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

[Ulysses G.]

There are still plenty of tossups, so I'm not sure what that proves. There are 146 electoral votes up for grabs at the moment.

There is definitely a trend towards Romney in Ohio and it is within the margin of error, so considered a tie. It is important to remember that, although Obama won Ohio in 2008, his victory was very narrow. Obama’s performance was not that impressive in traditional Democratic areas like Northeast Ohio and it is not difficult to conclude that his performance will be less impressive this time now that the euphoria of 2008 has faded. Wisconsin is also in play and could push Romney over the top without Ohio.

The aura of a losing campaign is unique, and Ross Douthat pegged it today:

Losing campaigns have a certain feel to them: They go negative hard, try out new messaging very late in the game, hype issues that only their core supporters are focused on, and try to turn non-gaffes and minor slip-ups by their opponents into massive, election-turning scandals.

Sound familiar? http://ricochet.com/...nflection-Point

Edited October 27, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[keemapoot]

Meanwhile, if Obama wins only through the electoral college, and not the popular vote, it will inflame even more polarization in the country, so even if Obama wins he will face obstacles at every turn in the Republican House especially.

A win in the electoral college that is not accompanied by one in the popular vote casts a shadow over the president and his ability to govern.

If Obama is re-elected that way, “the Republican base will be screaming that Romney should be president, and Obama doesn’t represent the country,” McKinnon predicted. “It’s going to encourage more hyperpartisanship.”

Every modern president to be re-elected — Dwight D. Eisenhower, Richard M. Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Clinton, George W. Bush — has gotten a bigger share of the vote in their second bid for office than their first, and with it, a chance to claim a mandate.

http://www.washingto...9c5d_story.html

[Ulysses G.]

I'm afraid that no matter who wins this election, there will be big problems afterwards. I would not discount the threats of riots if Romney wins because of the scare mongering and character assassination tactics used by the Obama campaign to hold on to power. Some people are scared of Romney and only because they have been mislead for political gain.

On the other hand, as keemapoot says, if Obama wins he will face even more obstacles in the Republican House. They are not going to cooperate with him after running the most dishonest campaign in modern history.

[keemapoot]

^Yes, there's a lot of truth in your statements too, and if Romney wins we can maybe expect some inner city riots? I wouldn't be surprised.

[maidu]

You sound like a defence attorney splitting hairs to defend a guilty client. One statistic has changed since the chart was put out and unempoyment is still terrible. Obama had 4 years to fix the economy as he promised to do to get elected and he failed. Time to go.

I would venture that if McCain or any other Republican had won in 2008, the economic mess we're seeing now would be a lot worse. Detoit's big 3 could have been shut down. If someone like Ryan had won in 2008, he likely would have thrown an added 1 or 2 trillion dollars at the military (which they didn't want) to build additional carrier groups - which is what he and Romney are advocating now.

I'm afraid that no matter who wins this election, there will be big problems afterwards. I would not discount the threats of riots if Romney wins because of the scare mongering and character assassination tactics used by the Obama campaign to hold on to power. Some people are scared of Romney and only because they have been mislead for political gain.

On the other hand, as keemapoot says, if Obama wins he will face even more obstacles in the Republican House. They are not going to cooperate with him after running the most dishonest campaign in modern history.

I don't think there will be riots if Romney wins. That's scaremongering. Unless Romney wins by cheating and/or suppressing a recount of contested counties, as Bush Jr's attack team (led by J.Baker) did in 2000. There were groups of baseball bat-armed Republican thugs forcing their way in to government offices where people were trying to count hanging chads. The armed thug disruption method worked for Republicans that time, but it's doubtful it will work a 2nd time.

[Ulysses G.]

^Yes, there's a lot of truth in your statements too, and if Romney wins we can maybe expect some inner city riots? I wouldn't be surprised.

I would not put it beyond the Occupy Wall Street and"professional" protester types to join in.

