Obama's stock plummets on Intrade, Romney's rising

[Conservative]

Intrade - Markets
Currently, on the Intrade 2012 Presidential Winner board, Obama has dropped to 59.5% chance of winning in November, down from 78% just before the debate against Romney.

Romney, meanwhile, has gone from 21% just before the debate with Obama, up to 40.6%.

Yeah, it's completely non-scientific, but it's interesting none the less.

Side note:

RCP, Romney is 1 point up over Obama in the average... ahead in Florida, North Carolina, Colorado, & Missouri, and is within 2.5 in Ohio, Wisconsin, Virginia and New Hampshire. As for the electoral map on RCP, Romney has pulled to within 20 of Obama... 201-181 (swing states).

Winning the swing states he's ahead in now would give Romney 254, needing only 16 more to win. Ohio alone would give it to Romney. If he doesn't get Ohio, then any combination of Wisconsin, Virginia & New Hampshire would give it to Romney.


The fat lady has not sung, libtards. Don't go renting your tux/gown for the inaugural ball just yet.

 

[Wroberson]

The bubble is coming...

 

[decker]

sign that you guys are heading for victory here. Romney got the big mo .

 

[Saigon]

I heard an interesting rumour that some European banks will downgrade American investments if Romney wins because his economic policies are seen as being bad for investment.

Remember when tax-and-spend Democrats were a worse economic option than Republicans?

 

[decker]

I heard an interesting rumour that some European banks will downgrade American investments if Romney wins because his economic policies are seen as being bad for investment.

Remember when tax-and-spend Democrats were a worse economic option than Republicans?

Well not sure about that but from uk point of view just having conservative in charge does not mean your ecnomey will improve
Our conservative prime minster david cameron not done much to improve job growth. In fact his cutting agenda hardly grown the ecnomey at all. cutting does not mean job grow .

 

[Saigon]

Decker -

I think Cameron is suffering from similar problems to Obama; as are most of the worlds leaders. Everywhere we look there is rising unemployment, sluggish growth and a lack of consumer confidence.

I can see Cameron losing the next election as a result of that.

 

[Decus]

I responded with this to a post by Decker but believe that it applies to what you are alluding to Saigon.

"Osbourne recently spoke of a triple threat to the global economy. The continued growth of US debt, uncertainty in the Eurozone and a slowdown in emerging market economies. Unfortunately, Osbourne is not the only one to say this.
The battle being waged to set this right is between those advocating that austerity measures be taken, versus those that see the way forward by stimulating economies through continued debt spending.

If you believe a recent IMF assessment, increasing taxes and curtailing spending will lead to falling GDP growth and require governments to borrow more, thereby increasing their debt. All seem to agree however that debt in an economic time bomb, with only two options available: reduce it or deal with the consequences."

Personally I think we've reached the point of no return. The debt has to be dealt with and no amount of manipulation or "kicking the can down the road" will avoid having to face a severe recession or even depression in order to reset the economy.

 

[decker]

Decker -

I think Cameron is suffering from similar problems to Obama; as are most of the worlds leaders. Everywhere we look there is rising unemployment, sluggish growth and a lack of consumer confidence.

I can see Cameron losing the next election as a result of that.

well he not very popular in the uk. Like all world leaders they all faced struggle from either poltical views to improve a sluggish ecnomey. Cutting or spending does not cure the promblem. But i think his goverment have cut far to fast.

i think cameron is very lucky to face such a weak labour oppostion leader. For me ed milliband is not a leader and frankly i wish labour party had someone who looked like one at the moment. Country don,t love the conservatives but can see him winning reelection due to labour weak leader.

 

[decker]

I responded with this to a post by Decker but believe that it applies to what you are alluding to Saigon.

"Osbourne recently spoke of a triple threat to the global economy. The continued growth of US debt, uncertainty in the Eurozone and a slowdown in emerging market economies. Unfortunately, Osbourne is not the only one to say this.
The battle being waged to set this right is between those advocating that austerity measures be taken, versus those that see the way forward by stimulating economies through continued debt spending.

