Romney vs. Obama

[LightyKD]

He's entitled to rally around the states in which projections show that he'll get the majority of votes - that's merely strenghtening his position. Most would think that visiting the states in which he has a poor chance at winning would be better, but on the other hand, it's not insane to add some aditional cover to the bases you already own.

What projections have you been reading? All the polls I have seen has Obama in the lead between 3-5 points. Not to mention the projections have Obama with 350+ electorate votes in comparison to Romney's 280-ish votes and the electorate votes are what matters the most in the U.S. election process. Granted, as a proud Democrat I'm not tooting the victory horn yet. There are 3 Presidential debates and one Vice Presidential debate and those will be a make or break moment for either party. I'm going into this with my fingers crossed. Also, Foxi, YES, you're right, Romney has every right to rally where-ever he wants to BUT, calling it a "Victory Rally" when there are still over 40 days left in this election season is a bit premature.

 

[Foxi4]

What projections have you been reading? All the polls I have seen has Obama in the lead between 3-5 points. Not to mention the projections have Obama with 350+ electorate votes in comparison to Romney's 280-ish votes and the electorate votes are what matters the most in the U.S. election process. Granted, as a proud Democrat I'm not tooting the victory horn yet. There are 3 Presidential debates and one Vice Presidential debate and those will be a make or break moment for either party. I'm going into this with my fingers crossed. Also, Foxi, YES, you're right, Romney has every right to rally where-ever he wants to BUT, calling it a "Victory Rally" when there are still over 40 days left in this election season is a bit premature.

...You are aware how the election system works in the US, right?

The U.S.A consists of States (duh!) - Romney may lead in some and lose in others, and he's interested in the ones he has a lead in.

 

[Hanafuda]

Obama is leading Romney with a lot of groups, including... NASCAR fans.

Can't say I saw that coming.

not the middle class. 14 point lead there.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81584.html

And here's a graph showing tracking of the Gallup poll so far for the month of September. Romney sure had a horrible week last week. His campaign's on the ropes n' shit.

 

[LightyKD]

What projections have you been reading? All the polls I have seen has Obama in the lead between 3-5 points. Not to mention the projections have Obama with 350+ electorate votes in comparison to Romney's 280-ish votes and the electorate votes are what matters the most in the U.S. election process. Granted, as a proud Democrat I'm not tooting the victory horn yet. There are 3 Presidential debates and one Vice Presidential debate and those will be a make or break moment for either party. I'm going into this with my fingers crossed. Also, Foxi, YES, you're right, Romney has every right to rally where-ever he wants to BUT, calling it a "Victory Rally" when there are still over 40 days left in this election season is a bit premature.

...You are aware how the election system works in the US, right?

The U.S.A consists of States (duh!) - Romney may lead in some and lose in others, and he's interested in the ones he has a lead in.

Um DUDE! I LIVE in the United States. Look at my flag and we do NOT have a popular vote system. The popular votes basically serve as a guide for the electorate voters and while Romney might want to keep the states he have a lead in, there are eight "swing states" in this country that are make or break states for either party and right now Romney is in Ohio (a swing state) trying to racket u up more votes. Also, Obama is leading (barely ) in most of the swing states so.... nuff said for now

 

[LightyKD]

Polls FTW

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/elections/

As you can see the current President has a somewhat stable lead with, Romney leading in only 11 spots on the first page and Obama leading in at least 67 spots. Need I say more???

 

[Foxi4]

Seeing that my preferred candidate already dropped out of the election, you're doomed either way. You have a choice between "same old" and "insane", so you're between a rock and a hard spot, really.

 

[LightyKD]

Seeing that my preferred candidate already dropped out of the election, you're doomed either way. You have a choice between "same old" and "insane", so you're between a rock and a hard spot, really.

As long as Obama wins, we will be fine. If Romney gets into office I'm leaving this country. Last thing I want to see is this country go into a Dark Ages state. The Republican party are really trying to turn this country into a theocracy in which education and reasoning take a back seat to their crusade against non-Christians.