Edited October 27, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[keemapoot]

It does make for an interesting conspiracy theory, that if Democrats lose, they will foment new race & class riots, in an effort to get back the White house in 4 years.

[Ulysses G.]

I would venture that if McCain or any other Republican had won in 2008, the economic mess we're seeing now would be a lot worse.

Sounds like pointless specuation. There is no way to know.

I don't think there will be riots if Romney wins. That's scaremongering.

There are threats to riot posted on Youtube and that is a fact.

Edited October 27, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[maidu]

Here's an excerpt of an article which gives a glimpse of what a manipulator Romney can be:

In 1987, two years before the company went public, then-Staples chief Tom Stemberg was negotiating his divorce settlement. The company's board, which Romney was a part of, agreed that Stemberg's company stock was worth less than a penny a share.

Concurrently, it was preparing to go public at a hoped-for offering price of $6 a share.

Romney said: "It was my true belief that one could justify one-tenth-of-one-cent as the value of the common stock, but that the stock was probably worth more than that."

Romney also testified that he was aware Staples was talking to Goldman Sachs about a possible public offering. In an earlier deposition, Romney had said a $6 per-share price was realistic, enabling Romney and his Bain partners "to more than double our money over a one- to three-year time frame."

Maidu's comment: Romney is embedded in the corporate culture of 'get all you can, take no prisoners, and the heck with the little people who might be in the way." He could be Thaksin's long lost twin brother. That's not the sort of ruthless CEO Americans want to run their country.

[Ulysses G.]

That's not the sort of ruthless CEO Americans want to run their country.

It is if he stands up to countries that are cheating and improves the economy. Maybe he can "manipulate" the democratic senate into finally passing a budget after all this time.

[keemapoot]

^^ All the episode shows is that Romney was attempting to help the CEO of his investee company, Staples, in a divorce to keep as much money away from the wife as possible. She still got rich, but much less so had Romney not testified such.

It's natural that Romney would be close with such a successful investee company. Successes are hard won in Private Equity.

Gloria Allred has tried to expose that this episode shows Romney's disdain for women.

* edit - oh, and if it's the "lying under oath" bit that bothers you about Romney, one of the advantages of his legal training is knowing how to draw subtle defensible distinctions between a lie and truth - great training for politics.

Edited October 27, 2012 by keemapoot

[geriatrickid]

No I don't. I support having them take responsibility for their own birth control. $10 per month is next to nothing.

And if they are too poor to be able to afford it?

Your argument is eerily similar to the position of evangelicals who wish to see these women "punished" for their wanton depraved lust.

Unfortunately, there is a catch. When these folks get knocked up, and pop out another one, who do you think is going to pay for the next Honey BooBoo or Dashid's upkeep until it most likely ends up in jail? Do the math. It is far more cost effective to assist people of limited means, i.e. the impoverished from having kids, then it is to care for their progeny.

You have illustrated the typical tea party Republican's political views well, and it is a view shared by Mitt and his sidekick young Mr. Ryan. Short term gain with no consideration of the long term implications. The Bain Capitals of this world are all about maximizing ROI asap and putting off the consequences.

[chuckd]

Here's an excerpt of an article which gives a glimpse of what a manipulator Romney can be:

In 1987, two years before the company went public, then-Staples chief Tom Stemberg was negotiating his divorce settlement. The company's board, which Romney was a part of, agreed that Stemberg's company stock was worth less than a penny a share.

Concurrently, it was preparing to go public at a hoped-for offering price of $6 a share.

Romney said: "It was my true belief that one could justify one-tenth-of-one-cent as the value of the common stock, but that the stock was probably worth more than that."

Romney also testified that he was aware Staples was talking to Goldman Sachs about a possible public offering. In an earlier deposition, Romney had said a $6 per-share price was realistic, enabling Romney and his Bain partners "to more than double our money over a one- to three-year time frame."