If you believe a recent IMF assessment, increasing taxes and curtailing spending will lead to falling GDP growth and require governments to borrow more, thereby increasing their debt. All seem to agree however that debt in an economic time bomb, with only two options available: reduce it or deal with the consequences."

Personally I think we've reached the point of no return. The debt has to be dealt with and no amount of manipulation or "kicking the can down the road" will avoid having to face a severe recession or even depression in order to reset the economy.

your right that we need to tackle the debt. But you don,t cut tat the pace osbourne has and then not have a plan for growth. he basically saying that we puts all our eggs into private sector and hope that provides growth. The promblem with that view is not really worked as no more jobs in uk private sector then public sector.

also it inconsitant approch. he willing to target normal people but yet does not target the banks that put us into this recession.

 

[Decus]

I probably shouldn't be repeating posts but one more time.

Thanks Decker. I appreciate your views. I don't think Romney is the solution either but Obama seems even more reckless in his inexperience. I also do not believe that this issue will be resolved by increasing taxes (ie: more taxes, less GDP growth - more debt).
We have to create a system wherein you don't have to rob the next generation in order to meet the needs of the present generation. We talk quite abit these days regarding sustainable development but have yet to address the issue of sustainable government. The principle is the same: to leave something better for the next generation

 

[decker]

I probably shouldn't be repeating posts but one more time.

Thanks Decker. I appreciate your views. I don't think Romney is the solution either but Obama seems even more reckless in his inexperience. I also do not believe that this issue will be resolved by increasing taxes (ie: more taxes, less GDP growth - more debt).
We have to create a system wherein you don't have to rob the next generation in order to meet the needs of the present generation. We talk quite abit these days regarding sustainable development but have yet to address the issue of sustainable government. The principle is the same: to leave something better for the next generation

thanks and i will avoid doing so either. like i said you need a balanced approch and if romney wins i hope he does not follow our conservative goverment approch of cutting to fast

 

[Saigon]

I think several conservative governments around the world have done what Cameron has done and basically used the recession as an excuse for cutting services they may have wanted to cut anyway.

There may be some value in that, but I also think Cameron has cut too much - and without notable success.

Given Romney's economic policies amount to slashing taxes and pumping money into the military I would imagine even less growth in the US as a result should be win.

 

[decker]

I think several conservative governments around the world have done what Cameron has done and basically used the recession as an excuse for cutting services they may have wanted to cut anyway.

There may be some value in that, but I also think Cameron has cut too much - and without notable success.

Given Romney's economic policies amount to slashing taxes and pumping money into the military I would imagine even less growth in the US as a result should be win.

Well this is what i am warning a potential romney white house about. If he follows the cutting agenda that many conservative goverment like ours have then you will not see quick growth any time soon. If you cut too fast that mean more unemployment which means that you have to create more jobs for those out of work,

now it right that debt need to be bought down in line with gdp but you need to have balanced approch to it. Cut spending but don,t do at it too quick a pace

 

[Saigon]

The thing that worries me most about Romney is the lack of genuine ideas.

Slashing taxes and funding the military seem like knee-jerk populist reactions that do nothing to solve the country's problems. If anything they will make them worse.

If desperate times call for desperate measures, it would be reassuring to at least see Romney suggesting some common sense methods of creating jobs or reducing the debt - even if they were a bit dramatic. Instead we get populism.

 

[decker]

The thing that worries me most about Romney is the lack of genuine ideas.

Slashing taxes and funding the military seem like knee-jerk populist reactions that do nothing to solve the country's problems. If anything they will make them worse.

If desperate times call for desperate measures, it would be reassuring to at least see Romney suggesting some common sense methods of creating jobs or reducing the debt - even if they were a bit dramatic. Instead we get populism.

i would hope he just doing it initally to please his own side and he govern from the center.

i am worried though that going down a policy of idea of cutting too fast and increasing military spending does not seem to me a way of helping create job growth. while miltary have more money, the private or public sector suffer as unemployment rises due to cuts to fast.

yes debt needs to be tackled but don,t cut as fast as our conservative prime minster has