Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: LurkerNoMore on November 05, 2012, 07:38:09 AM
-
was the most relevant reason for his failure?
The pathological lying?
The biggest "non" plan in the history of anything that was planned or required plans (that no specifics were ever shared about)?
The war on women?
The math that just doesn't add up no matter what?
Mitt's campaign itself declaring that Mitt didn't mean what he just said as soon as he finishes talking?
Sandy?
Bain capital?
Overt racism?
Auto bailout?
Romneycare?
The nerdy wonky VP pick?
General dislike that everyone has for Romney/Ryan as persons?
The positive economic news lately?
Anti-immigration sentiment?
Anti-union? Anti-gay? Anti-gun?
Lousy surrogates?
Loss of support from prominent Repubs and general dislike from his own party?
Christie traitorous turn with Obama?
Really, what's the whining and crying tomorrow night going to be about?
-
That the American people spoke.
Vote for love of country.
-
That it's Gods Will that Obama is to be POTUS a second term?
-
That more people want free stuff from the other taxpayers.
-
That more people want free stuff from the other taxpayers.
Like the fact the majority of gov't assistant recipients are Republicans?
-
this election comes down to non-white turnout.
if the turnout is 70-74% white, then Obama wins.
if the turnout is 74 to 78% white, then Romney wins.
The non-white vote is what determines everything. African-American & Hispanic turnout will determine Florida - and if Obama wins FL, it's over. If Romney wins FL, then he already has virgina, Colorado, and a few other swing states and he wins it, even without Ohio.
They showed a LOT of numbers comparing obama to bush 2004 - approval rating, nat'l tied, etc etc. And Kerry's negatives were high like Romney's.
I am predicting Romney delivers the upset due to poor turnout for Obama. While Obama is up to 67.4% on Intrade, he was at 95+% at this time in 2008. Just 2/1 favorite, I'd bet on the challenger.
-
Like the fact the majority of gov't assistant recipients are Republicans?
no way, this cannot be true.
-
That more people want free stuff from the other taxpayers.
53% of da popalation gotsa support the other 47%
-
no way, this cannot be true.
Whats always amusing to me, on Hotair.com, Free Republic, Newsbusters etc... you comb through the comments and you will ALWAYS find a few Republicans admitting they are on Welfare, Unemployment, Food Stamps and yet they are bitching about being on them and others being on them as well. Just last night I saw this on Newsbusters from a link posted here.
Its downright baffling and hilarious at the same time.
-
Whats always amusing to me, on Hotair.com, Free Republic, Newsbusters etc... you comb through the comments and you will ALWAYS find a few Republicans admitting they are on Welfare, Unemployment, Food Stamps and yet they are bitching about being on them and others being on them as well. Just last night I saw this on Newsbusters from a link posted here.
Its downright baffling and hilarious at the same time.
You are on hereditary welfare - who the fuck you think your kidding?
-
You are on hereditary welfare - who the fuck you think your kidding?
So money that you and your family have earned is now the new Welfare? I got ya.
-
So money that you and your family have earned is now the new Welfare? I got ya.
Romney earned every cent he has. Why is he vilified by Democrats?
-
So money that you and your family have earned is now the new Welfare? I got ya.
I have never gotten a penny in inheritance.
-
The excuse Repubs will tell themselves behind closed doors is that they need to do a better job of suppressing peoples access to vote. People are standing in line for 8 hours in Florida for early voting. You know that kills Repubs and they wish those people would just give up and go home. Thats the America that they prefer.
-
Romney earned every cent he has. Why is he vilified by Democrats?
What happened to George Romneys Millions and Millions? ???
What happened to Edward Roderick Davies, Ann Romneys fathers millions and millions? ???
-
obama was SO beatable. terrible economy, landslide in 2010, obamacare shoved down throats...
obama was incredibly unbeatable - Jeb/Christie would be leading by 7-8 points nationally right now.
At the same time, Romney was weaker than a popcorn fart... lifelong liberal who 'turned right' starting in 2010 when that got popular. He's the master of cheering whatever it popular... Ann Coulter called it right, so did santorum... he was the worst possible choice.... and obama should have been able to trounce him just for being such a piss-poor candidate who kept stepping in shit.
Both BO and MR have underachieved.
-
I have never gotten a penny in inheritance.
You just got government guaranteed student loans and mortgage and you earn your meager living thanks to the existence of a government institution (the court system)
-
You just got government guaranteed student loans and mortgage and you earn your meager living thanks to the existence of a government institution (the court system)
::)
As for this thread - I still do not see why you clowns are so confident considering an incumbent at sub 50% in most polls is bad bad bad news.
-
What happened to George Romneys Millions and Millions? ???
What happened to Edward Roderick Davies, Ann Romneys fathers millions and millions? ???
Add Paul Ryan and his wife to that list
-
What happened to George Romneys Millions and Millions? ???
What happened to Edward Roderick Davies, Ann Romneys fathers millions and millions? ???
Romney gave away his inheriticance
-
Romney gave away his inheriticance
oh ya he is so generous, all those fake charity contributions and off shore money holdings, stand up guy.
-
Romney gave away his inheriticance
bfd - he probably did it for the tax break
his dad died in 1995 and Romney was alreayd a multi millionaire
-
this election comes down to non-white turnout.
if the turnout is 70-74% white, then Obama wins.
if the turnout is 74 to 78% white, then Romney wins.
The non-white vote is what determines everything. African-American & Hispanic turnout will determine Florida - and if Obama wins FL, it's over. If Romney wins FL, then he already has virgina, Colorado, and a few other swing states and he wins it, even without Ohio.
They showed a LOT of numbers comparing obama to bush 2004 - approval rating, nat'l tied, etc etc. And Kerry's negatives were high like Romney's.
I am predicting Romney delivers the upset due to poor turnout for Obama. While Obama is up to 67.4% on Intrade, he was at 95+% at this time in 2008. Just 2/1 favorite, I'd bet on the challenger.
It doesn't have to be 70% white. If it's about 62-65% white, Romney wins it, especially with white male voters in his corner and the independents.
-
The excuse Repubs will tell themselves behind closed doors is that they need to do a better job of suppressing peoples access to vote. People are standing in line for 8 hours in Florida for early voting. You know that kills Repubs and they wish those people would just give up and go home. Thats the America that they prefer.
And the excuses for the Dems, if Romney wins will be........other than the usual "We wuz robbed" (close race) or "Americans are stupid and racist (blowout):
-
It doesn't have to be 70% white. If it's about 62-65% white, Romney wins it, especially with white male voters in his corner and the independents.
so you're saying white males will vote for the white male
why is that?
-
-
so you're saying white males will vote for the white male
why is that?
Throughout this campaign, we've heard all the talk about the gender gap, mainly with women. But, until recently, the media didn't bother talking about Obama losing BIG with men, particularly white men.
-
Throughout this campaign, we've heard all the talk about the gender gap, mainly with women. But, until recently, the media didn't bother talking about Obama losing BIG with men, particularly white men.
The progressive news outlets have been saying this since the start. A few months ago I even posted that Romney needed 61 percent of the white vote and that its not possible. You are just now figuring this out?
-
What happened to George Romneys Millions and Millions? ???
What happened to Edward Roderick Davies, Ann Romneys fathers millions and millions? ???
So all the money earned by Mitt in creating Bain and making it a profitable business is due to his father and grandfather?
It was a mirage. It was Mitt's grandfather and father who built Bain and were involved in the every day operations in order to make it a success
See how stupid you are.
-
So all the money earned by Mitt in creating Bain and making it a profitable business is due to his father and grandfather?
It was a mirage. It was Mitt's grandfather and father who built Bain and were involved in the every day operations in order to make it a success
See how stupid you are.
a lot of the opportunities he has in life certainly were
he alone though is responsible for destroying companies, shipping jobs overseas and evading taxes in the US
those are things his father never did
-
The progressive news outlets have been saying this since the start. A few months ago I even posted that Romney needed 61 percent of the white vote and that its not possible. You are just now figuring this out?
I posted that months ago. Look it up.
Now only is it possible, it's likely, considering Romney is killing Obama with independents (i.e. the CNN poll that has it tied, with Romney up 24 with independents, despite oversampling Dems by 11).
Romney's WAY ahead with white man and within arms' reach of Obama with women (ahead dramatically with married women).
-
so you're saying white males will vote for the white male
why is that?
Plenty of white males are the very same people who got Obama elected in 2008.
Plenty of white women voted for the liar in 2008.
Why should they be labeled racist for realizing Obama is a failure?
-
a lot of the opportunities he has in life certainly were
he alone though is responsible for destroying companies, shipping jobs overseas and evading taxes in the US
those are things his father never did
Right. Companies like Staples would have a different point of view. And of course, lets ignore the millions of Stim dollars that went to create jobs overseas. There is a reason why Obama wouldn't touch that subject.
Again, how did his father's millions, help him into founding Bain and making it the success it became? The truth is they had nothing to do with his success. There are plenty of people born with a silver spoon in thier mouth who never created anything of their own and did nothing with their lives.
Hell, Obama wasn't born rich and he has yet to create a single job.
-
Plenty of white males are the very same people who got Obama elected in 2008.
Plenty of white women voted for the liar in 2008.
Why should they be labeled racist for realizing Obama is a failure?
I never called anyone a racist
do you think some white males are voting for Romney because he is white?
Hasn't that been offered as the reason why black people are voting for Obama (not saying that you've said that but we've heard it from plenty of people on this board and from disgraced politicians like Sununu)
-
Right. Companies like Staples would have a different point of view. And of course, lets ignore the millions of Stim dollars that went to create jobs overseas. There is a reason why Obama wouldn't touch that subject.
Again, how did his father's millions, help him into founding Bain and making it the success it became? The truth is they had nothing to do with his success. There are plenty of people born with a silver spoon in thier mouth who never created anything of their own and did nothing with their lives.
Hell, Obama wasn't born rich and he has yet to create a single job.
sure - he didn't destroy every company he touched so I guess we should just ignore the ones that he did destroy (while making himself millions in the process)
Romneys fathers connections and money got him open doors and access
if you don't understand that this is how the world works then no need to go any further with this conversation
-
I never called anyone a racist
do you think some white males are voting for Romney because he is white?
Hasn't that been offered as the reason why black people are voting for Obama (not saying that you've said that but we've heard it from plenty of people on this board and from disgraced politicians like Sununu)
Yeah, there are some whites that are voting for Romney because he is white.
