the Republicans chose the wrong candidate then why isn't Obama way ahead. That's my point.

 

[JoeB131]

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.

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.

 

[JoeB131]

That is a great question.

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

If the Republicans chose the wrong candidate then why isn't Obama way ahead. That's my point.

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.

 

[Mac1958]

.

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.

.

 

[Shelzin]

That is a great question.

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

If the Republicans chose the wrong candidate then why isn't Obama way ahead. That's my point.

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?

 

[beretta304]

.

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.

.

However if an incumbent... truly is a great success, then there would not be such a divide. Hence he should be way ahead.

 

[Mac1958]

.

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.

.

However if an incumbent... truly is a great success, then there would not be such a divide. Hence he should be way ahead.

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

Consider both sides.

.

 

[beretta304]

That is a great question.

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

If the Republicans chose the wrong candidate then why isn't Obama way ahead. That's my point.

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?

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?

 

[beretta304]

.

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.

.

However if an incumbent... truly is a great success, then there would not be such a divide. Hence he should be way ahead.

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

Consider both sides.

.

That's a very valid and hard to argue point. There are reasons but if mentioned, then we will here the cry of racism chanted all day long.

 

[Shelzin]

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?

*whispers*

Democrats are full of shit too.

 

[JoeB131]

.

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.

.

However if an incumbent... truly is a great success, then there would not be such a divide. Hence he should be way ahead.

So Romney isn't failing as miserably as he should be and you consider this progress.

Hey, guy, you nominated a weird Mormon Robot, who should be winning, and he ain't.

 

[Mac1958]

.

I'd add one more to my little list, above:

• Many undecideds can't get one thing out of their head: A vote for Romney is a vote for the Tea Party.

 

[beretta304]

.

I'd add one more to my little list, above:

• Many undecideds can't get one thing out of their head: A vote for Romney is a vote for the Tea Party.

Maybe. It's the characterization of the Tea Party more than the reality of what they stand for.

 

[Shelzin]

.

I'd add one more to my little list, above:

• Many undecideds can't get one thing out of their head: A vote for Romney is a vote for the Tea Party.

Maybe. It's the characterization of the Tea Party more than the reality of what they stand for.

Well... I have very little doubt, although he would likely never say it, Ron cringes every time someone says he's the father of the Tea Party.

 

[beretta304]

.

I'd add one more to my little list, above:

• Many undecideds can't get one thing out of their head: A vote for Romney is a vote for the Tea Party.

Maybe. It's the characterization of the Tea Party more than the reality of what they stand for.

Well... I have very little doubt, although he would likely never say it, Ron cringes every time someone says he's the father of the Tea Party.

Using specifics what's so terrible about the Tea Party?

 

[Mac1958]

Maybe. It's the characterization of the Tea Party more than the reality of what they stand for.

Well... I have very little doubt, although he would likely never say it, Ron cringes every time someone says he's the father of the Tea Party.

Using specifics what's so terrible about the Tea Party?

.

I could provide a list of things the Tea Party has done and said that make the undecideds think twice, but I suspect you would agree with all of them. The short answer is, undecideds probably aren't big Tea Party fans.

.

 

[beretta304]

Well... I have very little doubt, although he would likely never say it, Ron cringes every time someone says he's the father of the Tea Party.

Using specifics what's so terrible about the Tea Party?

.

I could provide a list of things the Tea Party has done and said that make the undecideds think twice, but I suspect you would agree with all of them. The short answer is, undecideds probably aren't big Tea Party fans.

.

Likewise the undecideds will be doing a like of thinking twice regarding Obama as well. maybe moreso.

 

[JoeB131]

.

I'd add one more to my little list, above:

• Many undecideds can't get one thing out of their head: A vote for Romney is a vote for the Tea Party.

Maybe. It's the characterization of the Tea Party more than the reality of what they stand for.

NO, I think most people have the Teabaggers pegged about right.