Maidu's comment: Romney is embedded in the corporate culture of 'get all you can, take no prisoners, and the heck with the little people who might be in the way." He could be Thaksin's long lost twin brother. That's not the sort of ruthless CEO Americans want to run their country.

Have you ever heard of David Axelrod? He is Obama's campaign chief and has been a very close Obama confidant for many years.

Axelrod has used this tactic before about getting divorce records unsealed in order to get Obama elected. Since Romney has never been divorced Axelrod has had to dig deeper than usual to find some dirt.

It is very simply another Chicago dirty politics trick.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obama's Signature Move: Unsealing Private Records

Mitt Romney presents one enormous problem for Barack Obama's campaign: No divorce records. That's why the media are so hot to get their hands on Romney's tax records for the past 25 years. They need something to "pick through, distort and lie about" -- as the Republican candidate says.

...From the article...

Let's take a romp down memory lane and review the typical Obama campaign strategy. Obama became a U.S. senator only by virtue of David Axelrod's former employer, the Chicago Tribune, ripping open the sealed divorce records of Obama's two principal opponents. One month before the 2004 Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate, Obama was down in the polls, about to lose to Blair Hull, a multimillionaire securities trader. But then the Chicago Tribune leaked the claim that Hull's second ex-wife, Brenda Sexton, had sought an order of protection against him during their 1998 divorce proceedings. Those records were under seal, but as The New York Times noted: "The Tribune reporter who wrote the original piece later acknowledged in print that the Obama camp had 'worked aggressively behind the scenes' to push the story." Many people said Axelrod had "an even more significant role -- that he leaked the initial story."....

http://www.drudge.co...sealing-private

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

...and this...

http://en.wikipedia....an_(politician)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Following is an article from the Chicago Tribune (Axelrod's former employer) that focuses on the divorce records of Blair Hull. Mr. Hull was Obama's opponent in he Illinois Democratic primary in 2004. The article is filled with innuendos and half truths. More Chicago politics.

http://www.chicagotr...,4897225.column

[geriatrickid]

That's not the sort of ruthless CEO Americans want to run their country.

It is if he stands up to countries that are cheating and improves the economy. Maybe he can "manipulate" the democratic senate into finally passing a budget after all this time.

I would be more sympathetic to the USA standing up to other countries if the USA didn't have equally nasty trade barriers. Need some examples? Peanuts. US consumers are stuck with only US grown varieties and cannot access some of the higher quality peanuts from other countries. There are even restrictions on peanut oil imports. Citrus is probably one of the most protected industries in the USA. Most Americans have never tasted a clementine, aka the candy fruit. Grown in Morocco and now South Africa, trade barriers keep them out of the USA. Instead US consumers have to make do with some over priced and tasteless pulpy products. And on and on it goes.

I don't quite get the Republican position on trade anyway. As I understand it, it is US commercial businesses that seek to raise their capital from multinational lenders. The Chinese would prefer not to support the US economy, but if they didn't fund US debt, then the US economy would be even worse as there would be no way to return the funds that leave because the US consumer wants low cost consumer goods and buys Chinese. I find it laughable that so many US Republicans complain about the Chinese but they will not buy American when they have the chance.

[geriatrickid]

'chuckd' timestamp='1351307472' post='5787616']

Sir,

I am puzzled by your post. Surely as a dyed in the wool Republican and one that shares family values, you can understand why the issue of divorce was so very important. A marriage is a sacred contract. It is why we can't have those horrid same sex arrangements. Anyone that violates the sanctity of marriage, one of the core values that made America strong, should be revealed. There are exceptions of course, and your good friend Mr. Gingrich is one. He's on to his second marriage and I am sympathetic to good ole Newton Leroy Gingrich. His 1st wife might have been a harlot, so I do undertsand. Why gosh, Mr. Cain had a bit of similar issue except it was all those horrible women claiming he was akin to a lecherous groper. Shameful accusations they were, and I venture his accusers were harlots too. I know all about this because, land o'goshen, it was discussed at length during the Republican primaries and the various candidates made sure that the public was informed. As I understand it, the Romney campaign was very helpful in assisting the American public in getting the facts on messrs Gingrich and Cain. In light of this, the accusations you make against Mr. Axelrod are not much of an issue.