The problem is with Democrats generalizing racial overtones over the entire GOP party. When it is implied by them, by Democrats, that the ONLY reason the GOP want to oust Obama is because he is black. That the ONLY reasons people would vote for Romney is because he is white.
Then why so many whites voted for him in 2008? Obviously the racist rhetoric by Democrats is incorrect.
-
It doesn't have to be 70% white. If it's about 62-65% white, Romney wins it, especially with white male voters in his corner and the independents.
Disagree - the romney surrogate arguing with chuck todd today made a very good case for romney willing, but conceded if the non-white vote goes above 75%, it's a done deal... but that 70 to 74, and romney will have no problem winning.
If the vote is 62% white... that means it's 38% non-white - and that's beyond a win for obama, that's a landslide. Let's revisit this one in a day or three, it'll be interesting to see where it actually ends up.
-
sure - he didn't destroy every company he touched so I guess we should just ignore the ones that he did destroy (while making himself millions in the process)
Romneys fathers connections and money got him open doors and access
if you don't understand that this is how the world works then no need to go any further with this conversation
He created more companies and more JOBS than Obama has in his entire life. I guess we should ignore the thousands and thousands of jobs and the companies that he saved. Right?
If you don't understand that you need much more than connections and money to make it in this world, that you need vision, intelligence and thrive (that money by itself does not guarantee success), then you are more delusional than I thought.
-
Disagree - the romney surrogate arguing with chuck todd today made a very good case for romney willing, but conceded if the non-white vote goes above 75%, it's a done deal... but that 70 to 74, and romney will have no problem winning.
If the vote is 62% white... that means it's 38% non-white - and that's beyond a win for obama, that's a landslide. Let's revisit this one in a day or three, it'll be interesting to see where it actually ends up.
Not really!! Much of that non-white vote are in states that will easily go blue.
But, in the swing states, it's a different ball game. Look at Virginia, Ohio, and Florida. Obama's numbers (early voting) are down big time. I posted an article about the woes in Virginia. Here's the link.
http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/332157/tough-news-obama-early-voting-figures#
If Obama doesn't have that massive early voting gap to pad his lead, Romney will get the turnout on election day and likely beat him.
-
He created more companies and more JOBS than Obama has in his entire life. I guess we should ignore the thousands and thousands of jobs and the companies that he saved. Right?
If you don't understand that you need much more than connections and money to make it in this world, that you need vision, intelligence and thrive (that money by itself does not guarantee success), then you are more delusional than I thought.
well if you think a POTUS or his administration actually creates jobs then Obama administration has certainly created more jobs than Romney and it's a fact that he saved more jobs (think US auto industry and the associated supply chain) then Romney ever did
-
well if you think a POTUS or his administration actually creates jobs then Obama administration has certainly created more jobs than Romney and it's a fact that he saved more jobs (think US auto industry and the associated supply chain) then Romney ever did
http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2012/11/05/Madison-Fail-Obama-Springsteen-18K-Kerry-Springsteen-75K
-
well if you think a POTUS or his administration actually creates jobs then Obama administration has certainly created more jobs than Romney and it's a fact that he saved more jobs (think US auto industry and the associated supply chain) then Romney ever did
You just contradicted yourself. Democrats believe that a POTUS creates jobs. That is why they keep blaming Bush for the bad economy, even 4 years after he left office. If you support Obama you must accept the establish ideology of the Democratic party, that a POTUS does create jobs. Otherwise, why so critical of Bush?
But, here you are implying that the POTUS doesn't create jobs, while at the same time giving Obama credit for saving the auto industry. Which is the biggest lie ever. So how does he save anything, when he can't even create anything?
-
You just contradicted yourself. Democrats believe that a POTUS creates jobs. That is why they keep blaming Bush for the bad economy, even 4 years after he left office. If you support Obama you must accept the establish ideology of the Democratic party, that a POTUS does create jobs. Otherwise, why so critical of Bush?
But, here you are implying that the POTUS doesn't create jobs, while at the same time giving Obama credit for saving the auto industry. Which is the biggest lie ever. So how does he save anything, when he can't even create anything?
I said "if you think"
Merely claiming ownership of jobs created during one's administration has always seemed a bit suspect to me.
Jobs are created if someone has a great product or service and their is demand for said product or serivice
I don't see how any POTUS takes claim for creating a job unless their policies can be the direct cause and effect of the job (i.e. you get a tax break for hiring someone or some federal program was the impetus for the job such as infrastructure spending). I do give the Obama administration credit for savings tens of thousands of jobs throught the auto bailout (and the banking bailout for that matter) and from the stimuls and even from the HARP/HAMP program
-
A POTUS can create an environment that can lead to confidence in business owners to expand business and in turn hire more people.
Obama has been poison with all his regulations, pushing through Obamacare and the uncertainty of whether he will or won't raise taxes.
-
When Romney loses, history will say 333386's head exploded like a watermelon with a grenade inside.
-
A POTUS can create an environment that can lead to confidence in business owners to expand business and in turn hire more people.
Obama has been poison with all his regulations, pushing through Obamacare and the uncertainty of whether he will or won't raise taxes.
if he has been poison then why did the hemoraging of jobs that started under Bush come to a halt under Obama
Bush policies should have been good for the job creation environment and yet at the end of his term we were losing jobs at a faster pace then almost any other time in our history.
Romney will be no panacea for jobs. He'll have to actually show how is is going to reduce the deficit while simultaneously lowering taxes and increasing goverment spending. Lowering taxes might stimulate some demand but only in the middle and lower classes and tax ctus for them are very dubious at best
-
That the American people spoke.
Vote for love of country.
Agree. The people will have spoken tomorrow. Will be a sad day for the country if they give Obama another four years.
Regardless of the outcome, we need to support our leader and hope he is successful.
-
Agree. The people will have spoken tomorrow. Will be a sad day for the country if they give Obama another four years.
Regardless of the outcome, we need to support our leader and hope he is successful.
F that. He was never my leader and I hope he fails miserably since what is bad for Obama is good for america.
What obama wants is terrible for the average person in this country.
-
F that. He was never my leader and I hope he fails miserably since what is bad for Obama is good for america.
What obama wants is terrible for the average person in this country.
I don't support his mindset or most of what comes out of his mouth, but I don't want to see the country fail. If he is reelected, he needs to do what Clinton did and work with Republicans to get things done.
-
I don't support his mindset or most of what comes out of his mouth, but I don't want to see the country fail. If he is reelected, he needs to do what Clinton did and work with Republicans to get things done.
Jesus Christ dude - really? He has no intention of working w the GOP and what he wants is a disaster for this country.
I'm hoping for him to have a disastrous second term mired in scandal over libya, fast n furious etc.
Him succeeding equals amnesty, cap n trade, tax hikes, etc.
Fuck that and fuck him along w every stupid fuck voting for him. Only a turd would even consider voting for obama.
-
no way, this cannot be true.
I've been out canvassing a lot these past few weeks. I don't know which folks are on public assistance, but I find it interesting that the houses with a bunch of broken beater vehicles parked all over the front yards, weeds growing high, unpainted houses with garbage strewn everywhere are the one's where the contact information on my canvass contact sheet reads that they are Republican. I thought Republicans were rich folks. Guess there are some poor ones too.
-
F that. He was never my leader and I hope he fails miserably since what is bad for Obama is good for america.
What obama wants is terrible for the average person in this country.
What I find interesting about your posts in this thread is that you seem to be admitting defeat. Do you know something that no one else does? Granted the election looks really good for Obama right now, but like a lot of races, it is still very close. Anything can happen come Tuesday.
-
What I find interesting about your posts in this thread is that you seem to be admitting defeat. Do you know something that no one else does? Granted the election looks really good for Obama right now, but like a lot of races, it is still very close. Anything can happen come Tuesday.
Absolutely not - I have no idea what is going to happen to be honest.
I'm 50-50 right now but think Romney pulls it out. I think obama best case scenario is tight ev win while losing massive pop vote but mittens more likely winning.
If Obama loses the pop vote and wins ev by a hair it will be four more years of total chaos.
-
What happened to 52-47? You seemed so certain?
-
What happened to 52-47? You seemed so certain?
Sandy happened and i think the media created narrative that obama was doing a good job (which is total bs) gave him a point or so.
-
Jesus Christ dude - really? He has no intention of working w the GOP and what he wants is a disaster for this country.
I'm hoping for him to have a disastrous second term mired in scandal over libya, fast n furious etc.
Him succeeding equals amnesty, cap n trade, tax hikes, etc.
Fuck that and fuck him along w every stupid fuck voting for him. Only a turd would even consider voting for obama.
When I talk about him succeeding, I don't mean he should be able to push through things that can harm the country. I'm talking about him compromising and doing things that will help the country. I agree he probably won't, but my hope is he will do what is best for the country.
Hopefully I don't have to worry about that if the people do the right thing tomorrow.
-
F that. He was never my leader and I hope he fails miserably since what is bad for Obama is good for america.
What obama wants is terrible for the average person in this country.
If you live in the country as a citizen, then like it or not he is your leader. Don't delude yourself. Or else take your broke ass back to your home country with the rest of the Crytalians living there.
Anyone saying they hope the president fails - not matter what party he is affiliated with - needs no spin or excuses to convey what they really mean. His failure is YOUR failure as well. Hard to imagine you are a stupid enough fuck to want to hold back the entire country simply because your man obsession with Obama has gotten the best of your tiny little brain.
-
If you live in the country as a citizen, then like it or not he is your leader. Don't delude yourself. Or else take your broke ass back to your home country with the rest of the Crytalians living there.
Anyone saying they hope the president fails - not matter what party he is affiliated with - needs no spin or excuses to convey what they really mean. His failure is YOUR failure as well. Hard to imagine you are a stupid enough fuck to want to hold back the entire country simply because your man obsession with Obama has gotten the best of your tiny little brain.
If Obama fails on Cap n Trade? American taxpayers win
If Obama fails on Amnesty? American taxpayers win
If Obama fails on his war on fossil fuels ? American taxpayers win
If Obama fails on his islamization of the west and ME - we all win.
-
When I talk about him succeeding, I don't mean he should be able to push through things that can harm the country.
.
-
Andrea Mitchell: ‘If Pennsylvania Is In Play, Then This Is All Over For The President’(no filter!)
Mediaite/MSNBC ^ | November 5, 2012 | Andrea Mitchell
Posted on Monday, November 05, 2012 3:39:13 PM
While examining some possible Electoral College scenarios with NBC News White House Correspondent Chuck Todd, Andrea Mitchell wondered why President Barack Obama’s campaign would send former President Bill Clinton to Philadelphia if they were confident the Keystone State was unlikely to flip to Mitt Romney on Tuesday. “If Pennsylvania is in play, then this is all over for the president,” Mitchell said.
