For the last many months, I've been pretty consistently of the opinion that Obama is likely to win the election by a fairly narrow popular margin (1-2%) but a "safe" EC margin (300 or so votes). Nothing really has changed in terms of popular opinion for the last many months, no matter what goes on in the campaigns - everyone seems to be locked into their candidate much more so than any previous election in modern history. But my opinion has started to change watching the convention weeks and the narratives of each campaign. The GOP missed a huge opportunity to actually put forth a specific agenda last week. For all the talk that Obama was all rhetoric in 2008, his list of detailed proposals dwarfed anything Romney has talked about - both in his campaign and his convention speech. I'm starting to sense that this next week is going to define the race. If the Dems do what I suspect they will do - lay out their own agenda and tie Romney to the "same ol' GOP policies" notion - they are going to get a pretty significant bounce next week with independents. It will recede, but I think some of it will hold - and at the end of the day, this shifts to a more comfortable 5-6% margin in the popular vote, similar to 2008. It won't be because of Obama's popularity, but a significant and difficult-to-overcome disinterest in Romney. McCain, while he had party headwinds against him, was personally likeable and popular. Romney is the opposite - he has political headwinds behind him, but simply cannot resonate with people. He's just not giving anyone not already politically aligned with the GOP a strong reason to vote for him.
Agree with everything except I believe the final vote will still be closer to 1-3%. As utterly pathetic as Romney is, Obama is sucking wind and won't be able to pull away without a major gaffe on Romney's part. IMO, R&R will be within striking distance at the end and they shouldn't do or say anything desperate to get over the hump.
I am not speaking about you specifically. but others who actually try to convince him of anything. I lampoon him constantly because I want to see if I can get him to go full r****d.
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/7ud3pK5Wa90" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Celebrities vouch for Obama: "Obama is just a celebrity, he doesn't know how to run a country! He only knows how to smile for the cameras and read off the teleprompter! Besides all these celebrities are dumb and don't know a thing about politics." Celebrities vouch for Romney: "Romney is a ******* American icon. Look at all these influentially, intellectually and culturally well-rounded figures and go-getters support our glorious and dear leader!" Hypocrites. And lol: "Creeping Socialism." Trying to bring back the red scare.
That isn't a celebrity, that's Chuck Norris. We only have elections because Chuck is too busy fighting aliens, demons, and robots from the future to waste his time running the country. If you can't see the difference, it doesn't say much for your judgment when it comes time to go to the polls.
I've seen plenty of liberals even on this forum openly advocate socialism. Don't be afraid of calling it what it is, if you endorse it. I'm not advocating Republicans being irrationally afraid of socialism, mind you.
Having socialist programs and favoring them is not the same thing as being a socialist or "creeping toward socialism." Social Security is a purely socialist program. So is Medicare. And both enjoy overwhelming popularity. Has most of the country, the majority that supports those socialist programs, been creeping toward socialism for the better part of the last century? From Ionesco's Rhinoceros... Logician: Here is an example of a syllogism. The cat has four paws. Isidore and Fricot both have four paws. Therefore, Isidore and Fricot are cats. Old Gentleman: My dog has got four paws. Logician: Then it's a cat. -- Logician: Another syllogism. All cats die. Socrates is dead. Therefore Socrates is a cat. Old Gentleman: And he's got four paws. That's true. I've got a cat named Socrates. Logician: There you are, you see.
I don't agree with Ranger Walker on anything, but Wife #2 looks great and I've never sensed he was anything but a decent guy. He either downshifted his movie career or accepted his own mediocrity 25 years ago and shifted focus and resources to a lot of really decent community service work.
The more I read about Romney's life, the more puzzled I am that the best parts of him, his faith, community and family life, are not being emphasized as much as it could. Devoting 30 hrs/week to his church on top of his workhours is a pretty impressive feat. Being a bishop and attending to his Boston congregants (whether with good results or bad...) brings a more humanizing element. Even his draft dodge-like experiences in France allowed him to see a worldview that wasn't handed to him. His cheapness and austerity might be insufferable to those around him, but it sheds some balance to how he denies the trappings of his 250 million dollar net worth to the press...even if he blames his wife when responding about his penchant for real estate. Part of it is that his Mormonism is considered a political liability. Another part is that his church frowns boosting upon his spiritual accomplishments as his own. But they should get more testimonials to offset his 'autistic' foot-in-mouth jack assery. The problem in all of this is that it doesn't answer why is he's so detached from other people and what they're going through. So he's a workaholic who is bright enough to get JD/MBA from Harvard, spearhead the private equity movement, and become a decent if polarizing governor of Massachusetts. None of it sheds light on what he stands for or what the inner workings of his church means to Americans given that his family is pretty up there in the hierarchy. It also appears that how he leads is like what you see from his responses to people who "gives excuses"...I know I can do it better than you so do it how I tell you to. Which is sad because the competence is there, but the empathy and values are not.
How awful is it in Chuck Norris' world? It's always weird to hear people talk like life has been hell the last four years, because Barry couldn't cure cancer. Settle down drama queen.
Mitt is extremely competent. Waaaaaaay more competent than Obama was (and is). We need a competent leader. NOW
You do know he is a Mormon? I don't know if Americans have a very favorable view of Mormonism. It has mellowed a little bit, but that religion grew from pretty cultish origins, and even still has some cult like practices.