Edited October 27, 2012 by geriatrickid

[chuckd]

That's not the sort of ruthless CEO Americans want to run their country.

It is if he stands up to countries that are cheating and improves the economy. Maybe he can "manipulate" the democratic senate into finally passing a budget after all this time.

I would be more sympathetic to the USA standing up to other countries if the USA didn't have equally nasty trade barriers. Need some examples? Peanuts. US consumers are stuck with only US grown varieties and cannot access some of the higher quality peanuts from other countries. There are even restrictions on peanut oil imports. Citrus is probably one of the most protected industries in the USA. Most Americans have never tasted a clementine, aka the candy fruit. Grown in Morocco and now South Africa, trade barriers keep them out of the USA. Instead US consumers have to make do with some over priced and tasteless pulpy products. And on and on it goes.

I don't quite get the Republican position on trade anyway. As I understand it, it is US commercial businesses that seek to raise their capital from multinational lenders. The Chinese would prefer not to support the US economy, but if they didn't fund US debt, then the US economy would be even worse as there would be no way to return the funds that leave because the US consumer wants low cost consumer goods and buys Chinese. I find it laughable that so many US Republicans complain about the Chinese but they will not buy American when they have the chance.

Now this has devolved into the Great Clementine Debate? It isn't only the US that has no Clementine candy. I have lived overseas for the last 31 years and have never enjoyed a tasty Clementine. My life is apparently not complete.

The reason the Chinese support the US economy is they earn interest on the debt and earn income from the massive trade imbalance in China's favor. If China were to lose the US market their economy would be in serious trouble.

Does this statement from your post mean only Republicans complain about the Chinese but will not purchase US products? If so, you might want to dig up some sources to back up the allegation.

" I find it laughable that so many US Republicans complain about the Chinese but they will not buy American when they have the chance."

Edited October 27, 2012 by chuckd

[geriatrickid]

No I don't. I support having them take responsibility for their own birth control. $10 per month is next to nothing.

And if they are too poor to be able to afford it?

Your argument is eerily similar to the position of evangelicals who wish to see these women "punished" for their wanton depraved lust.

Unfortunately, there is a catch. When these folks get knocked up, and pop out another one, who do you think is going to pay for the next Honey BooBoo or Dashid's upkeep until it most likely ends up in jail? Do the math. It is far more cost effective to assist people of limited means, i.e. the impoverished from having kids, then it is to care for their progeny.

You have illustrated the typical tea party Republican's political views well, and it is a view shared by Mitt and his sidekick young Mr. Ryan. Short term gain with no consideration of the long term implications. The Bain Capitals of this world are all about maximizing ROI asap and putting off the consequences.

Most of those people "too poor" to afford $10 for birth control are already mothers/parents of enough children to live a comfortable life on the ADC (Aid for Dependent Children) welfare checks they are drawing. Perhaps they could cut down on their Twinky purchases to be able to afford that horrible $10 monthly birth control costs.

Have you ever tried to live on that income while raising a brood in a Kentucky trailer park? BTW, Hostess went bankrupt. No more twinkies.

[geriatrickid]

^Yes, there's a lot of truth in your statements too, and if Romney wins we can maybe expect some inner city riots? I wouldn't be surprised.

I would not put it beyond the Occupy Wall Street and"professional" protester types to join in.

They are still less dangerous than the wackos from Waco, or the Ruby Ridge Killers, or the Minitemen militias, or the other various armed self appointed militias and posses.

[samran]

I would venture that if McCain or any other Republican had won in 2008, the economic mess we're seeing now would be a lot worse.