“Why would you send Bill Clinton to Philadelphia if you weren’t certain that the people of Philadelphia were going to turn out and you would have a Democratic victory,” Mitchell asked Todd.
(Excerpt) Read more at mediaite.com ...
-
Andrea Mitchell: ‘If Pennsylvania Is In Play, Then This Is All Over For The President’(no filter!)
Mediaite/MSNBC ^ | November 5, 2012 | Andrea Mitchell
Posted on Monday, November 05, 2012 3:39:13 PM
While examining some possible Electoral College scenarios with NBC News White House Correspondent Chuck Todd, Andrea Mitchell wondered why President Barack Obama’s campaign would send former President Bill Clinton to Philadelphia if they were confident the Keystone State was unlikely to flip to Mitt Romney on Tuesday. “If Pennsylvania is in play, then this is all over for the president,” Mitchell said.
“Why would you send Bill Clinton to Philadelphia if you weren’t certain that the people of Philadelphia were going to turn out and you would have a Democratic victory,” Mitchell asked Todd.
(Excerpt) Read more at mediaite.com ...
Obama is ahead in the polls in Pennsylvania by 3.8 points today. Doesn't look like this is too big a problem for him.
-
The excuse Repubs will tell themselves behind closed doors is that they need to do a better job of suppressing peoples access to vote. People are standing in line for 8 hours in Florida for early voting. You know that kills Repubs and they wish those people would just give up and go home. Thats the America that they prefer.
QFT
Good post!
-
I've been out canvassing a lot these past few weeks. I don't know which folks are on public assistance, but I find it interesting that the houses with a bunch of broken beater vehicles parked all over the front yards, weeds growing high, unpainted houses with garbage strewn everywhere are the one's where the contact information on my canvass contact sheet reads that they are Republican. I thought Republicans were rich folks. Guess there are some poor ones too.
maybe they are just pro-rape and forced pregnancies
-
Obama is ahead in the polls in Pennsylvania by 3.8 points today. Doesn't look like this is too big a problem for him.
Bill Clinton is in Philly, trying to rally the troops.....BIG PROBLEM!!!
Even Obama's deputy campaign manager is claiming that the race in PA has become "competitive".
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/11/05/cutter_pennsylvania_has_tightened_definitely_competitive.html
Pennsylvania...COMPETITI VE....THIS LATE?
-
Penn doesn't have the same level of early voting as OH, FL, and VA. Obama winnning all 3 handily. Romney needs SICK turnout tomorrow to win those places.
-
Penn doesn't have the same level of early voting as OH, FL, and VA. Obama winnning all 3 handily. Romney needs SICK turnout tomorrow to win those places.
Obama isn't winning handily in any of those states. And, I've posted the articles to prove it:
Tough News for Obama in Early Voting Figures
By Jim Geraghty
November 1, 2012 11:13 A.M.
Dave Wasserman of the Cook Political Report notes that the early vote in Virginia is not going the way the Obama campaign hoped: “Today’s new 10/31 numbers even more troubling for Obama. His best counties way off 2008 pace.” He elaborates that as of yesterday, 185,489 ballots had been cast in Obama localities, compared to 214,783 by this point in 2008, while 115,908 in McCain, compared to 117,224 in 2008.
He adds, “Obama strongholds Arlington –20.0%, Fairfax –20.9%, Richmond –13.7% (vs. just –9.2% statewide). Hmm . . .” and “In Romney strongholds, enthusiasm up. Hanover (33.1% Obama) turnout up 6.2%, Buchanan (coal country) up 14.5% vs. 2008.”
By the way, I will be quite surprised if Romney-Ryan doesn’t outpace McCain-Palin’s vote totals and percentages in northern Virginia by a healthy margin. I say that based on the GOP get-out-the-vote operations improving in the 2009 and 2010 elections, and the almost unbelievable numbers of A) Romney-Ryan signs (paid for by the Republican Party of Virginia) in neighborhoods like mine where Obama-Biden yard signs appeared standard-issue for all homeowners four years ago and B) George Allen for Senate yard signs.
In this morning’s Jolt, now in the hands of subscribers, I took a look at some indicators in Ohio, Wisconsin, and nationally.
Hey, remember how the Obama campaign’s fantastic get-out-the-vote operation was going to create this impregnable firewall of key swing states, and run up such an enormous advantage in the early vote that Romney would never be able to make up the difference?
First interesting indicator of the morning from early voting: I mentioned Tuesday that early voting in Cuyahoga County, Ohio — the Democrat vote stronghold that includes Cleveland — slipped behind the pace of 2008 after running ahead for the first twenty-eight days of early voting or so. (We don’t know how these early voters are voting, but Obama won this county 69 percent to 30 percent last time around, so we can presume he’s leading this cycle on a somewhat comparable rate.) Well, the early vote collapsed Tuesday and Wednesday. Of course, a big chunk of that dropoff is from the remains of Hurricane Sandy dumping snow and wind and miserable weather on the Cleveland area. But if we see early voting continue to be slow in these final days, it will be a bit of evidence that the Democrats’ get-out-the-early vote effort in Ohio isn’t really expanding their total share of the vote; they’re just getting their traditional Election Day voters to vote earlier.
The second interesting indicator from early voting:
Just as the presidential race is deadlocked in the campaign’s final days, the candidates are also running about even when it comes to the ground game. Voters nationally, as well those in the closely contested battleground states, report being contacted at about the same rates by each of the campaigns. And with a fifth of likely voters reporting already having cast their ballots, neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney has a clear advantage among early voters. This is in sharp contrast to early voting at this point four years ago, which favored Obama by a wide margin . . .
The Pew Research Center survey found that the race is even among all likely voters nationwide (47% Obama, 47% Romney). Unlike the last campaign, the race also is close among voters who say they have already voted.
In the poll, conducted Oct. 24-28, 19% of likely voters say they have already voted; that is unchanged from the same week in the 2008 campaign (Oct. 23-26, 2008). Currently, Romney holds a seven-point edge among early voters (50% to 43%); because of the small sample, this lead is not statistically significant. At this point four years ago, Obama led John McCain by 19 points (53% to 34%) among early voters.
Then there’s the third interesting indicator from early voting:
“If the election was held today, President Barack Obama would lose the state of Wisconsin because where his base is, we have not turned out the vote early,” Mayor Michael Hancock told a Democratic rally. “The suburbs and rural parts of Wisconsin — the Republican base — are voting. President Obama’s base has yet to go vote.
“We’ve got to get our people to go vote,” Hancock said.
Later Hancock talks to the Washington Examiner and explains,
“This is a very close race, and the point we’re trying to make is make sure the base shows up, turns out and begins to vote early,” Hancock said. “I saw where the votes were rolling in, and I said we’ve got to make sure that where the president’s base is, they get out and vote.”
First question: Just how many votes does the mayor of Denver stumping in Milwaukee bring out? “Hey, everybody, grab your friends and call your neighbors! Michael Hancock’s in town!” Are we sure this guy didn’t just want to take a trip to Milwaukee for some brats? I mean, isn’t Colorado a swing state?
Secondly, Hancock must have been briefed by somebody in the Obama campaign or the Wisconsin Democratic Party. So somebody is worried about the early vote in Wisconsin, at least so far!
http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/332157/tough-news-obama-early-voting-fi
Then, there's Ohio. As mentioned earlier, Obama is down about 155,000 early votes from 2008; conversely, Romney's up at least 108,000 from what McCain had, as of Thursday night (I've heard more recent numbers of 120,000 from Rove, earlier today, as of Saturday night).
That wipes out the margin by which Obama won Ohio in 2008.
And, as far as Florida goes, per Politico, Romney's right behind Obama in early voting with 4.3 million ballots in the coffer, thus far (Obama 43%; Romney 40%).
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83176.html
That's not handily winning by any measure; not to mention, Romney's beating Obama in Colorado.
-
These douchbags have all this data that Obama is in trouble and this is a tight race but...nooooooo, Obama in a landslide. As long as we hold the House, Obama's damage is mitigated. Not only does Obama need to loose but he needs to be smoked so the libs never take power again in this country. You libs hate Mitt...I view Obama as a traitor to the country and should spend the rest of his miserble life in a prison cell.
-
These douchbags have all this data that Obama is in trouble and this is a tight race but...nooooooo, Obama in a landslide. As long as we hold the House, Obama's damage is mitigated. Not only does Obama need to loose but he needs to be smoked so the libs never take power again in this country. You libs hate Mitt...I view Obama as a traitor to the country and should spend the rest of his miserble life in a prison cell.
I view the Republican congress as traitors to this country for focusing on seeking to end Obama's presidency while ignoring a struggling economy. Their obstructionism was the very definition of treason.
-
I view the Republican congress as traitors to this country for focusing on seeking to end Obama's presidency while ignoring a struggling economy. Their obstructionism was the very definition of treason.
You seem to forget two things:
One, it isn't a Republican Congress, just a Republican HOUSE (the other half of Congress is run by the Democrats.
Two, had Obama and the Dems not ignored our struggling economy, the Dems might not have lost the House in the first place.
-
I view the Republican congress as traitors to this country for focusing on seeking to end Obama's presidency while ignoring a struggling economy. Their obstructionism was the very definition of treason.
Stfu pedo.
-
I still think Romney will get the win tomorrow. I think it'll be a Dewey moment... I think it could be the retirement of Nate silver/538, etc. Dems just seem to have so much swagger, not good, they have to be desperate to win, and they aren't.
OR
I think it'll lead to a revolution in the GOP.... Tea party was awesome and powerful in 2010, but today? Repubs chose the moderate/RINO over all the tea party heroes, and losing to a VERY beatable obama? They need to figure out their identity.
-
Whats always amusing to me, on Hotair.com, Free Republic, Newsbusters etc... you comb through the comments and you will ALWAYS find a few Republicans admitting they are on Welfare, Unemployment, Food Stamps and yet they are bitching about being on them and others being on them as well. Just last night I saw this on Newsbusters from a link posted here.
Its downright baffling and hilarious at the same time.
Lol, I know someone that just got laid off voting Romney, I said you realize he wants to cut your unemployment right :D
-
Obama isn't winning handily in any of those states. And, I've posted the articles to prove it:
Tough News for Obama in Early Voting Figures
By Jim Geraghty
November 1, 2012 11:13 A.M.