 

[Hanafuda]

Um DUDE! I LIVE in the United States. Look at my flag and we do NOT have a popular vote system. The popular votes basically serve as a guide for the electorate voters and while Romney might want to keep the states he have a lead in, there are eight "swing states" in this country that are make or break states for either party and right now Romney is in Ohio (a swing state) trying to racket u up more votes. Also, Obama is leading (barely ) in most of the swing states so.... nuff said for now

Nuff said? Maybe. All those assumptions are based only on polls. Yes, they're the only reference we have, but they're rarely accurate when it's all over (unless it's a landslide). Most of the polls being done recently that show Obama with a lead are sampling democrats over republicans by 11% or so, when there were only 7% more registered democrats than republicans for the 2008 election. Has the registered base of democrats in the USA really increased by 4% over the last 4 years? The results of the 2010 election would suggest otherwise. On the other hand, the percentage of people who are dependent on SS disability or food stamps or unemployment or welfare has probably increased by much more than 4% over the last 4 years, so ironically the polls (and Romney's comment about the 47%) may ultimately prove accurate after all.

 

[The Catboy]

Seeing that my preferred candidate already dropped out of the election, you're doomed either way. You have a choice between "same old" and "insane", so you're between a rock and a hard spot, really.

I'd rather stick with the same old than have some nut job like Mitt in office. At least with the same old I can retain what little rights I still have.

 

[Foxi4]

Petty squabbles. You have more important things to worry about than your forreign interests and/or religious disputes - the U.S has internal problems which remained unfixed for several years now.

You need another president like Bill Clinton - fair play, he may not have been the best husband, but he was the only president out of the last few who not only didn't increase the deficit - in fact, he decreased it. It's a shame that a good politician was sent to the margins because of his shabby personal life, which shouldn't be of anyone's concern.

Americans have a horrible tendency to lead to voting between two complete extremes rather than looking for someone who represents the center - the sweet-spot of politics. You had Ron Paul and you wasted that opportunity in my opinion.

I'd rather stick with the same old than have some nut job like Mitt in office. At least with the same old I can retain what little rights I still have.

Fair play, it's the better candidate out of the two, but it doesn't help the U.S in its current economical predicament.

 

[LightyKD]

Um DUDE! I LIVE in the United States. Look at my flag and we do NOT have a popular vote system. The popular votes basically serve as a guide for the electorate voters and while Romney might want to keep the states he have a lead in, there are eight "swing states" in this country that are make or break states for either party and right now Romney is in Ohio (a swing state) trying to racket u up more votes. Also, Obama is leading (barely ) in most of the swing states so.... nuff said for now

Nuff said? Maybe. All those assumptions are based only on polls. Yes, they're the only reference we have, but they're rarely accurate when it's all over (unless it's a landslide). Most of the polls being done recently that show Obama with a lead are sampling democrats over republicans by 11% or so, when there were only 7% more registered democrats than republicans for the 2008 election. Has the registered base of democrats in the USA really increased by 4% over the last 4 years? The results of the 2010 election would suggest otherwise. On the other hand, the percentage of people who are dependent on SS disability or food stamps or unemployment or welfare has probably increased by much more than 4% over the last 4 years, so ironically the polls (and Romney's comment about the 47%) may ultimately prove accurate after all.

It's obvious that we stand on different sides of the fence BUT, I agree with you. The polls do have a margin of error and I really think this election boils down to which party can 1) energize their base and 2) get enough independent voters to side with them for this election. Politics is like a game of chess but sadly this game isn't for fun and it effects everyone. I have a feeling that no matter who you are rooting for, we all will have out fingers crossed on Election night because the race will be that damn close.

 

[Hanafuda]

As long as Obama wins, we will be fine.

wow. cuz we've been rebounding like a damned rocket the last four years, right?

If Romney gets into office I'm leaving this country.

So your allegiance to your nation is so weak that it's dependent entirely on your satisfaction with the outcome of a Presidential election?

Last thing I want to see is this country go into a Dark Ages state. The Republican party are really trying to turn this country into a theocracy in which education and reasoning take a back seat to their crusade against non-Christians.

Hyperbole. You're good at it.

 

[The Catboy]

I'd rather stick with the same old than have some nut job like Mitt in office. At least with the same old I can retain what little rights I still have.

Fair play, it's the better candidate out of the two, but it doesn't help the U.S in its current economical predicament.

Going to be honest.
Me wanting to live a normal life >> me being pursued because I just happen to gay and not a Christian.

