FDR in 1936 and 2012

[bike nut]

[Benny B]

 
If you doubt that the new unemployment statistics are great for Obama, the biggest indication is that Republicans are accusing President Obama of cooking them. Former General Electric CEO Jack Welch accused Obama of falsifying the numbers. Come on, Jack—if you don’t like those numbers, why not just go with Mitt Romney’s fantasy numbers? Welch tweeted “Unbelievable jobs numbers. These Chicago guys will do anything. Can’t debate so change numbers.” The debate was Wednesday, Jack. They certainly changed them quickly. You should look at the report for signs of white-out! Does anybody even remember white-out? It must still be around. I think Jack Welch has been sniffing it.

[Coach is Back!]

Unemployment wasn't supposed to exceed 8%; it stayed above that for 44 months straight.

It's supposed to be 5.5% by now.....NOT EVEN CLOSE.

Keep ducking and dodging, Obama Boy.

I'm sure you were waiting with cheeks wide open, to console the President, after that beating he took Wednesday night.

LOL...forget 5.5, it's not even close to 7.8%. It was predicted go to 8.3% when the reports came out, low and behold it's magically 7.8. hahaha, what a fraud.

[Benny B]

"The discovery that Jack Welch isn't just a book-cooking right winger but also an outright conspiracy theorist is only one of today's amazements.

Interestingly, the "conservatives" who insist that the Obama administration is mucking with the employment numbers for political gain never had any issue with the numbers when they were anti-Obama fodder. Why is that?"

[MCWAY]

LOL...forget 5.5, it's not even close to 7.8%. It was predicted go to 8.3% when the reports came out, low and behold it's magically 7.8. hahaha, what a fraud.

Yep. As if conservatives hadn't been predicting for about a year that the libs would cook the numbers to get it below 8, just before the election.

Of course, they also have to cover that Rodney-King-style beatdown Obama took during the debate.

[Shockwave]

If you doubt that the new unemployment statistics are great for Obama, the biggest indication is that Republicans are accusing President Obama of cooking them. Former General Electric CEO Jack Welch accused Obama of falsifying the numbers. Come on, Jack—if you don’t like those numbers, why not just go with Mitt Romney’s fantasy numbers? Welch tweeted “Unbelievable jobs numbers. These Chicago guys will do anything. Can’t debate so change numbers.” The debate was Wednesday, Jack. They certainly changed them quickly. You should look at the report for signs of white-out! Does anybody even remember white-out? It must still be around. I think Jack Welch has been sniffing it.

You are hilarious dude.

[Coach is Back!]

"The discovery that Jack Welch isn't just a book-cooking right winger but also an outright conspiracy theorist is only one of today's amazements.

Interestingly, the "conservatives" who insist that the Obama administration is mucking with the employment numbers for political gain never had any issue with the numbers when they were anti-Obama fodder. Why is that?"

Benny, I got 10k that says not only are these numbers fixed but after it's all said and done, we'll find out Obama is a COMPLETE fraud. Whatcha say? You're really (or almost anyone) is questioning Welsh? You're the one delusional.

[bike nut]

[arce1988]

  That Cartoon is dead on.

[quadzilla456]

haha! Good stuff!

[Coach is Back!]

How did I know Benny would abandon another thread.

[Benny B]

LOL 
It's amazing how little it takes to make repubes gleeful.  I guess you like this new, moderate Romney that emerged at the debate? One that basically disavowed all of the "severely conservative" stuff he's espoused for the last two years? The one that's going to "repeal" ObamaCare, yet keep all of its major components???

Hmm...let's see.  Would you rather win a single debate through continous LYING, or actually win the election?
I know what I prefer. 


BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!


On election day, its your boy Willard that is going to get his ass kicked. 

[Coach is Back!]

Just finish your shift at Mac.Donalds?

[Coach is Back!]

Benny, you claim to be a financial expert. Explain to the people how the ue came down to 7.8 when.all indications pointed to 8.3, up from 7.8. Even some kind are questioning it. So explain

[Natural Man]

real uemployment numbers are so much higher, and not just in the usa...

[MCWAY]

LOL  
It's amazing how little it takes to make repubes gleeful.   I guess you like this new, moderate Romney that emerged at the debate? One that basically disavowed all of the "severely conservative" stuff he's espoused for the last two years? The one that's going to "repeal" ObamaCare, yet keep all of its major components???

Hmm...let's see.  Would you rather win a single debate through continous LYING, or actually win the election?
I know what I prefer.  


BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!




On election day, its your boy Willard that is going to get his ass kicked.  

Maybe, maybe not.  Voter registration among Republicans is higher than that of Democrats. Throw out the polls that grossly oversample Democrats and the fact that independents usually break against the incumbent and you may get something more like........



BOOM THAT, Obama Boy.

BTW, the only lying going on here is by Team Obama, as his deputy campaign manager had to admit on CNN that Obama's claim about Romney's so-called $5 trillion tax cut was FALSE.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/10/04/cutter_concedes_5_trillion_attack_on_romney_is_not_true.html

[Voice of Doom]

Jesus Christ...how about everybody just vote for who they're gonna vote for and STFU for the next 6 weeks!

