Gallup state numbers predict huge Obama loss

[rightwinger]

Approval numbers are down for Government as a whole. And rightfully so. As bad as Obamas approval numbers are, they are still higher than the numbers for Congress, the Republicans, the Tea Party or head to head against Romney

 

[RDD_1210]

I totally agree with you that Romney is a progressive...

However I doubt democrats would vote for him since he is painted as the devil just because he claims hes a republican.

Romney says the right shit sometimes but that doesn't mean he will apply his ideas.

I prefer Paul, however I'm voting against Obama - If I have to vote for Romney I will because I want Obama **** and his communist and oppressive Czars the **** out of there, a long with his tyrannical and oppressive DOJ..

"oppressive czars". LOL!

You're posts are the gift that keep on giving.

How the **** are they not oppressive?

Not to mention in what universe are Czars even legal?

How are they?

What universe did they not exist before Obama?

I love how everything is an issue NOW that it happens under Obama (debt, deficit, debt ceiling, czars) It's only an issue now for some odd reason.

 

[Mr.Nick]

As mentioned above, there are many who don't approve of Obama's performance are still going to vote for him, there's no way in hell they'd vote for a Republican.

I'd need to see some empirical evidence that this method is accurate historically before I'd even begin to take it seriously.

Looks like standard partisan pap to me.

.

That is what makes this race so interesting....

As a libertarian I will without question admit that the ideology attracts a bunch of misguided weirdos that would otherwise have voted for Obama.

Ron Paul will be nominated thanks to the weirdo help and then will go on to beat the snot bubbles out of Obama.

If idiotic tyrannical weirdo lunatics who would otherwise vote authoritarian - or I mean democrat want to help nominate Paul that is fine with me..

 

[California Girl]

He is in some deep shit.

Even Hillary Clinton walked away, and many democrats are quietly opposing him..

I doubt many democrats would flip script and vote for a republican other than Ron Paul, however I'm sure many just wont vote or will vote Ron Paul or for Mickey Mouse as write-ins.

Actually, that's where Romney's 'he's a liberal disguised as a conservative' may well come into play. Center dems may well prefer Romney to Obama.

I totally agree with you that Romney is a progressive...

However I doubt democrats would vote for him since he is painted as the devil just because he claims hes a republican.

Romney says the right shit sometimes but that doesn't mean he will apply his ideas.

I prefer Paul, however I'm voting against Obama - If I have to vote for Romney I will because I want Obama **** and his communist and oppressive Czars the **** out of there, a long with his tyrannical and oppressive DOJ..

There is nothing 'progressive' about Romney. He is, however, a practical conservative - like I am. I am personally conservative but I don't want to force my way on others - a fundamentally true conservative approach. Romney can and does work bi-partisanly, he knows how to get a rational balanced approach to work for both 'sides'.

I like his ideas... I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Valox]

RCP shows Obama with 229 electoral votes, the Republican candidate with 191, and a toss up of 118.
RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Battle for White House

In the general election between Romney and Obama, Obama only edges out Romney by 2.2% points.
RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - General Election: Romney vs. Obama

There is still plenty of time, a lot of room for blunders, and a lot of room for unknowns combined with a very precarious economy.

 

[jillian]

Actually, that's where Romney's 'he's a liberal disguised as a conservative' may well come into play. Center dems may well prefer Romney to Obama.

I totally agree with you that Romney is a progressive...

However I doubt democrats would vote for him since he is painted as the devil just because he claims hes a republican.

Romney says the right shit sometimes but that doesn't mean he will apply his ideas.

I prefer Paul, however I'm voting against Obama - If I have to vote for Romney I will because I want Obama **** and his communist and oppressive Czars the **** out of there, a long with his tyrannical and oppressive DOJ..

There is nothing 'progressive' about Romney. He is, however, a practical conservative - like I am. I am personally conservative but I don't want to force my way on others - a fundamentally true conservative approach. Romney can and does work bi-partisanly, he knows how to get a rational balanced approach to work for both 'sides'.

I like his ideas... I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.

and by practical, you mean what? that he says whatever will get him elected?

i suppose that's practical.

me, i wouldn't take chances and vote for someone who thinks it's ok to ban birth control

 

[Dr.Drock]

I totally agree with you that Romney is a progressive...

However I doubt democrats would vote for him since he is painted as the devil just because he claims hes a republican.

Romney says the right shit sometimes but that doesn't mean he will apply his ideas.

I prefer Paul, however I'm voting against Obama - If I have to vote for Romney I will because I want Obama **** and his communist and oppressive Czars the **** out of there, a long with his tyrannical and oppressive DOJ..

There is nothing 'progressive' about Romney. He is, however, a practical conservative - like I am. I am personally conservative but I don't want to force my way on others - a fundamentally true conservative approach. Romney can and does work bi-partisanly, he knows how to get a rational balanced approach to work for both 'sides'.

I like his ideas... I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.

and by practical, you mean what? that he says whatever will get him elected?

i suppose that's practical.

me, i wouldn't take chances and vote for someone who thinks it's ok to ban birth control

you don't think Obama said whatever would get him elected?