Dave Wasserman of the Cook Political Report notes that the early vote in Virginia is not going the way the Obama campaign hoped: “Today’s new 10/31 numbers even more troubling for Obama. His best counties way off 2008 pace.” He elaborates that as of yesterday, 185,489 ballots had been cast in Obama localities, compared to 214,783 by this point in 2008, while 115,908 in McCain, compared to 117,224 in 2008.
He adds, “Obama strongholds Arlington –20.0%, Fairfax –20.9%, Richmond –13.7% (vs. just –9.2% statewide). Hmm . . .” and “In Romney strongholds, enthusiasm up. Hanover (33.1% Obama) turnout up 6.2%, Buchanan (coal country) up 14.5% vs. 2008.”
By the way, I will be quite surprised if Romney-Ryan doesn’t outpace McCain-Palin’s vote totals and percentages in northern Virginia by a healthy margin. I say that based on the GOP get-out-the-vote operations improving in the 2009 and 2010 elections, and the almost unbelievable numbers of A) Romney-Ryan signs (paid for by the Republican Party of Virginia) in neighborhoods like mine where Obama-Biden yard signs appeared standard-issue for all homeowners four years ago and B) George Allen for Senate yard signs.
In this morning’s Jolt, now in the hands of subscribers, I took a look at some indicators in Ohio, Wisconsin, and nationally.
Hey, remember how the Obama campaign’s fantastic get-out-the-vote operation was going to create this impregnable firewall of key swing states, and run up such an enormous advantage in the early vote that Romney would never be able to make up the difference?
First interesting indicator of the morning from early voting: I mentioned Tuesday that early voting in Cuyahoga County, Ohio — the Democrat vote stronghold that includes Cleveland — slipped behind the pace of 2008 after running ahead for the first twenty-eight days of early voting or so. (We don’t know how these early voters are voting, but Obama won this county 69 percent to 30 percent last time around, so we can presume he’s leading this cycle on a somewhat comparable rate.) Well, the early vote collapsed Tuesday and Wednesday. Of course, a big chunk of that dropoff is from the remains of Hurricane Sandy dumping snow and wind and miserable weather on the Cleveland area. But if we see early voting continue to be slow in these final days, it will be a bit of evidence that the Democrats’ get-out-the-early vote effort in Ohio isn’t really expanding their total share of the vote; they’re just getting their traditional Election Day voters to vote earlier.
The second interesting indicator from early voting:
Just as the presidential race is deadlocked in the campaign’s final days, the candidates are also running about even when it comes to the ground game. Voters nationally, as well those in the closely contested battleground states, report being contacted at about the same rates by each of the campaigns. And with a fifth of likely voters reporting already having cast their ballots, neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney has a clear advantage among early voters. This is in sharp contrast to early voting at this point four years ago, which favored Obama by a wide margin . . .
The Pew Research Center survey found that the race is even among all likely voters nationwide (47% Obama, 47% Romney). Unlike the last campaign, the race also is close among voters who say they have already voted.
In the poll, conducted Oct. 24-28, 19% of likely voters say they have already voted; that is unchanged from the same week in the 2008 campaign (Oct. 23-26, 2008). Currently, Romney holds a seven-point edge among early voters (50% to 43%); because of the small sample, this lead is not statistically significant. At this point four years ago, Obama led John McCain by 19 points (53% to 34%) among early voters.
Then there’s the third interesting indicator from early voting:
“If the election was held today, President Barack Obama would lose the state of Wisconsin because where his base is, we have not turned out the vote early,” Mayor Michael Hancock told a Democratic rally. “The suburbs and rural parts of Wisconsin — the Republican base — are voting. President Obama’s base has yet to go vote.
“We’ve got to get our people to go vote,” Hancock said.
Later Hancock talks to the Washington Examiner and explains,
“This is a very close race, and the point we’re trying to make is make sure the base shows up, turns out and begins to vote early,” Hancock said. “I saw where the votes were rolling in, and I said we’ve got to make sure that where the president’s base is, they get out and vote.”
First question: Just how many votes does the mayor of Denver stumping in Milwaukee bring out? “Hey, everybody, grab your friends and call your neighbors! Michael Hancock’s in town!” Are we sure this guy didn’t just want to take a trip to Milwaukee for some brats? I mean, isn’t Colorado a swing state?
Secondly, Hancock must have been briefed by somebody in the Obama campaign or the Wisconsin Democratic Party. So somebody is worried about the early vote in Wisconsin, at least so far!
http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/332157/tough-news-obama-early-voting-fi
Then, there's Ohio. As mentioned earlier, Obama is down about 155,000 early votes from 2008; conversely, Romney's up at least 108,000 from what McCain had, as of Thursday night (I've heard more recent numbers of 120,000 from Rove, earlier today, as of Saturday night).
That wipes out the margin by which Obama won Ohio in 2008.
And, as far as Florida goes, per Politico, Romney's right behind Obama in early voting with 4.3 million ballots in the coffer, thus far (Obama 43%; Romney 40%).
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83176.html
That's not handily winning by any measure; not to mention, Romney's beating Obama in Colorado.[/size]
cut early voting in half and guess what happens
I think whoever didn't get to vote early will show up tomorrow
-
cut early voting in half and guess what happens
I think whoever didn't get to vote early will show up tomorrow
Care to clarify that "cutting early voting in half" statement?
Obama needs to be WAAAAY ahead of Romney to buffer a GOP surge on election day. That's what he did in 2008, especially in Ohio.
He's nowhere near his '08 numbers. If Gallup's numbers are correct and the Republicans have a 3-point (or greater) edge, Romney closes the gap and wins Ohio. That and Colorado, coupled with the southeast, gives Romney the win at 275 EC votes.
-
Care to clarify that "cutting early voting in half" statement?
Obama needs to be WAAAAY ahead of Romney to buffer a GOP surge on election day. That's what he did in 2008, especially in Ohio.
He's nowhere near his '08 numbers. If Gallup's numbers are correct and the Republicans have a 3-point (or greater) edge, Romney closes the gap and wins Ohio. That and Colorado, coupled with the southeast, gives Romney the win at 275 EC votes.
I'm not sure why you are convinced that this election will be an exact repeat of 2008 regarding who goes to the polls when, but I guess we'll know soon enough.
-
I thought voter enthusiasm would be way down... BUT what i'm seeing is people waiting in line for 6 hours in Miami... wow
-
I'm not sure why you are convinced that this election will be an exact repeat of 2008 regarding who goes to the polls when, but I guess we'll know soon enough.
Because, unlike 2008, Obama has a record. And it SUCKS. Therefore, you have lower turnout (particularly among younger voters and black voters).
And, with the whole novelty of electing the first black president now gone, it's safe to say that Obama's turnout will NOT match the 2008 turnout (the early voting numbers prove it).
Obama won Ohio by amassing a HUGE lead in early voting (over 340K). McCain got more votes on election day. But, that lead of Obama was too massive to overcome.
Now, he only leads Romney by about 75,000 or so. If GOP turnout even matches what McCain got, Romney overtakes Obama and wins Ohio.
-
That the American people spoke.
Vote for love of country.
If you love your country you dont vote for a big government huge spending warmonger like Romney
-
Like the fact the majority of gov't assistant recipients are Republicans?
In their defence many republicans have no education and low I.Q so its harder for them to be succesful and get employed ;)
-
You just got government guaranteed student loans and mortgage and you earn your meager living thanks to the existence of a government institution (the court system)
Boomm
-
Agree. The people will have spoken tomorrow. Will be a sad day for the country if they give Obama another four years.
Regardless of the outcome, we need to support our leader and hope he is successful.
+1
-
Jesus Christ dude - really? He has no intention of working w the GOP and what he wants is a disaster for this country.
I'm hoping for him to have a disastrous second term mired in scandal over libya, fast n furious etc.
Him succeeding equals amnesty, cap n trade, tax hikes, etc.
Fuck that and fuck him along w every stupid fuck voting for him. Only a turd would even consider voting for obama.
So half the country is turds?
-
maybe they are just pro-rape and forced pregnancies
;D
-
I view the Republican congress as traitors to this country for focusing on seeking to end Obama's presidency while ignoring a struggling economy. Their obstructionism was the very definition of treason.
This!!
-
So half the country is turds?
Don't know about 50%, but I would say about 75% of Obama voters are worthless parasites, socialists, communists, tax sponges, etc.
-
Don't know about 50%, but I would say about 75% of Obama voters are worthless parasites, socialists, communists, tax sponges, etc.
What do you have to say about the fact that the largest block of Republicans is in the rural areas of the U.S. For the most part Democrats live in the cities? In Oregon, the Portland Metro area and Eugene are mainly Democratic while the little podunk logging towns with a bunch of rednecks are Republican. Most of the south also votes Republican. Seems like most Democrats live where the action is, so to speak....places like Manhattan where you live....you must feel like an outcast.
-
What do you have to say about the fact that the largest block of Republicans is in the rural areas of the U.S. For the most part Democrats live in the cities? In Oregon, the Portland Metro area and Eugene are mainly Democratic while the little podunk logging towns with a bunch of rednecks are Republican. Most of the south also votes Republican. Seems like most Democrats live where the action is, so to speak....places like Manhattan where you live....you must feel like an outcast.
Correct. I live among a lot a of guilt ridden white leftists.
-
Correct. I live among a lot a of guilt ridden white leftists.
Something must be wrong with me. I am a Democrat and I am white, but I am not guilt ridden at all. Why is that?
-
Something must be wrong with me. I am a Democrat and I am white, but I am not guilt ridden at all. Why is that?
Don't know, maybe you have not realized it yet :P
-
Don't know about 50%, but I would say about 75% of Obama voters are worthless parasites, socialists, communists, tax sponges, etc.
you do realize that it is in fact a fact that red states accept the most welfare, food stamps and pay the least amount of taxes right? these tax sponges are majority repub, it's simple math, which makes sense since the large part of their base is inbred rednecks with no education.
-
you do realize that it is in fact a fact that red states accept the most welfare, food stamps and pay the least amount of taxes right? these tax sponges are majority repub, it's simple math, which makes sense since the large part of their base is inbred rednecks with no education.
That's a pretty broad brush. How do you know the majority of welfare receipients in a "red state" are Republicans?
-
you do realize that it is in fact a fact that red states accept the most welfare, food stamps and pay the least amount of taxes right? these tax sponges are majority repub, it's simple math, which makes sense since the large part of their base is inbred rednecks with no education.
Then explain why the bulk of people with less than a high school education vote DEMOCRAT. Per CNN's exit polls, here's the vote by education background for Obama, McCain, or a third party candidate, respectively.