Sounds like pointless specuation. There is no way to know.

Yet you have faith in the fact that those same policies will now turn the US around? I'm confused....if they are good for the next 4 years, why woudn't they have been good for the previous 4?

[Baloo22]

I don't think there will be riots if Romney wins. That's scaremongering. Unless Romney wins by cheating and/or suppressing a recount of contested counties, as Bush Jr's attack team (led by J.Baker) did in 2000. There were groups of baseball bat-armed Republican thugs forcing their way in to government offices where people were trying to count hanging chads. The armed thug disruption method worked for Republicans that time, but it's doubtful it will work a 2nd time.

Baseball-bat armed Republican thugs? Only in the hallucinations of the far-left loon fringe!

The "disruption" that you are refering to was caused by the Dade County canvassing commission move of their ballot “recount” out of a large room, where their actions were being observed by the media and both Democrat and Republican observers, to a small room away from the observations of journalists and the media and also excluding all Republican observers from the room. They were following the Democrat Party “Chicago Style” behind closed doors vote counting tradition.

[Jingthing]

Not sure about the baseball bats, but during the 2000 recount crisis, there most certainly were large groups of republican activists behaving in an extremely thug-like manner. It was all over the media with live coverage. So let's keep this real. It wasn't democrats. It was republicans. It wasn't Chicago. It was Florida.

[geriatrickid]

Looks like Romney had very good reasons for laying off on the Ben Ghazi conspiracy train.

Condi Rice and her voice of reason weighed in.

Not that this will stop the yahoos and cowboys from making their wild allegations. Maybe Sunnunu will offer his race loyalty explanation for her position

[Baloo22]

Not sure about the baseball bats, but during the 2000 recount crisis, there most certainly were large groups of republican activists behaving in an extremely thug-like manner. It was all over the media with live coverage. So let's keep this real. It wasn't democrats. It was republicans. It wasn't Chicago. It was Florida.

My comment was keeping it real. You need to read it again. The thug-like manner was exibited by the Dade County (Democrat-led; Suprise!) Canvassing Commision's attempts to hide their ballot "recount" from public view. Citizens objected to and protested against such disgusting underhanded conduct. They were right to do so. And I did not say it occured in Chicago. I said it was "Democrat Party “Chicago Style” behind closed doors vote counting tradition." And that is exactly what it was!

[keemapoot]

Looks like Romney had very good reasons for laying off on the Ben Ghazi conspiracy train.

Condi Rice and her voice of reason weighed in.

Not that this will stop the yahoos and cowboys from making their wild allegations. Maybe Sunnunu will offer his race loyalty explanation for her position

Yes, agreed. I do hope she does get a shot if Romney is elected to finally show her stuff in another term. She has also been criticized widely by Republicans on a host of issues. Hopefully the moderate Romney will show up for the meeting on Secretary of State candidates....

And...is it just me, or is she the hottest 57 yr old ever? Must be that combination of smarts and those bedroom eyes.

[chuckd]

No I don't. I support having them take responsibility for their own birth control. $10 per month is next to nothing.

And if they are too poor to be able to afford it?

Your argument is eerily similar to the position of evangelicals who wish to see these women "punished" for their wanton depraved lust.

Unfortunately, there is a catch. When these folks get knocked up, and pop out another one, who do you think is going to pay for the next Honey BooBoo or Dashid's upkeep until it most likely ends up in jail? Do the math. It is far more cost effective to assist people of limited means, i.e. the impoverished from having kids, then it is to care for their progeny.

You have illustrated the typical tea party Republican's political views well, and it is a view shared by Mitt and his sidekick young Mr. Ryan. Short term gain with no consideration of the long term implications. The Bain Capitals of this world are all about maximizing ROI asap and putting off the consequences.

Most of those people "too poor" to afford $10 for birth control are already mothers/parents of enough children to live a comfortable life on the ADC (Aid for Dependent Children) welfare checks they are drawing. Perhaps they could cut down on their Twinky purchases to be able to afford that horrible $10 monthly birth control costs.