What do you think he'd choose if given the following 2 choices in a hypothetical scenario.

1.) Tell the truth and lose the election

2.) Lie and win the election.

 

[jillian]

A... way too early for that kind of prediction
B... Historically, how has Gallup been predicting the results using the same criteria?

A. I agree.
B. not very well...

C. Reality: We don't even know who the nominee is yet. Gingrich is going to run the southern primaries. And if Romney keeps saying things like the "poor don't matter", he's not going to be very marketable.

The current state of things:

RealClearPolitics - President Obama vs. Republican Candidates

 

[Oldstyle]

He didn't run on accomplishments in '08, he won't run on accomplishments in '12, those who didn't care he didn't have any accomplishments in '08 won't care that he has none in '12.

Sad to say, but he'll win easily again in my opinion. Not that I care if it's him or one of the liberals the republican party props up, Romney or Gingrich.

I have to respectfully disagree with you on this, Doc. Obama's run in '08 was remarkable BECAUSE he didn't have a record. He ran as this kind of blank piece of paper onto which people projected what they hoped he would be. That's no longer the case after 3 years of governing. The electorate has a much better idea of what Barack Obama's strengths and weaknesses are...what HE is. It's not a vague notion of "Change You Can Believe In" this time around. It's his policies...many of which have not been successful against his opponent's proposed policies. No blank slate this time. I think he's in deep trouble unless the economy turns around and I don't see that happening in the next nine months. It's much more likely that trouble in Europe or the Middle East will make things worse rather than better.

 

[Mr.Nick]

"oppressive czars". LOL!

You're posts are the gift that keep on giving.

How the **** are they not oppressive?

Not to mention in what universe are Czars even legal?

How are they?

What universe did they not exist before Obama?

I love how everything is an issue NOW that it happens under Obama (debt, deficit, debt ceiling, czars) It's only an issue now for some odd reason.

I don't even know why they exist - they have no purpose other than talking shit.

Are you dumb enough to believe I somehow agreed with Czars under Bush??

WTF man...

You think I'm partisan?

I'm NOT, unlike most progressives who were bitching about the Patriot Act but not support it for example. Or those that labeled GW a warmonger and are now fine with war because their democrat leader and savior commits the act..

I'm not that type of person - that shit is for idiots who lack ideological standards - and that is what makes them partisan.

It's not about what has been done - it's about who did it.

 

[Dr.Drock]

He didn't run on accomplishments in '08, he won't run on accomplishments in '12, those who didn't care he didn't have any accomplishments in '08 won't care that he has none in '12.

Sad to say, but he'll win easily again in my opinion. Not that I care if it's him or one of the liberals the republican party props up, Romney or Gingrich.

I have to respectfully disagree with you on this, Doc. Obama's run in '08 was remarkable BECAUSE he didn't have a record. He ran as this kind of blank piece of paper onto which people projected what they hoped he would be. That's no longer the case after 3 years of governing. The electorate has a much better idea of what Barack Obama's strengths and weaknesses are...what HE is. It's not a vague notion of "Change You Can Believe In" this time around. It's his policies...many of which have not been successful against his opponent's proposed policies. No blank slate this time. I think he's in deep trouble unless the economy turns around and I don't see that happening in the next nine months. It's much more likely that trouble in Europe or the Middle East will make things worse rather than better.

Agree to disagree, I've yet to talk to someone who said "I voted for Obama in '08 but won't in '12."

 

[DiamondDave]

I keep telling people that Obama vs. Romney is not the cakewalk the Left keeps boasting. Obama is in some real trouble.

Unfortunately he will get a boost from the Paul-bots who either sit at home, write Paul in, or urge him to run 3rd party.

Well yes, that could happen. But the Neocons did that to themselves. They certainly haven't been kind to Ron Paul and his supporters. I suggest they try and mend fences with him. They're gonna need him and his supporters come November.

I said all along.... the guy is a loon when it comes to foreign policy... but if some candidate offers and Paul accepts to work a position overseeing the reduction of government or government spending... that could be a winning situation

But if no such thing happens.. there will be plenty of looney minions that can throw a monkey wrench into things with funky voting (writeins, etc)..

 

[Mr.Nick]

There is nothing 'progressive' about Romney. He is, however, a practical conservative - like I am. I am personally conservative but I don't want to force my way on others - a fundamentally true conservative approach. Romney can and does work bi-partisanly, he knows how to get a rational balanced approach to work for both 'sides'.

I like his ideas... I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.

and by practical, you mean what? that he says whatever will get him elected?

i suppose that's practical.

me, i wouldn't take chances and vote for someone who thinks it's ok to ban birth control

you don't think Obama said whatever would get him elected?


What do you think he'd choose if given the following 2 choices in a hypothetical scenario.

1.) Tell the truth and lose the election

2.) Lie and win the election.

The correct answer for that is #2...

That would go for most politicians in any election.