No High School (4%)
63%
35%
2%
H.S. Graduate (20%)
52%
46%
2%
Some College (31%)
51%
47%
2%
College Graduate (28%)
50%
48%
2%
Postgraduate (17%)
58%
40%
2%
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#USP00p1
That simply means that the blue counties within the red states that soak up all that welfare.
-
was the most relevant reason for his failure?
The pathological lying?
The biggest "non" plan in the history of anything that was planned or required plans (that no specifics were ever shared about)?
The war on women?
The math that just doesn't add up no matter what?
Mitt's campaign itself declaring that Mitt didn't mean what he just said as soon as he finishes talking?
Sandy?
Bani capital?
Overt racism?
Auto bailout?
Romneycare?
The nerdy wonky VP pick?
General dislike that everyone has for Romney/Ryan as persons?
The positive economic news lately?
Anti-immigration sentiment?
Anti-union? Anti-gay? Anti-gun?
Lousy surrogates?
Loss of support from prominent Repubs and general dislike from his own party?
Christie traitorous turn with Obama?
Really, what's the whining and crying tomorrow night going to be about?
Mitt never should have F'd the babysitter.
Flip flopped on abortion.
Flip flopped on Romney/Obama care
The useless 47%
Sucking up to Jews in Israel
-
That's a pretty broad brush. How do you know the majority of welfare receipients in a "red state" are Republicans?
There arent many dem in red states
-
A simple google search shows that conservative red states have the highest rate of high school drop outs, unwed birth, teen pregnancies, poverty, and lack of college education.
-
A simple google search shows that conservative red states have the highest rate of high school drop outs, unwed birth, teen pregnancies, poverty, and lack of college education.
And take a wild guess as to how those folks vote. Hint: CNN exit poll 2008.
-
And take a wild guess as to how those folks vote. Hint: CNN exit poll 2008.
Seeing how they are from conservative red states, I would pretty much think that was an indicator. Of course if you are going by the the biggest turn out in election history, that does NOTHING to change the fact that these so called Bible states are the worst off in the nation.
-
There arent many dem in red states
How many Democrats versus Republicans are on welfare in "red states"?
-
How many Democrats versus Republicans are on welfare in "red states"?
Do you honestly believe that there is anyway to find this out?
-
Do you honestly believe that there is anyway to find this out?
I doubt it. That was sort of the point.
-
Correct. I live among a lot a of guilt ridden white leftists.
I thought you said you lived in a ghetto surrounded by savages, and beasts ?
I thought you said you haven't seen an Obama sign anywhere in your ghetto so where do all this white leftists live ?
-
I view the Republican congress as traitors to this country for focusing on seeking to end Obama's presidency while ignoring a struggling economy. Their obstructionism was the very definition of treason.
QFT
-
I doubt it. That was sort of the point.
Of course one could make some assumptions if they knew what the states economy was like including what percentage of folks are on public assistance and if they knew how many registered Democrats and Republicans there were. However, this would only provide an overview and might not tell the whole story.
-
I view the Republican congress as traitors to this country for focusing on seeking to end Obama's presidency while ignoring a struggling economy. Their obstructionism was the very definition of treason.
I view the Dems and Obama as traitors to this country for focusing on everything but the economy. Their obstructionism (displayed by them passing Obamacare with 0 GOP votes) was the very definition of treason.
-
I view the Dems and Obama as traitors to this country for focusing on everything but the economy. Their obstructionism (displayed by them passing Obamacare with 0 GOP votes) was the very definition of treason.
great observation as always
the economy is definitely worse than when Obama first took office
unemployment is worse, the stock market is worse, housing prices are worse
Hopefully when Romney gets elected he will restore it to that pristine condition it was when Bush left office
-
great observation as always
the economy is definitely worse than when Obama first took office
unemployment is worse, the stock market is worse, housing prices are worse
Hopefully when Romney gets elected he will restore it to that pristine condition it was when Bush left office
The unemployment rate is higher and we're $6 trillion more in debt. Thanks for agreeing with me, bright spot. :)
Stick to talking about how great the post office is doing.
-
The unemployment rate is higher and we're $6 trillion more in debt. Thanks for agreeing with me, bright spot. :)
Stick to talking about how great the post office is doing.
apparently you're not aware of the miracle of compound interest
Of course I'm not suprised that you're uniformed about the unemployment rate
It was 8.3% when Obama took office in February 2009 and it's 7.9% today
I guess you must believe that you believe that 7.9% is higher than 8.3%
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3
-
apparently you're not aware of the miracle of compound interest
Of course I'm not suprised that you're uniformed about the unemployment rate
It was 8.3% when Obama took office in February 2009 and it's 7.9% today
I guess you must believe that you believe that 7.9% is higher than 8.3%
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3
Oh, I forgot. You believe those numbers.
If the labor force participation rate was the same today as it was when he took office, unemployment would be over 10%. Unfortunately for the millions of long-term unemployed Americans, they no longer matter (or exist, for that matter).
Interest? His $1+ trillion yearly deficits play a much bigger role.
Thanks for playing. Now kindly get back in your 15-year-old Nissan and drive back on over to the thread where you tell us how well the $5+ billion in debt post office is doing.
-
Oh, I forgot. You believe those numbers.
If the labor force participation rate was the same today as it was when he took office, unemployment would be over 10%. Unfortunately for the millions of long-term unemployed Americans, they no longer matter (or exist, for that matter).
Interest? His $1+ trillion yearly deficits play a much bigger role.
Thanks for playing. Now kindly get back in your 15-year-old Nissan and drive back on over to the thread where you tell us how well the $5+ billion in debt post office is doing.
I wasn't aware you statements were based on your own make believe numbers and not the actual #'s from the government
what was the make believe UE number in Feb 2009 ?
btw - I told you at least a few times now I bought a new Lexus this year and I plan on driving it for 15 years just like my last car. Do you think you'll hve moved out of your parents house by the time I need to buy another new car?
-
Mitt never should have F'd the babysitter.
i wonder why that never came up in the election?
maybe they feared backlash, thought it'd actually help him with pity voters?
-
i wonder why that never came up in the election?
maybe they feared backlash, thought it'd actually help him with pity voters?
probably because there was no proof it was true
-
Oh, I forgot. You believe those numbers.
If the labor force participation rate was the same today as it was when he took office, unemployment would be over 10%. Unfortunately for the millions of long-term unemployed Americans, they no longer matter (or exist, for that matter).
Interest? His $1+ trillion yearly deficits play a much bigger role.
Thanks for playing. Now kindly get back in your 15-year-old Nissan and drive back on over to the thread where you tell us how well the $5+ billion in debt post office is doing.
I don't like that information = That information is a conspiracy.
The Republican Party, 2012
-
I don't like that information = That information is a conspiracy.
The Republican Party, 2012
what do you expect from a guy who thinks Obama administration has not focused on the economy and has apparently obstructed themslelves from doing anything
the kid lives in a fantasy world but since he's 26 and unable to move out of his parents house he probably needs to fantasize a lot
-
I don't like that information = That information is a conspiracy.
The Republican Party, 2012
Republican Party? I voted for Gary Johnson.
Fact of the matter is that the millions of Americans who no longer exist (or matter to the Dems and Obama) would put the unemployment rate over 10% if they were considered to be part of the labor force participation rate.
Not that you care as you ran off to China for a few hundred bucks a month. Sick life! ::)
The economy is in shambles and slowing down (again). Thanks, Obama! Good job paying off your cronies nearly $1 trillion.
-
Republican Party? I voted for Gary Johnson.
Fact of the matter is that the millions of Americans who no longer exist (or matter to the Dems and Obama) would put the unemployment rate over 10% if they were considered to be part of the labor force participation rate.
Not that you care as you ran off to China for a few hundred bucks a month. Sick life! ::)
The economy is in shambles and slowing down (again). Thanks, Obama! Good job paying off your cronies nearly $1 trillion.
is this another one of those facts you made up ?
Here's an actual fact from consensus reality from the most recent jobs report
A government survey of households found that 578,000 Americans joined the work force in October, the Labor Department said. Of those, 470,000 found work. The difference is why the unemployment rate rose from 7.8 percent in September.
note the use of a link -you should try it sometime:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iAiXHnveYNIVXWRSEeRdFXuhGatg?docId=b1ec151dbd1541a89cd705238302fc3c
-
The Reason Why The Unemployment Rate Dropped: The Labor Participation Rate Is At Fresh 31 Year Lows
Curious why the unemployment rate dropped from 8.3% to 8.1%, even as just 96,000 jobs were added? The labor participation rate declined from 63.7% to 63.5%, the lowest since 1981. It means that somehow in August the labor force declined by 368,000 people, which is a paradox since according to the household survey 119,000 jobs were lost in August, yet at the same time the unemployment rate dropped. Remember: it is an election year.
(http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2012/08-2/Labor%20Force%20Participation%2063.5_0.jpg)
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/reason-why-unemployment-rate-dropped-labor-participation-rate-fresh-31-year-lows
Thanks for playing.
-
probably because there was no proof it was true
true, but the pic of the dude at 23, he looked like a trailer version of the rest of those kids. Everyone at DU knew all about it, but romney never even sked.
-
Oh, I forgot. You believe those numbers.
If the labor force participation rate was the same today as it was when he took office, unemployment would be over 10%. Unfortunately for the millions of long-term unemployed Americans, they no longer matter (or exist, for that matter).
Interest? His $1+ trillion yearly deficits play a much bigger role.
Thanks for playing. Now kindly get back in your 15-year-old Nissan and drive back on over to the thread where you tell us how well the $5+ billion in debt post office is doing.
god your fucking stupid. You believe those numbers? lol, you apparently believe the numbers when it suits your purpose.
Go drown yourself.
-
(http://i.imagebanana.com/img/qrcm027g/fbf.gif)
-
I doubt it. That was sort of the point.
You know why they are called read states?
If New York was number 1 reciever of welfare and i claimed it was because of republicans like Coach you would laugh
Get your head out of your ass BB thats just pathetic
-
Republican Party? I voted for Gary Johnson.
Fact of the matter is that the millions of Americans who no longer exist (or matter to the Dems and Obama) would put the unemployment rate over 10% if they were considered to be part of the labor force participation rate.
Not that you care as you ran off to China for a few hundred bucks a month. Sick life! ::)
The economy is in shambles and slowing down (again). Thanks, Obama! Good job paying off your cronies nearly $1 trillion.
Your comments on my salary always crack me up.