[bike nut]

LOL 
It's amazing how little it takes to make repubes gleeful.  I guess you like this new, moderate Romney that emerged at the debate? One that basically disavowed all of the "severely conservative" stuff he's espoused for the last two years? The one that's going to "repeal" ObamaCare, yet keep all of its major components???

Hmm...let's see.  Would you rather win a single debate through continous LYING, or actually win the election?
I know what I prefer. 


BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!


On election day, its your boy Willard that is going to get his ass kicked. 

Debate Slaughter Meltdown........hahahaha hahahahaha.

Win a debate with lies? Your man was right there on stage, why didn't he get off his dumb ass and refute them then? Face it....48 hrs later and obama still can't counter Romney.

Your one man prediction means sweet fuck all. This will be a Repub landslide just like the mid-terms. Pack your bags saggy arm michelle, you and your pancake titties are headed back to Blue Island.

[MCWAY]

lol. You are a funny guy.

What's funny is listening to liberals make excuses for why Obama got creamed Wednesday night.

Let's see there's:

• Hanky-Gate
  
• Altitude-Gate
• Lack-of-Angry-Black-Man-Gate

• Moderator-Gate

• Brain-Freeze-Gate

As for the EC polls, try getting some where Dems aren't oversampled six to ten points (or more); then, run the numbers and see where it leads you.
[/list]

[polychronopolous]

What's funny is listening to liberals make excuses for why Obama got creamed Wednesday night.

Let's see there's:


• Hanky-Gate
  
• Altitude-Gate
• Lack-of-Angry-Black-Man-Gate
• Moderator-Gate
• Brain-Freeze-Gate

As for the EC polls, try getting some where Dems aren't oversampled six to ten points (or more); then, run the numbers and see where it leads you.

[/list]

What was that line Romney came out with? "I had a friend who said 'You don't pick the winners and losers...you just pick the losers!'"

LOL talk about complete and utter pawnage as Obama heard that line and then immediately looked down at his feet!!

[MCWAY]

Debate Slaughter Meltdown........hahahaha hahahahaha.

Win a debate with lies? Your man was right there on stage, why didn't he get off his dumb ass and refute them then? Face it....48 hrs later and obama still can't counter Romney.

My point exactly!! Every time Obama tried to advance one of his falsehoods about Romney's policies and plans, Romney cut him to pieces, especially about the tax cuts.

Best of all, Romney beat Obama over the head with his record REPEATEDLY (to which Obama could not answer) and reminded him, "You've been president for four years., when he tried to pull the Blame-Bush card.

[MCWAY]

What was that line Romney came out with? "I had a friend who said 'You don't pick the winners and losers...you just pick the losers!'"

LOL talk about complete and utter pawnage as Obama heard that line and then immediately looked down at his feet!!

My favorite was, "Look! I’ve got five boys. I’m used to people saying something that’s not always true, but just keep on repeating it and ultimately hoping I’ll believe it.

That was his counter when Obama, for the third or fourth time, accused Romney of wanting a $5 trillion tax cut for the rich.

[polychronopolous]

My favorite was, "Look! I’ve got five boys. I’m used to people saying something that’s not always true, but just keep on repeating it and ultimately hoping I’ll believe it.

That was his counter when Obama, for the third or fourth time, accused Romney of wanting a $5 trillion tax cut for the rich.

Yeah that was a classic too! Man this has got me pumped up...almost like watching a Tyson knockout highlight  reel! I think I might have to rewatch it to see just how big of a brutal ass whooping Romney really put on Obama!!

[MCWAY]

Guess this is the last we'll see of Obama Boy on this thread.

[syntaxmachine]

What's funny is listening to liberals make excuses for why Obama got creamed Wednesday night.

Yes, that is funny as well. Though I think the "creaming" was just Romney being a better actor, which is something that probably doesn't indicate much about how he would perform once in office.

As for the EC polls, try getting some where Dems aren't oversampled six to ten points (or more); then, run the numbers and see where it leads you.

1. OK. Let's throw out the results from all organizations that oversample Dems -- if indeed that's what's happening -- by only looking at the results from an organization that definitely doesn't do that, since it oversamples Republicans instead: Rasmussen.

I've noticed that you focus on national polls in your posts; that would be fine if this country were a democracy. As it happens, the candidate who wins does so by winning electoral votes, not the popular vote. We can use Rasmussen's Ohio polls as a metric for Willard's chances since no Republican has won the White House without winning Ohio.

2. Rasmussen's latest poll -- which accounts for any potential effects of the first debate -- indicates Obama is ahead by 1% in Ohio, with a margin of error of 4.5%. It is a common misperception that since the difference between the candidates is within the margin of error, the candidates are 'essentially tied.' But this isn't true: given the margin of error and difference between the candidates, we can infer the probability that the candidate the poll says is ahead really is ahead. This table captures such probabilities:



Since our particular margin of error is 4.5%, there is a 59% chance Obama really is ahead and would win Ohio -- and thus the White House -- if the election were held today. The conclusion that Willard is in poor shape is doubly reinforced by three more facts: Rasmussen uses likely voters and not registered voters, the probability above is as high as it is for an organization that oversamples Republicans, meaning the real probability is higher, and market data -- which as I've said repeatedly is more accurate than polling data -- indicates a 64% chance of an Obama victory.

3. So that's what happens when we remove any potential effects of Dem oversampling. Thanks.