Poll: Obama Leading Romney 49% To 46% Ahead Of Second Debate

[Jingthing]

Perhaps more importantly, there doesn't seem to be any way for Romney to win Ohio and if he can't his chance of victory is very remote.

Nonsense. Romney and Obama are virtually tied in Ohio as in the margin of error. Romney has an excellent chance of taking Ohio and there are other paths to victory if he doesn't.

The other paths of winning without Ohio do exist but are very unlikely. Objective analysts don't rate Romney's chances of winning in Ohio as excellent. Anything is possible of course. Edited October 20, 2012 by Jingthing

[endure]

Bill Ayers and Al Sharpton will do for starters, then there's this.

http://www.westernjo...marxism-part-1/

So that would be two men who aren't politicians and another man who's trying to publicise his book.

[Jingthing]

MSNBC is doing pretty well ratings wise. Obviously Fox is tops in ratings, but CNN has slipped so MSNBC is rising. I sometimes like to watch Fox and MSNBC at the same time: political STEREO. Especially amusing when they are talking about the same topic.

BTW, you can stream live MSNBC here:

http://blog.livenews...rockinroosters/

MSNBC is obviously going for an opposite of Fox play, and that is so very welcome.

Edited October 20, 2012 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

After four lousy years, a lot of democrats are switching their votes to Romney. After voting for and supporting Democrats all of his life, Lee Iacocca endorsed Republican Mitt Romney for president on Thursday. The endorsement of the former Chrysler chairman is expected to help Romney in two highly competitive states: Pennsylvania, where the 88-year-old Iacocca was born and raised and in Michigan, where Iacocca rose to become a major figure in the auto industry and won praise for putting together the government-backed loans that saved Chrysler in 1980.

Iacocca put out a statement saying that he backs Romney because of his “dozens of years of experiences in the public and private sectors” and because the GOP nominee has a plan that “will enable a stronger America.”

Edited October 20, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[koheesti]

Just a question. I keep reading about these "endorsements". Personally I don't need to know, nor do I care about other peoples' positions when deciding who I wish to support, but is this really such a big deal in America? Can't people think for themselves? I saw Giuliani supports Obama, I would think that would put a lot of people off if this is the case.

Why would Giulliani's support put anyone off? They can think for themselves.

Endorsements are useful for those who want to vote, but follow politics for whatever reason. For single issue voters (same sex marriage, abortion,etc) the decision is easy. For many regular people, who just want to get through their daily lives and maybe not be able to even name the VP but still believe its their civic duty to vote.

I know who will get my vote for president. That's easy, But my ballot has other, more local politicians on it that I am not familiar with (I live overseas). I will probably leave them blank (voting straight along party lines for people I've never heard isn't something I'm comfortable with). If I don't want to "waste my ballot" I could read my local paper online and see what they say about the candidates (endorsements) before making a decision. Here's my ballot (not including the pages of state constitutional amendments, etc). Notice it is in English AND Spanish ...

Edited October 20, 2012 by koheesti

[keemapoot]

After four lousy years, a lot of democrats are switching their votes to Romney. After voting for and supporting Democrats all of his life*, Lee Iacocca endorsed Republican Mitt Romney for president on Thursday.

Jai Yen, I know you're enthusiastic about Romney, but uh..that's not strictly true. As one of my business role models, he always was interesting in that his political support has shifted back and forth over time rather than only Republican. He supported Bush Jr., in his first term, and I suspect supported Reagan (too lazy to look it up).

First, Iacocca has always been a political independent*, although probably a more Democratic-leaning one. It was Jimmy Carter and a Democratic Congress that pushed for assistance to his ailing auto company. More recently, Iacocca said he supported President Barack Obama‘s efforts to saveGeneral Motors and Chrysler, although he was concerned about the impact on dealers who lost their franchises. Iacocca does not seem to have endorsed a candidate in the last president race, theFree Press said. But eight years ago, Iacocca endorsed Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, who unsuccessfully challenged President George W. Bush.

It’s not clear whether Iacocca’s endorsement will have that much impact on the race: the business community seems to be pretty solidly behind Romney, and retired auto industry executives also are likely to already be voting for him

http://www.forbes.co...es-mitt-romney/

http://www.usatoday....sement/1642053/

*Emphasis added

Edited October 20, 2012 by keemapoot

[koheesti]

Bill Ayers and Al Sharpton will do for starters, then there's this.

http://www.westernjo...marxism-part-1/

So that would be two men who aren't politicians and another man who's trying to publicise his book.

Marxists in American don't usually rise very high in politics...until recently that is.

[Jingthing]

Bill Ayers and Al Sharpton will do for starters, then there's this.

http://www.westernjo...marxism-part-1/

So that would be two men who aren't politicians and another man who's trying to publicise his book.

Marxists in American don't usually rise very high in politics...until recently that is.

That is the kind of thing Europeans understandably giggle about. Obama's a Marxist? Yeah. Sure. All educated people should study Marxist literature. I took such a class in college surrounding by people more like Mitt Romney than Barack Obama.