Also Mitt is not going to help America, he drove Massachusetts into the ground. If he plans on doing the same to America as he did to Massachusetts, I am getting the fuck out of America if he gets in office.

 

[LightyKD]

Petty squabbles. You have more important things to worry about than your forreign interests and/or religious disputes - the U.S has internal problems which remained unfixed for several years now.

You need another president like Bill Clinton - fair play, he may not have been the best husband, but he was the only president out of the last few who not only didn't increase the deficit - in fact, he decreased it. It's a shame that a good politician was sent to the margins because of his shabby personal life, which shouldn't be of anyone's concern.

Americans have a horrible tendency to lead to voting between two complete extremes rather than looking for someone who represents the center - the sweet-spot of politics. You had Ron Paul and you wasted that opportunity in my opinion.

I'd rather stick with the same old than have some nut job like Mitt in office. At least with the same old I can retain what little rights I still have.

Fair play, it's the better candidate out of the two, but it doesn't help the U.S in its current economical predicament.

LMFAO! Ron Paul? That's who you were rooting for? That racist son of a bitch is crazy and I'm glad he's no where near the Presidential seat.

 

[Foxi4]

Going to be honest.
Me wanting to live a normal life >> me being pursued because I just happen to gay and not a Christian.

Also Mitt is not going to help America, he drove Massachusetts into the ground. If he plans on doing the same to America as he did to Massachusetts, I am getting the fuck out of America if he gets in office.

I never said that he would, I think that man is insane and shouldn't be a politician, let alone a candidate for the President's seat. What I said was that you are left with two options, neither of which is going to help. You can merely choose the rate at which the country will further descend.

 

[Hanafuda]

You need another president like Bill Clinton - fair play, he may not have been the best husband, but he was the only president out of the last few who not only didn't increase the deficit - in fact, he decreased it. It's a shame that a good politician was sent to the margins because of his shabby personal life, which shouldn't be of anyone's concern.

That happened when Republicans controlled both houses of Congress. Their budget, but Clinton takes credit.

 

[LightyKD]

As long as Obama wins, we will be fine.

wow. cuz we've been rebounding like a damned rocket the last four years, right?

If Romney gets into office I'm leaving this country.

So your allegiance to your nation is so weak that it's dependent entirely on your satisfaction with the outcome of a Presidential election?

Last thing I want to see is this country go into a Dark Ages state. The Republican party are really trying to turn this country into a theocracy in which education and reasoning take a back seat to their crusade against non-Christians.

Hyperbole. You're good at it.

YES because I'm not a nationalist and I care more about the well being of ALL of Earth and not just one country

 

[Foxi4]

LMFAO! Ron Paul? That's who you were rooting for? That racist son of a bitch is crazy and I'm glad he's no where near the Presidential seat.

Sure, pursue someone for the mistakes of the past rather than read his political programme.

 

[The Catboy]

Going to be honest.
Me wanting to live a normal life >> me being pursued because I just happen to gay and not a Christian.

Also Mitt is not going to help America, he drove Massachusetts into the ground. If he plans on doing the same to America as he did to Massachusetts, I am getting the fuck out of America if he gets in office.

I never said that he would, I think that man is insane and shouldn't be a politician, let alone a candidate for the President's seat. What I said was that you are left with two options, neither of which is going to help. You can merely choose the rate at which the country will further descend.

Considering the fact that it took Bush 8 years to fuck up the country, I doubt it's going to be fixed in only 4.
When it really comes down it, Obama will do more for America than Mitt.

Personally I would rather have many other people over both of them, but give the choices I have, Obama is better choice.

 

[Hanafuda]

I'd rather stick with the same old than have some nut job like Mitt in office. At least with the same old I can retain what little rights I still have.

Fair play, it's the better candidate out of the two, but it doesn't help the U.S in its current economical predicament.

Going to be honest.
Me wanting to live a normal life >> me being pursued because I just happen to gay and not a Christian.

Also Mitt is not going to help America, he drove Massachusetts into the ground. If he plans on doing the same to America as he did to Massachusetts, I am getting the fuck out of America if he gets in office.

You're being pursued? By who? Gay police?

Drove Massachusetts into the ground? It was 50th in job creation when he took office, and 28th when he left.

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/obama-twists-romneys-economic-record/