 

[Mr.Nick]

There is nothing 'progressive' about Romney. He is, however, a practical conservative - like I am. I am personally conservative but I don't want to force my way on others - a fundamentally true conservative approach. Romney can and does work bi-partisanly, he knows how to get a rational balanced approach to work for both 'sides'.

I like his ideas... I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.

and by practical, you mean what? that he says whatever will get him elected?

i suppose that's practical.

me, i wouldn't take chances and vote for someone who thinks it's ok to ban birth control

you don't think Obama said whatever would get him elected?


What do you think he'd choose if given the following 2 choices in a hypothetical scenario.

1.) Tell the truth and lose the election

2.) Lie and win the election.

The correct answer for that is #2 Alex. Too bad it wasn't a daily double ...

That would go for most politicians in any election.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Actually, that's where Romney's 'he's a liberal disguised as a conservative' may well come into play. Center dems may well prefer Romney to Obama.

I totally agree with you that Romney is a progressive...

However I doubt democrats would vote for him since he is painted as the devil just because he claims hes a republican.

Romney says the right shit sometimes but that doesn't mean he will apply his ideas.

I prefer Paul, however I'm voting against Obama - If I have to vote for Romney I will because I want Obama **** and his communist and oppressive Czars the **** out of there, a long with his tyrannical and oppressive DOJ..

There is nothing 'progressive' about Romney. He is, however, a practical conservative - like I am. I am personally conservative but I don't want to force my way on others - a fundamentally true conservative approach. Romney can and does work bi-partisanly, he knows how to get a rational balanced approach to work for both 'sides'.

I like his ideas... I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Ever hear of "Romneycare" then alleged "conservatives" bash Obamacare then support Romney???

What the ****???

He's a socialist prick ****..

 

[Mr.Nick]

Romney is the type of guy that would compromise on socialism just as long as he was allowed to keep his money in the deal..

Romney is an elitist...

Money doesn't make you an elitist however money + attitude does...

I have nothing against people with money, however I have something against fake people and liars.

I don't like Newt either, however he is more honest than Romney...

I think Newt has a bit of spine, Romney is nothing more than a shill...

 

[Dr.Drock]

I totally agree with you that Romney is a progressive...

However I doubt democrats would vote for him since he is painted as the devil just because he claims hes a republican.

Romney says the right shit sometimes but that doesn't mean he will apply his ideas.

I prefer Paul, however I'm voting against Obama - If I have to vote for Romney I will because I want Obama **** and his communist and oppressive Czars the **** out of there, a long with his tyrannical and oppressive DOJ..

There is nothing 'progressive' about Romney. He is, however, a practical conservative - like I am. I am personally conservative but I don't want to force my way on others - a fundamentally true conservative approach. Romney can and does work bi-partisanly, he knows how to get a rational balanced approach to work for both 'sides'.

I like his ideas... I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Ever hear of "Romneycare" then alleged "conservatives" bash Obamacare then support Romney???

What the ****???

He's a socialist prick ****..

Exactly, it'll be the father of Obamacare (Romney) vs the man signed on to it (Obama).

Romney will only expand on Obamacare. Go by actions, not words.

 

[Mr.Nick]

There is nothing 'progressive' about Romney. He is, however, a practical conservative - like I am. I am personally conservative but I don't want to force my way on others - a fundamentally true conservative approach. Romney can and does work bi-partisanly, he knows how to get a rational balanced approach to work for both 'sides'.

I like his ideas... I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Ever hear of "Romneycare" then alleged "conservatives" bash Obamacare then support Romney???

What the ****???

He's a socialist prick ****..

Exactly, it'll be the father of Obamacare (Romney) vs the man signed on to it (Obama).

Romney will only expand on Obamacare. Go by actions, not words.

Don't get me wrong I'm a right-leaning (morally) individual. However people would have to be out of their minds to vote for a guy like Romney.

Given his track record it is amazing how he can just stand up on a podium or soapbox and pretend like he is a realistic candidate..

He's the type of asshole that could be guilted into anything.... Hes a hypocrite and a pansy.

Romney is more concerned with his own image than he is with leading this country and actually solving problems - both social and economic.

 

[skookerasbil]

I would be concerned if it were actual Obama vs Romney numbers rather than just Obama approval numbers

You had me worried there at first

Right s0n.........but do me a favor please. Make sure to take a gander in here on election night. I got a couple of gay MSPAINT Photobucket Classics already geared up for you, Shaman, Truthmatters and a couple more lefty bozo's who are going to wake up on November 7th with dick........and I'm going to be here rubbing salt in the misery wound that is going to be as big as a black hole for the k00ks.

I cant wait.....this shit cant come soon enough for me..........sending this Keynesian BS policies to the mothball bin for at least 2 generations.

 

[skookerasbil]

Until about 10 days ago, I didnt think Romney had it in him to take the fight to a Chicago taught president.
But now Im thinking this guy Romney can be a real mofu and ruthless as hell just like this fraud of a president we have. Its all good..........I cant wait to see the ad's.