[Chicog]

It is NOT the case. The former Mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani supports and campaigns for the Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney.

You are correct and it's sure going to help Romney out a lot in New York state!

It was my mistake, I was sweeping headlines on a news crawler and misread it. However, I think having Giuliani coming out with this kind of thing must be less than helpful.

Speaking with Candy Crowley on CNN's "State of the Union," Giuliani, a former GOP presidential candidate himself, was invited to walk back critical statements he made about Romney going back to 2008. Instead, Giuliani ended up reaffirming some of them, as he unfavorably compared Romney's stint as governor of Massachusetts to his own years as New York City's mayor.

"Maybe it was circumstances or whatever, but I had massive reduction in unemployment," Giuliani said. "He had a reduction in unemployment of about 8 percent, 10 percent -- I think it was 15 percent. I had a reduction in unemployment of 50 percent. They had a growth of jobs of 40,000. We had a growth of jobs of 500,000. So I was comparing what I thought was my far superior record to his otherwise decent record, but the numbers weren't as great."

[chiangmaikelly]

Late Thursday, the Pew Research Center, the poll that has been toughest on Romney's favorability, released results showing that Romney is ahead of Obama by a point, 50 percent to 49 percent. That is a stunning turnaround from March, when Obama's favorable rating in Pew was about twice Romney's, 55 percent to 29 percent.

Gallup also has Romney beating Obama on the favorability rating, 52 percent to 51 percent.

Even the liberal DailyKos/SEIU/PPP poll has Romney beating Obama on the fave rating, 49 percent to 46 percent.

REALCLEAR MAP: Romney takes first lead in electoral college...

http://www.realclear...ollege_map.html

[lomatopo]

I think whoever wins Ohio will either be re-elected or elected.

Barring some huge surprise, event, gaffe I still think Romney will get enough electoral college votes to be elected. I did not cast my vote for Mr. Romney the two previous times he was on my ballot, nor do I plan to do so this time.

http://www.270towin.com/

[Jingthing]

My take.

When the Romney campaign is licking their wounds in defeat, they'll be whining about how they peaked TOO EARLY.

That said, people who believe Romney will win enjoy a good deal at intrade.

BTW, about polls.

Who answers their phone these days from unknown callers?

Who doesn't have caller ID?

I got a call the other day I didn't recognize.

Of course I didn't answer. I never do from numbers I don't know.

I looked it up.

It was the GALLUP poll. Yes, I have a U.S. phone number.

You can't call them back.

Get the point?

Edited October 20, 2012 by Jingthing

[GiHadOrange]

Marxists in American don't usually rise very high in politics...until recently that is.

That is the kind of thing Europeans understandably giggle about. Obama's a Marxist? Yeah. Sure. All educated people should study Marxist literature. I took such a class in college surrounding by people more like Mitt Romney than Barack Obama.

What i don't get or have at least problems with it is that label "liberal" because i read it often when actually some socialist tendencies are getting described.

people should d some study on the Austrian school.

[Ulysses G.]

My take.

You claimed that Romney was "toast" and had no chance two months ago. I prefer to wait to see the result of the actual vote.

[Jingthing]

My take.

You claimed that Romney was "toast" and had no chance two months ago. I prefer to wait to see the result of the actual vote.

Yes, it can't be over soon enough! But until then, if you don't mind, I think people will tend to talk about it.

[gudtymchuk]

Just a question. I keep reading about these "endorsements". Personally I don't need to know, nor do I care about other peoples' positions when deciding who I wish to support, but is this really such a big deal in America? Can't people think for themselves? I saw Giuliani supports Obama, I would think that would put a lot of people off if this is the case.

I believe most liberal democrats were deeply influenced by Clint Eastwood's empty chair.....

[chiangmaikelly]

Obama ahead, “Reading the OP, it appears to be a completely objective report of ONE recent credible poll.”

Obama behind, “BTW, about polls. Who answers their phone these days from unknown callers?"

[Jingthing]

Obama ahead, “Reading the OP, it appears to be a completely objective report of ONE recent credible poll.”

Obama behind, “BTW, about polls. Who answers their phone these days from unknown callers?"

Sounds like a case of Romnesia!

I most def would not vote for me for president.

Thankfully Obamacare covers preexisting conditions. So if I ever repatriate I'll commit myself to one of those Romnesia re-education camps.

Edited October 20, 2012 by Jingthing

[maidu]

A big factor is if liberals get off their fat butts and vote. The usual trend is for conservatives to make the effort to get in their Lincoln Continentals and drive over to the polling booth and vote. Liberals are usually too stoned, or lazy or simply slough it off by saying, "my one little vote doesn't count anyway..." If liberals vote en masse, Obama wins.

This thing about trying to paint Obama with a Marxist paintbrush is silly. It may work with oldie arch conservatives, but that's about it. It's like saying Romney is the monopoly man with the silver cane and top hat. Gimme a break.

[Jingthing]

Yes, base enthusiasm is vital. That's part of the motivation behind the Romnesia craze which appears to be for real beating out Binders of Women.