Are you really 26 and already this jaded by life?
You're headed for 33386 territory. Stay on this site so we can watch your lifelong meltdown.
-
Your comments on my salary always crack me up.
Are you really 26 and already this jaded by life?
You're headed for 33386 territory. Stay on this site so we can watch your lifelong meltdown.
He s a 33 gimmick
There cant be 2 people that stupid
-
History will say ..."He was never supposed to win"
How else can you explain such a shitty choice of candidate, so completely out of touch with average Americans, whose position changed to whatever direction the wind blew, every time the wind blew?
History will say if Republicans really wanted to take back the White House, they wouldn't have robbed Ron Paul in the primaries. It's interactive theatre with audience participation, but the direction, script and final act were already predetermined.
-
Bill Clinton is in Philly, trying to rally the troops.....BIG PROBLEM!!!
Even Obama's deputy campaign manager is claiming that the race in PA has become "competitive".
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/11/05/cutter_pennsylvania_has_tightened_definitely_competitive.html
Pennsylvania...COMPETITI VE....THIS LATE?
McWay. Im really enjoying reading back over your (not so old) posts.
Tough break with that Gallup poll that has never failed nd it really seemed like you had it in the bag after that football game on
Sunday. I cant believe that one let you down too.
-
McWay. Im really enjoying reading back over your (not so old) posts.
Tough break with that Gallup poll that has never failed nd it really seemed like you had it in the bag after that football game on
Sunday. I cant believe that one let you down too.
Technically, the Redskin Rule ended when Bush got re-elected. The 'Skins lost at home to the Steelers on that Sunday before election day.
-
voting fraud
lack of voting ID check
and bias left wing media
no other explanation for worst president ever being re releced
although it was hair close
100k people in 6 or so key states wow
-
OBAMA 59,651,236*
ROMNEY 57,028,531
OBAMA is leading by 2.6 million votes right now
-
voting fraud
lack of voting ID check
and bias left wing media
no other explanation for worst president ever being re releced
although it was hair close
100k people in 6 or so key states wow
You are a sore loser.
-
The Reason Why The Unemployment Rate Dropped: The Labor Participation Rate Is At Fresh 31 Year Lows
Curious why the unemployment rate dropped from 8.3% to 8.1%, even as just 96,000 jobs were added? The labor participation rate declined from 63.7% to 63.5%, the lowest since 1981. It means that somehow in August the labor force declined by 368,000 people, which is a paradox since according to the household survey 119,000 jobs were lost in August, yet at the same time the unemployment rate dropped. Remember: it is an election year.
(http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2012/08-2/Labor%20Force%20Participation%2063.5_0.jpg)
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/reason-why-unemployment-rate-dropped-labor-participation-rate-fresh-31-year-lows
Thanks for playing.
LOL after being unable to comment on your lie about the UE rate you decide to pivot to same old chart of the Labor Participation rate
First of all your article from "Tyler Durden" is 2 months out of date. The Labor participation rate went up in October
http://www.businessinsider.com/labor-force-participation-rate-2012-10
I know you right wingers like to pull out that particular chart because it looks so dramatic and seems to mean something but like your long lost buddy 333 you seem to have no clue why the chart looks the way it does or what it even means. Did you notice the rate has been dropping since right around 2000. Why do you think that is so?
Here is an explanation of why it's guys like you who are actually causing the rate to go down (well - you and also the fact that the baby boomers started to retired rightg around the year 2000
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/10/why-is-the-labor-force-shrinking-blame-young-men-not-the-economy/263368/
Aggregates can be misleading. For instance, that surge in the participation rate from the 1960's to 1980's is a result of women joining the workforce. The male rate, on the other hand, has been declining since the 1950's.
Male participation has fallen under President Obama. It fell under President George W. Bush. And President Clinton. It's fallen in every presidential administration going back to at least Eisenhower's, with the exception of Carter's, for whom it was flat.
Why are fewer men choosing to work? For that, we turn to the Census Bureau's 2012 Statistical Abstract. The participation rate is lower for single men than for married men, and marriage rates in the US have been falling for decades, so we'd expect a modest decline from that. Looking by age bucket, it's been pretty steady for single and married men for everyone over the age of 25 since the start of the Great Recession.
The recent decline we've seen has been primarily among young, single men. For single men age 16-19, participation fell by almost 9 points from 2006-2010. For single men age 20-24 it fell by almost 5 points. This could be for a variety of factors, from men deciding it's not worth bothering to apply for a job at the local grocery store, to men more focused on their education with unskilled work harder to find, to those living at home who decide there's no need for spending money when so much entertainment is free online.
Additionally, the acceleration in the labor force decline began when the oldest baby boomers began turning 60. Yes, because of deflated housing prices and retirement accounts, boomers will work longer than they thought. But 60-year olds still work less than 30-year olds, and that demographic shift is being reflected in the data.
What's more, this decline in the workforce is part of a century-long trend towards working less in the United States. Child labor laws were passed during the Great Depression, restricting child labor. During the Truman administration, the US government instituted the 40-hour work week for federal employees. The passage of Social Security and Medicare reduced incentives for seniors to work as well.
This is a good thing. Among his many writings, John Maynard Keynes talked about an eventual 15-hour work week to satisfy the material needs of citizens. We're progressing slower than he thought, but we're getting there.
But can fewer working young adults possibly be a good thing? It's intuitive that fewer workers means less work and a smaller and weaker economy. But since the decline is mostly among very young men (and, to a lesser extent, young women) we need to understand why they're dropping out.Student loan debt outstanding has grown from $360 billion to $900 billion over the past seven years. The size of this debt is daunting, but it shows that some of the labor force decline is due to young people investing more in their education, an eventual long-term positive.
And those not dropping out for education-related reasons? If it's just a bunch of 17-year olds who are content spending their time on Facebook instead of earning a few bucks bagging groceries, that's one thing. But if it's people who feel shut out of the workforce, that's something policymakers should address.
These are issues we're going to have to grapple with, because with robotic labor on the horizon, our desire and ability to compete with emerging market and silicon-based labor, especially for less-educated Americans, is likely to continue to fall.
-
Is this moron really bragging about the labor force participation rate ticking up 2 tenths of a percent when that still puts it among the lowest levels seen in 3-4 decades? What a stupid mother fucker this 20-year-old Nissan driver is.
If the labor force participation rate was the same as when Obama took office, unemployment would be over 10%. This is a FACT. You can spin it anyway you want but that's irrefutable. Millions of Americans are no longer counted in the labor rolls thanks to having been out of work for so long. That's not going to change thanks to the failed economic policies espoused by this administration.
An article from the Atlantic talking about Keynes? LOL. Your misinformed obsession with that failure of a system never ceases to amaze me. But it's expected as you're just not very smart. One of the worst articles I've ever read and pretty much just a laundry list of unsubstantiated excuses for the failure in the white house. Not surprising coming from a leftist rag like that.
Quick, tell us how trillions more in printed money will fix everything. ::)
-
Is this moron really bragging about the labor force participation rate ticking up 2 tenths of a percent when that still puts it among the lowest levels seen in 3-4 decades? What a stupid mother fucker this 20-year-old Nissan driver is.
If the labor force participation rate was the same as when Obama took office, unemployment would be over 10%. This is a FACT. You can spin it anyway you want but that's irrefutable. Millions of Americans are no longer counted in the labor rolls thanks to having been out of work for so long. That's not going to change thanks to the failed economic policies espoused by this administration.
An article from the Atlantic talking about Keynes? LOL. Your misinformed obsession with that failure of a system never ceases to amaze me. But it's expected as you're just not very smart.
Quick, tell us how trillions more in printed money will fix everything. ::)
just watching you get dumber the minute now
you don't really understand the article do you ?
-
just watching you get dumber the minute now
you don't really understand the article do you ?
Yes, yes, Keynesianism is the be-all, end-all.
We know as you never shut the fuck up about it, post office boy. It's funny that you're calling anyone dumb when you're on record advocating for more stimulus. You've clearly never taken a class on economics but it's not surprising as you're just not intelligent.
-
Yes, yes, Keynesianism is the be-all, end-all.
We know as you never shut the fuck up about it, post office boy. It's funny that you're calling anyone dumb when you're on record advocating for more stimulus. You've clearly never taken a class on economics but it's not surprising as you're just not intelligent.
good lord you're dumb
this has nothing to do with Keynesianism. I know you saw his name in the article but you actually have to read the words in front and after his name too
countdown to you calling me gay
-
good lord you're dumb
this has nothing to do with Keynesianism. I know you saw his name in the article but you actually have to read the words in front and after his name too
countdown to you calling me gay
Many of socialist countries in Europe that you idolize have instituted furloughs. Funny you point that out as we're heading down that same path as it's already been happening in California, among other places.
It's always funny watching someone from California talk economics. I'm guessing you voted for prop 30 last night, too.
-
Many of socialist countries in Europe that you idolize have instituted furloughs. Funny you point that out as we're heading down that same path as it's already been happening in California, among other places.
It's always funny watching someone from California talk economics. I'm guessing you voted for prop 30 last night, too.
who mentioned furloughs
If you're going to rant like a moron can you at least try to address something that's actually in the article
-
It's like talking to a wall. No wonder you drive a fucking beater and you can't spell "relevant" correctly. You're certifiably retarded (again, we all knew that).
Christ, I hope 333 comes back so you can go back to stalking him while ranting about how great the post office is doing (being $5 billion in debt and all) or how liberal George Washington was. LOL.
-
It's like talking to a wall. No wonder you drive a fucking beater and you can't spell "relevant" correctly. You're certifiably retarded (again, we all knew that).
Christ, I hope 333 comes back so you can go back to stalking him while ranting about how great the post office is doing (being $5 billion in debt and all) or how liberal George Washington was. LOL.
LOL - now back to spelling and anything else to change the subject
you're the one who brought up Labor Participation and now you not even capable of talking about it ?
remember this was your pivot after lying that UE was higher now then when Obama got in office
-
LOL - now back to spelling and anything else to change the subject
you're the one who brought up Labor Participation and now you not even capable of talking about it ?
remember this was your pivot after lying that UE was higher now then when Obama got in office
Fury will just keep switching talking points to try to cover up the fact his knowledge is very limited
-
Fury will just keep switching talking points to try to cover up the fact his knowledge is very limited
Truth!
You can expect some generic ad nauseum reply from him in response. And probably a request to supersize your fries as well.
-
History will say ..."He was never supposed to win"
How else can you explain such a shitty choice of candidate, so completely out of touch with average Americans, whose position changed to whatever direction the wind blew, every time the wind blew?
