Reply With Quote
son its quite comical how you pick and choose what to read and post.
Despite a Strong Debate Campaign, Romney's Path to 270 Remains Steep
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...steep/263999/#
son its quite comical how you pick and choose what to read and post.
Hypocrisy your name is Bob.
It's quite comical that you have a reading comprehension limit.
Saw report this morning that shows this race is as tight as can be. Si se puede!!
popular vote polls are all over the place, but electoral votes are the only ones that count.
It was about electoral votes. Obama just edging out Romney but just one State could change all that.
The Washington Post , not that it really matters, endorsed Obama today.
Silver's predicting Barry 290 vs 247
Currently 61.3% chance at intrade for obama
FoxNews is already planning the celebration.
Parade route down Wall St!
Will Obama and Romney both wear Goldman Sachs t shirts at the celebration?
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...r/nate-silver/
Gecko trending in the right direction.
It will be unfortunate for american people if this happen. I read this article about bob woodward book on Obama. It make Obama look bad.
Which gets us to Bob Woodward's "The Price of Politics," published last month. The portrait it contains of Mr. Obama—of a president who is at once over his head, out of his depth and wholly unaware of the fact—hasn't received the attention it deserves. Throughout the book, which is a journalistic history of the president's key economic negotiations with Capitol Hill, Mr. Obama is portrayed as having the appearance and presentation of an academic or intellectual while being strangely clueless in his reading of political situations and dynamics. He is bad at negotiating—in fact doesn't know how. His confidence is consistently greater than his a en, his arrogance greater than his grasp.
He misread his Republican opponents from day one. If he had been large-spirited and conciliatory he would have effectively undercut them, and kept them from uniting. (If he'd been large-spirited with Mr. Romney, he would have undercut him, too.) Instead he was toughly partisan, he shut them out, and positions hardened. In time Republicans came to think he doesn't really listen, doesn't really hear. So did some Democrats. Business leaders and mighty CEOs felt patronized: After inviting them to meet with him, the president read from a teleprompter and included the press. They felt like "window dressing." One spoke of Obama's surface polish and essential remoteness. In negotiation he did not cajole, seduce, muscle or win sympathy. He instructed. He claimed deep understanding of his adversaries and their motives but was often incorrect. He told staffers that John Boehner, one of 11 children of a small-town bar owner, was a "country club Republican." He was often patronizing, which in the old and accomplished is irritating but in the young and inexperienced is infuriating. "Boehner said he hated going down to the White House to listen to what amounted to presidential lectures," Mr. Woodward writes.
Last edited by ErnestLynch; 10-26-2012 at 08:25 PM.
its funny cause romney is using the momentum narrative trying for a self fulfilling prophecy and obama is saying sure go ahead ill use it to scare my base into voting. somebody is bluffing about being ahead, we will find out who
Gecko still trending in the Good-for-USA direction:
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...r/nate-silver/
Nate Silver has such a wide, strong reputation for accuracy that many desperate right-wingers and Repugs have become "Nate Silver Truthers", just like AGW deniers.
I read a couple rumors that Rove spending is abandoning Gecko as a lost cause and switching his C-U $10Ms to close House and Senate races.
Romney got a tremendous boost from his post debate press coverage. I think the press coverage in the week after the first debate was more important than the debate itself. Obama was slammed in the media all the way until the next debate. After Obama won the second debate, the coverage flipped against Romney and his momentum stopped.
Did some research on pollsters and the two most consistent over the past two elections were Rasmussen and Pew. Pew doesn't put out as much as Rasmussen so if you just look at Rasmussen and assign electoral votes, Romney needs to take either Wisconsin or Ohio to win it. In the Rasmussen poll he also has Iowa tied but with Romney ahead in New Hampshire, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina and Colorado he wouldn't need Iowa. If he wins all the states Rasmussen has him ahead in and takes Wisconsin but loses Ohio and Iowa (All three Rasmussen has as tied) he finishes with 271 electoral votes.
You do realize Rasmussen is THE biggest GOP shill poll there is, right?
I read that hear before and was curious so I checked who was the closest in the last two elections. In '08 Rasmussen was closest. In '04 they were 4th or 5th.
You do realize Rasmussen is THE biggest GOP shill poll there is, right?
Here is the link to check out: http://electoralmap.net/2012/2008_el...php#reportcard
Overall Poll Score Grade Accuracy Consistency Rasmussen Reports 91% A- 92% 86% Ipsos/McClatchy 89% B+ 92% 79% CNN/Opinion Research 88% B+ 92% 77% Fox News 84% B 92% 61% Pew 83% B- 92% 56% GWU/Battleground 79% C+ 92% 41% Diageo/Hotline 77% C+ 77% 79% NBC News / Wall St. Journal 76% C 77% 75% Gallup Traditional 73% C- 77% 63% Marist 67% D+ 62% 82% ABC News / Wash Post 67% D+ 62% 82% IBD/TIPP 66% D 77% 34% Gallup Expanded 66% D 62% 78% CBS News / NYT 60% D- 62% 56% Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby 35% F 31% 48%
Last edited by Mikesatx; 10-27-2012 at 05:18 PM.
While Bob Woodward is one of the best journalists to ever grace this Earth, he did not write the hit piece you are quoting. Peggy Noonan did. Peggy Noonan is a GOP speechwriter and trustee of the Manhattan Ins ute. That place is about as politically neutral as the Heritage Foundation.
I am buying that book on Kindle right now though. Came out last month. I am slacking.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1451651104
eye reed gut
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp201...rasmussen.html
Truth about Rasmussen poll
Has Rasmussen changed their polling techniques? Assuming that Rasmussen is off because he appears on Fox would be the same as assuming Silver is biased because he is affiliated with the NY Times. We will know in about 10 days! I hope they are accurate because it would make for a very entertaining election day.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