Speaking of the famous Binders, it turns out (as usual) Romney was misleading people in the last debate. He claimed he called for the women applicants when it turns out the binders of women's RESUMES was the idea of an outside group. Not his idea as he claimed. Also insiders in the one term of Romney in Mass. say his enthusiasm for women hires waned a lot later in his term.

His entire answer of course, slippery as it was, was a total dodge about the direct question that was asked, support for equal pay for women. Which he never answered.

Romney will definitely have a women's problem come November and it won't be in any binders.

Edited October 20, 2012 by Jingthing

[geriatrickid]

Nate Silver questions Gallups reliability;

Strange that Nate Silver waited to questions Gallup's reliabilty until Romney was ahead.

Why not deal with the issue at hand, which is the reliability of Gallup. I find it interesting that you do not dispute SIlver's position, rather you question his timing. One off political intention polls are not definitive. They have to be considered from the perspective of identifying trends and if they have a consistent validity. There are other poll results that show the trend was to Romney. Their results are not being questioned. Rather, only the historical reliability of Gallup was being commented upon. If you wish to hang your hat on one Gallup poll, ok, but it is not consistent with other polling results.

[Jingthing]

...

It's like saying Romney is the monopoly man with the silver cane and top hat. Gimme a break.

Maybe not the Monopoly Man but I wouldn't be surprised to look up the definition of PLUTOCRAT and see his picture ...

[Ulysses G.]

Nate Silver questions Gallups reliability;

Strange that Nate Silver waited to questions Gallup's reliabilty until Romney was ahead.

Why not deal with the issue at hand, which is the reliability of Gallup.

We will find out in about 3 weeks how reliable Gallup is. All the polls are accurate sometimes and inaccurate at other times. There is no way to know until the election.

Edited October 20, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

Romney will definitely have a women's problem come November and it won't be in any binders.

Women are not simple. They can see through all the silly "War on Women" rhetoric. They know that a decent economy is more important than saving $9 per month on free birth control and so they are switching to Romney in droves. Obama has had 4 years and despite alll the broken promises, he has just not delivered.

[Jingthing]

Romney will definitely have a women's problem come November and it won't be in any binders.

Women are not simple. They can see through all the silly "War on Women" rhetoric. They know that a decent economy is more important than saving $9 per month on free birth control and so they are switching to Romney in droves. Obama has had 4 years and despite alll the broken promises, he has just not delivered.

Pro choice women won't be switching.

Romney's amazing flip flopping inspiring some cover art:

Edited October 20, 2012 by Jingthing

[GiHadOrange]

A big factor is if liberals get off their fat butts and vote. The usual trend is for conservatives to make the effort to get in their Lincoln Continentals and drive over to the polling booth and vote. Liberals are usually too stoned, or lazy or simply slough it off by saying, "my one little vote doesn't count anyway..." If liberals vote en masse, Obama wins.

This thing about trying to paint Obama with a Marxist paintbrush is silly. It may work with oldie arch conservatives, but that's about it. It's like saying Romney is the monopoly man with the silver cane and top hat. Gimme a break.

The first choice—and the only one that matters—is: freedom or dictatorship, capitalism or statism.

That is the choice which today’s political leaders are determined to evade. The “liberals” are trying to put statism over by stealth—statism of a semi-socialist, semi-fascist kind—without letting the country realize what road they are taking to what ultimate goal. And while such a policy is reprehensible, there is something more reprehensible still: the policy of the “conservatives,” who are trying to defend freedom by stealth.

Ayn Rand

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/statism.html

[Jingthing]

The endorsement from the Salt Lake City Tribune, world capital of Mormonism, is quite excellent!

Therefore, our endorsement must go to the incumbent, a competent leader who, against tough odds, has guided the country through catastrophe and set a course that, while rocky, is pointing toward a brighter day. The president has earned a second term. Romney, in whatever guise, does not deserve a first.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/55019844-82/romnehttp://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/55019844-82/romney-obama-state-president.html.cspy-obama-state-president.html.csp

[GiHadOrange]

Here is a third option. What i like about this that it gives a nice comparison between the 2 main candidates Obama and Romney.

[Jingthing]

Gary who?

Anyway, back to the actual contenders, it is not true that Romney wants to replace Obamacare with Romneycare. Romneycare is very similar to Obamacare, except on the state level. One state. Romney doesn't want any federalization of health care reform. He is basically for the status quo, which is a nightmare, pre-Obamacare.

[GiHadOrange]

Gary who?

Anyway, back to the actual contenders, it is not true that Romney wants to replace Obamacare with Romneycare. Romneycare is very similar to Obamacare, except on the state level. One state. Romney doesn't want any federalization of health care reform. He is basically for the status quo, which is a nightmare, pre-Obamacare.

As i said its a third option, from a libertarian viewpoint. from someone who is neither an Obama nor Romney supporter.

No need to discuss Gary Whos own positions, but i found the comparsion interesting - which brakes down to: same, same and not much different.

And when looking at the vice president candidates there is the choice between an Ayn Rand fan vs. a Golda Meir fan.

Edited October 20, 2012 by GiHadOrange