History will say if Republicans really wanted to take back the White House, they wouldn't have robbed Ron Paul in the primaries. It's interactive theatre with audience participation, but the direction, script and final act were already predetermined.
I saw an article this afternoon that puts Mitt Romney at the top of the list of frontrunners for Republican candidate for 2016. History will say they made the same mistake twice.
http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/109905/the-revenge-rick-perry#
How Rick Perry–Mr. "Oops"–Helped Kill the Romney Campaign
Of all the characters who littered the strange campaign of 2012, none was a bigger laughingstock than Rick Perry, who will go down in political lore for three things: threatening bodily harm to the chairman of the Federal Reserve, declaring that our staunch ally Turkey is run by "Islamic terrorists", and, oops, I can’t remember the third thing. But now that the election is over, it’s looking like Perry had the last laugh.
It’s been so long now that it’s easy to forget, but 15 months ago, the governor of Texas was looming as a force to be reckoned with. After mulling a run for president, he decided to jump in, with a potent fundraising base and the presumptive support of most of the delegate-rich South behind him. Sure, he wasn’t considered the sharpest pitchfork in the barn, but he had never lost an election and, with his brief flirtation with secession, had tapped into the anti-Washington fervor of the moment far better than any other Republican in the field. Premier national political magazines dispatched reporters to do long profiles of him. And the frontrunner for the Republican nomination fatefully decided that Perry was such a threat to his prospects that he would … try to destroy him by running to his right on immigration.
Mitt Romney repeatedly attacked Perry for his support of in-state tuition for undocumented students at Texas colleges, declaring at one debate that it "made no sense at all" and running what was probably the nastiest ad of the primaries, a Web ad (since disappeared) that concluded with a clip of former Mexican president Vincente Fox praising Perry, as if that in and of itself was disqualifying. (Separate from the attacks on Perry, Romney also declared he would veto the Dream Act, which provides a route to citizenship for young illegal immigrants, and proposed a policy under which undocumented residents would "self-deport.") It was a brazen gambit. For one thing, Romney had had a spot of trouble some years earlier for employing illegal immigrants at his Belmont, Mass. manse, which Perry made sure to mention in what became the most heated exchange of the primary season. For another thing, it cynically overlooked the reality of Texas, where vast numbers of young undocumented residents are a reality to be reckoned with and where the tuition policy had broad legislative support. It was left to Perry to utter the defense that arguably sealed his fate even before his debate snafu: "If you say we should not educate children who come into our state … by no fault of their own, I don't think you have a heart."
But even as Romney was glorying in the move, its risks were plain to see. After vanquishing his foes amid a virtually all-white primary electorate, Romney was going to face a general election in which he could not afford to do worse than John McCain had with Hispanics—a 32 percent share. His harsh rhetoric was, for many voters, going to be inextricable with the litany of Republican callousness on the issue—Tom Tancredo, Maricopa County Sherrif Joe Arpaio, Arizona’s draconian anti-illegal immigration law and its copycats in Alabama and elsewhere, and on and on. Hispanic Republicans warned Romney to cool it, but he blustered on. What was he thinking? Probably, that he had managed so often in other contexts to play the opportunistic Etch-a-Sketch game, so why not think he could do the same here? Come general election time, he would have his son Craig tape Spanish-language ads, and would load up the Tampa convention with Hispanic Republicans, and would appear at a Univision forum with an oddly-tinted skin tone.
No dice. As the campaign went on, it became clear that Romney's immigration flanking of Perry was an "original sin," as Ron Brownstein put it. In a year when many Hispanic voters surely were gettable, out of frustration with a slow recovery and Obama’s failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform, Romney’s share of the Hispanic vote on Tuesday plunged to 27 percent—while the Hispanic share of the electorate ticked inexorably up by about a third, to 10 percent. Somewhere in West Texas, a man in cowboy boots named "Freedom" and "Liberty" was cackling.
A final cautionary note on this: even as the Republicans’ woes with Hispanic voters are drawing overdue attention—even Charles Krauthammer was hitting Romney on this score after the votes came in—it is important to keep some regional context in mind. The GOP’s Hispanic deficit is a huge Electoral College problem for the party in Florida, Colorado and Nevada, and will soon become a problem in Arizona and maybe even Georgia and (dreamers can dream) Texas. But it is a negligible factor in the Democrats’ Midwestern firewall, the swath of states that guaranteed Barack Obama’s victory Tuesday night: Ohio, Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin and Minnesota. While it’s proper for demographers to herald the Democrats’ expanding, multi-hued coalition, it is also worth remembering that Obama won Ohio because of a) huge turnout by African-Americans and b) his ability to hang onto far more working-class white voters than he did in other parts of the country—and to even pick up some more along the way. Check out this terrific New York Times map showing the shifts in party support between 2008 and this year. Not surprisingly, given Obama's narrower edge this time around, most of the country shifted red to a certain degree. But look what shifted more Democratic even than in Obama’s big 2008 win—much of central Ohio. Much of that is due to the increasingly cosmopolitan Columbus metro area. But it’s also a reflection of shifts in deeply middle- and working-class towns like Chillicothe, the seat of Ross County, where Obama somehow managed to improve substantially over his 2008 vote share. In places like this, what mattered was less Mitt Romney demagoguing Rick Perry on immigration than his blithely offering the Texas governor a $10,000 bet.
-
We know know the official talking point of why Romney lost
Obama voters want "stuff"
-
Like the fact the majority of gov't assistant recipients are Republicans?
Citation please.
-
the Tax Foundation — a conservative Washington-based think tank — has, however unintentionally, provided the answer. In 2007, the foundation published a survey of 2005 federal spending in each state and compared that with each state’s contribution in federal taxes. In other words, the foundation identified the states that sponge off the federal government and those that subsidize it. The welfare-queen states and the responsible, producing states, as it were.
The list, alas, hasn’t been updated — in part, no doubt, because conservatives didn’t like what it revealed: that those states that got more back from our government than they paid in were overwhelmingly Republican. The 10 biggest net recipients of taxpayers’ largess were, in order, New Mexico, Mississippi, Alaska, Louisiana, West Virginia, North Dakota, Alabama, South Dakota, Kentucky and Virginia. The 10 states that paid in the most and got back the least were New Jersey, Nevada, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Illinois, Delaware, California, New York and Colorado.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/welfare-queen-states/2011/05/17/AFzTK45G_story.html
-
great observation as always
the economy is definitely worse than when Obama first took office
unemployment is worse, the stock market is worse, housing prices are worse
Hopefully when Romney gets elected he will restore it to that pristine condition it was when Bush left office
lol ;D
-
I found the article I saw. I mistakenly typed Romney above. It is Ryan that has a chance in 2016.
http://nationaljournal.com/politics/ryan-emerges-from-campaign-with-higher-profile-2016-options-20121107
Ryan Emerges From Campaign With Higher Profile, 2016 Options
BOSTON –Paul Ryan won’t be helping Mitt Romney lead the country in a new direction from the White House. But the congressman from Wisconsin, famous for his small-government budget blueprints, has emerged from his first national race with high visibility and a top spot on any list of 2016 presidential prospects.
Ryan's immediate future lies on Capitol Hill. As chairman of the House Budget Committee, he will be making an abrupt transition from the glare of the campaign trail to the back rooms of Capitol Hill as Congress heads into a lame-duck session and negotiations on how to avoid a “fiscal cliff” of automatic tax increases and spending cuts.
Ryan did win an election on Tuesday night: the race for his House seat in Wisconsin where state election law allowed him to run concurrently with his vice presidential bid. Unless he resigns from the House--a fate that longtime aides and close confidantes have a hard time imagining--Hill staffers expect he’ll have no trouble obtaining the necessary waiver on term limits to keep his chairmanship in the next Congress.
“I think at the end of the day, he's committed to advancing these ideas in a political forum, which suggests elected office,” said Matthew Spalding, a vice president at the conservative Heritage Foundation and a longtime Ryan friend.
Ryan issued a statement on Wednesday addressing his short-term plans. “I look forward to spending some time with my family in the coming days and then continuing my responsibilities as chairman of the House Budget Committee and representative of Wisconsin First Congressional District,” he said, after saying he was “immensely proud” of the GOP presidential campaign and grateful to nominee Mitt Romney for putting him on the ticket.
There was a time when Ryan considered quitting Congress: in 2006, after Democrats won both chambers. It was a “gut-check” moment, as one longtime aide described it, and after much soul-searching the episode led Ryan to write his first “Road Map for America’s Future.” The document marked Ryan’s head-first jump into the sensitive issue of entitlement reform and made him into a popular target for Democrats. But it also made him the intellectual leader of the House Republicans, a stature that will only be enhanced by his vice presidential run and the debt and spending issues at the top of the national agenda.
“With the fiscal cliff issues and everything that’s looming … he's going to be center stage in the negotiations and at some level will have claim to be titular heir to the Republican Party,” said Steve Schmidt, a GOP strategist who worked on John McCain
’s 2008 presidential bid.
The big question that remains, then, is what the next cycle will hold for Ryan. At the request of many conservatives, he explored the possibility of his own presidential bid this year, but ultimately opted to sit out the cycle due to the pressures on his young family--his children are 10, 9, and 7--and a sense that Congress was the best place to change national policies.
He has had no conversations about 2016 among his closest staff, according to a longtime aide who was granted anonymity to speak more freely. If he decides to run, he will do so from a more advantageous position. Close to 40 percent of people hadn’t heard of him before he was nominated; but, according to CNN/ORC polling, that had dropped to single digits within about 10 days. His favorability has stayed the same.
“He's well respected, and he's done a good job as the VP candidate,” said Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol. He predicted that Ryan would start with an edge among the deep bench of Republicans who may consider a run, including New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida
. Indeed, Ryan proved to be an effective campaigner who even held audiences captive when he began using a slide show about the rising debt at town halls.
The Romney campaign projected rosy images of Ryan as a legislator in search of bipartisanship, but his appeal at this point is concentrated among conservatives who like his prescriptions, which include steep cuts in taxes and spending, and restructuring Medicare as a voucher program.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, the senior Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said that Ryan is a passionate advocate, not a lawmaker who pursues compromise. Both are necessary to tackle the nation’s deficits and debt, he said. “Will he continue to be the standard-bearer for the Far Rright of the Republican Party, or will he demonstrate a new willingness to work together in order to meet our budget challenges?” Van Hollen asked of Ryan in an e-mail.
It’s a question that underscores the strengths Ryan would bring to a presidential primary race, and the strategic decisions he’ll have to make with an eye on his future.