Have you ever tried to live on that income while raising a brood in a Kentucky trailer park? BTW, Hostess went bankrupt. No more twinkies.

Awww. Too bad about the Twinkies.

How many welfare recipients do you know that are raising a brood in a Kentucky trailer park?

Just for the record and to make you feel wealthy when compared to others, I am currently living below the US poverty level, helping raise a 13 year old step-son and have just finished putting my wife through her Bachelor's degree.

By the way, why doesn't this Kentucky welfare mom just have a US government paid abortion? You Obama supporters seem to approve of that sort of thing. But then, why should she, since adding another name to the ADC rolls will bring her more welfare money.

[maidu]

Not sure about the baseball bats, but during the 2000 recount crisis, there most certainly were large groups of republican activists behaving in an extremely thug-like manner. It was all over the media with live coverage. So let's keep this real. It wasn't democrats. It was republicans. It wasn't Chicago. It was Florida.

My comment was keeping it real. You need to read it again. The thug-like manner was exibited by the Dade County (Democrat-led; Suprise!) Canvassing Commision's attempts to hide their ballot "recount" from public view. Citizens objected to and protested against such disgusting underhanded conduct. They were right to do so. And I did not say it occured in Chicago. I said it was "Democrat Party “Chicago Style” behind closed doors vote counting tradition." And that is exactly what it was!

In the re-count chambers, there were representatives from both parties. Republicans, both inside the room and outside wanted desperately to thwart the re-count process. The reason the recount was moved, was because rowdy republican thugs were making as much commotion as possible in order to stymie the democratic process. They pushed by guards and forced their way up to the re-count chambers in their desperate efforts to <deleted> the re-count, because they knew, as everyone else did, that a successful recount would have clearly been to Gore's advantage, and would have put him in the President's seat, where he should have rightfully gone.

added note: ALL those ballots, from Dade County (and probably other counties) are being kept in storage. Would be interesting in having a scientific count. Not a Republican count (republicans are not very scientific, still believing the world is roughly 5,500 years old) and they would probably continue to discount any and all ballots where the 'chad' was not 100% pushed though. It was a sad episode in American history, with one bright spot: Mr. Gore graciously conceded defeat when the (Republican leaning) Supreme Court hung up the process for the umpteenth time. Gore could have fought on for a fair re-count, but he was too much of a gentleman to do so.

Edited October 27, 2012 by maidu

[keemapoot]

I guess it was bound to happen sooner than later. Both Obama and Romney have lawyer'd up big time for an expected post-election dispute. This could get really nasty.

Obama, Romney line up elite lawyers for potential election disputes

They are the lawyers who have been tapped by the Obama and Romney teams to navigate any legal challenges to voting procedures or results in a tight contest that could dredge up memories of the disputed 2000 election that was settled by the U.S. Supreme Court.

http://www.chicagotr...0,1182921.story

[Jingthing]

The pro Obama ad targeted at young women that is driving "conservatives" bait sheit:

BTW, if you don't know this brilliant actress, she's the star of Girls, must watch intelligent American t.v.

Edited October 27, 2012 by Jingthing

[Steely Dan]

The pro Obama ad targeted at young women that is driving "conservatives" bait sheit:

BTW, if you don't know this brilliant actress, she's the star of Girls, must watch intelligent American t.v.

Yet another cynical attempt to divide America seeing as married women are projected to vote heavily in favour of Romney.

[Jingthing]

America IS divided. Nothing to do with any cynical attempts by anybody.

A prime example: Ms. "Shuck and Jive" Palin:

https://www.facebook...151118681228435

BTW, if this is Romney "momentum" I'd like to see what he calls a setback:

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/10/mitt-romneys-very-long-odds-winning-election/58414/#

Edited October 27, 2012 by Jingthing