-
Citation please.
The reason some people feel comfortable making these outrageous claims is because they cannot be proved. When someone applies for public assistance, they aren't asked their party affiliation. It is also true that when someone registers to vote, they aren't asked if they have ever, or are currently receiving public assistance. Hence there is no way to know for certain if Republicans or Democrats are more likely to be on public assistance.
One can make assumptions though as long as they realize that there is a risk of accuracy when it comes to assuming things. For example, one can assume that the number of people on public assistance is higher in states where the poverty rate is also higher. The 10 states with the highest poverty rates are: Texas, West Virginia, South Carolina, Louisiana, Arkansas, Kentucky, Alabama, District of Columbia, New Mexico and Mississippi. Of these, New Mexico is the only state which voted for Democratic Presidential candidate. This would lead one to assume that there is greater poverty in Republican leaning states and thus the likelihood of folks being on public assistance being on public assistance is greater. Note: D.C. is not officially a state although it was listed in these statistics as one.
Citations:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/21/poverty-rises-despite-end-of-recession_n_1023946.html#s424704&title=1_Mississippi
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html
-
I found the article I saw. I mistakenly typed Romney above. It is Ryan that has a chance in 2016.
http://nationaljournal.com/politics/ryan-emerges-from-campaign-with-higher-profile-2016-options-20121107
Ryan Emerges From Campaign With Higher Profile, 2016 Options
BOSTON –Paul Ryan won’t be helping Mitt Romney lead the country in a new direction from the White House. But the congressman from Wisconsin, famous for his small-government budget blueprints, has emerged from his first national race with high visibility and a top spot on any list of 2016 presidential prospects.
Ryan's immediate future lies on Capitol Hill. As chairman of the House Budget Committee, he will be making an abrupt transition from the glare of the campaign trail to the back rooms of Capitol Hill as Congress heads into a lame-duck session and negotiations on how to avoid a “fiscal cliff” of automatic tax increases and spending cuts.
Ryan did win an election on Tuesday night: the race for his House seat in Wisconsin where state election law allowed him to run concurrently with his vice presidential bid. Unless he resigns from the House--a fate that longtime aides and close confidantes have a hard time imagining--Hill staffers expect he’ll have no trouble obtaining the necessary waiver on term limits to keep his chairmanship in the next Congress.
“I think at the end of the day, he's committed to advancing these ideas in a political forum, which suggests elected office,” said Matthew Spalding, a vice president at the conservative Heritage Foundation and a longtime Ryan friend.
Ryan issued a statement on Wednesday addressing his short-term plans. “I look forward to spending some time with my family in the coming days and then continuing my responsibilities as chairman of the House Budget Committee and representative of Wisconsin First Congressional District,” he said, after saying he was “immensely proud” of the GOP presidential campaign and grateful to nominee Mitt Romney for putting him on the ticket.
There was a time when Ryan considered quitting Congress: in 2006, after Democrats won both chambers. It was a “gut-check” moment, as one longtime aide described it, and after much soul-searching the episode led Ryan to write his first “Road Map for America’s Future.” The document marked Ryan’s head-first jump into the sensitive issue of entitlement reform and made him into a popular target for Democrats. But it also made him the intellectual leader of the House Republicans, a stature that will only be enhanced by his vice presidential run and the debt and spending issues at the top of the national agenda.
“With the fiscal cliff issues and everything that’s looming … he's going to be center stage in the negotiations and at some level will have claim to be titular heir to the Republican Party,” said Steve Schmidt, a GOP strategist who worked on John McCain
’s 2008 presidential bid.
The big question that remains, then, is what the next cycle will hold for Ryan. At the request of many conservatives, he explored the possibility of his own presidential bid this year, but ultimately opted to sit out the cycle due to the pressures on his young family--his children are 10, 9, and 7--and a sense that Congress was the best place to change national policies.
He has had no conversations about 2016 among his closest staff, according to a longtime aide who was granted anonymity to speak more freely. If he decides to run, he will do so from a more advantageous position. Close to 40 percent of people hadn’t heard of him before he was nominated; but, according to CNN/ORC polling, that had dropped to single digits within about 10 days. His favorability has stayed the same.
“He's well respected, and he's done a good job as the VP candidate,” said Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol. He predicted that Ryan would start with an edge among the deep bench of Republicans who may consider a run, including New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida
. Indeed, Ryan proved to be an effective campaigner who even held audiences captive when he began using a slide show about the rising debt at town halls.
The Romney campaign projected rosy images of Ryan as a legislator in search of bipartisanship, but his appeal at this point is concentrated among conservatives who like his prescriptions, which include steep cuts in taxes and spending, and restructuring Medicare as a voucher program.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, the senior Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said that Ryan is a passionate advocate, not a lawmaker who pursues compromise. Both are necessary to tackle the nation’s deficits and debt, he said. “Will he continue to be the standard-bearer for the Far Rright of the Republican Party, or will he demonstrate a new willingness to work together in order to meet our budget challenges?” Van Hollen asked of Ryan in an e-mail.
It’s a question that underscores the strengths Ryan would bring to a presidential primary race, and the strategic decisions he’ll have to make with an eye on his future.
Thanks for clearing that up. I thought I had misread an article I read this morning suggesting that Ryan might be the Republican front runner in 2016. The same article suggested that Hillary Clinton could be the Democratic front runner in 2016. It went on to suggest that Mrs. Clinton had the best chance of being the next U.S. President in 2016. Of course, she would have to decide to accept the nomination.
-
Bum -why are you moving War Horses post ?
It hardly offensive compared to the shit people say directly to me
Heck, it not even as offensive as the stuff we've said to each other in the past
LOL - now back to spelling and anything else to change the subject
you're the one who brought up Labor Participation and now you not even capable of talking about it ?
remember this was your pivot after lying that UE was higher now then when Obama got in office
Straw man. I dont know where you get the energy to talk to these retarded idiots like fury, but i do find amusing seeing the monkeys dance.. 8)
-
Hahaha. Bums a sensitive guy. Straw is slamming people with facts and common sense. Its hilarious to watch....thats all i meant ;D
-
Hahaha. Bums a sensitive guy. Straw is slamming people with facts and common sense. Its hilarious to watch....thats all i meant ;D
He has been rather touchy since Obama won. I suspect he is completely crushed.
I have seen this in Religious people in person when shown an undeniable fact. They begin to question their very existence and everything they have ever been told for a split second before turning their anger against you.
Its almost surreal.
-
He has been rather touchy since Obama won. I suspect he is completely crushed.
I have seen this in Religious people in person when shown an undeniable fact. They begin to question their very existence and everything they have ever been told for a split second before turning their anger against you.
Its almost surreal.
Its sad. Ill send him a Hallmark with a foodstamp in it. That'll help.
-
He has been rather touchy since Obama won. I suspect he is completely crushed.
I have seen this in Religious people in person when shown an undeniable fact. They begin to question their very existence and everything they have ever been told for a split second before turning their anger against you.
Its almost surreal.
HaHa! That is soooooooo true.
-
He has been rather touchy since Obama won. I suspect he is completely crushed.
I have seen this in Religious people in person when shown an undeniable fact. They begin to question their very existence and everything they have ever been told for a split second before turning their anger against you.
Its almost surreal.
;D
-
Have you guys been getting PMs from 33386? He keeps telling me he's leaving and tells me to go fuck myself.
-
Have you guys been getting PMs from 33386? He keeps telling me he's leaving and tells me to go fuck myself.
LOL! Most people simply just leave.
This loser won't be going anywhere. This is his ENTIRE life.
-
Have you guys been getting PMs from 33386? He keeps telling me he's leaving and tells me to go fuck myself.
No. Guess he doesn't like me well enough to say goodby. :)
-
All 333 used to do was post articles and invent colourful adjectives for Obama. How exactly will he be missed? Beating on a dead horse for FOUR fucking years only for his favourite to be stomped at the polls.
Why would be come back. Nothing here for him.
-
getbig is a great source of info. It helps you to see thru the BS that both fox and msnbc try to sell. You see that both sides exaggerate, ignore facts, and candy-coat shit to promote their own narrative.
getbig is also a great valve for blowing off steam. many of us work alone or with clueless people who don't enjoy politics chat. it's nice to exchange ideas, be wrong and owned at times, but also learn none of us knows everything.
Getbig is kinda like therapy at times :)
-
I totally like 3333 when he stops doing the FUBO type of stuff and actually talks about what he actually and legitimately feels is right and true... He's very capable and you can see through the cloud of the rhetoric.
He's a good guy... He just hates obama and he should be focusing that hate on the Republicans and fixing their shit.
That's what I want to do... I just need more cohorts.
-
I totally like 3333 when he stops doing the FUBO type of stuff and actually talks about what he actually and legitimately feels is right and true... He's very capable and you can see through the cloud of the rhetoric.
He's a good guy... He just hates obama and he should be focusing that hate on the Republicans and fixing their shit.
That's what I want to do... I just need more cohorts.
he's logged on right now and has probably been posting with at least a couple of gimmick. The guys pattern of posting virtually 24/7 is indicative of obsessive compulsive behaviour if not a true addiction. There is no way he stops cold turkey
I never understood the 8th grade drama queen act. If you want to quit then just stop posting but don't announce it like anyone gives a shit
Perhaps like that woman melting down on youtube his brain just can't deal with the reality that his fellow citizens chose to re-elect someone that he apparently believes is truly a communist sleeper cell
-
He has been rather touchy since Obama won. I suspect he is completely crushed.
I have seen this in Religious people in person when shown an undeniable fact. They begin to question their very existence and everything they have ever been told for a split second before turning their anger against you.
Its almost surreal.
;D
-
he's logged on right now and has probably been posting with at least a couple of gimmick. The guys pattern of posting virtually 24/7 is indicative of obsessive compulsive behaviour if not a true addiction. There is no way he stops cold turkey
I never understood the 8th grade drama queen act. If you want to quit then just stop posting but don't announce it like anyone gives a shit
Perhaps like that woman melting down on youtube his brain just can't deal with the reality that his fellow citizens chose to re-elect someone that he apparently believes is truly a communist sleeper cell
;)
It was obvious to even the casual observer that he has mental issues.
-
;)
It was obvious to even the casual observer that he has mental issues.
x2
He had about 95,000 posts mostly in four years. That's about 65 posts a day average, each and every day for 365 days for 4 years. not factoring vacation days (if he ever went on one). I can't imagine making 65 posts in a single day and to think that was his average each day for 4 years....