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

[Ulysses G.]

Many of Romney's positions are different from Ryan's and Romney is the Big Kahuna. I put anything that the Huffington Post says about politics right down there with Glenn Beck on the believability index.

Edited October 30, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[keemapoot]

Many of Romney's positions are different from Ryan's and Romney is the Big Kahuna. I put anything that the Huffington Post says about politica right down there with Glen Beck on the believability index.

It's nice to see you criticizing a Republican. I agree that Romney is boss, and this is really all just politics now. If Romney does get get to sit in the Oval office, I'm pretty confident he will decide on most things with a measured, reasoned moderate head. He is a pragmatist in spite of his pandering to the far right to get elected.

[maidu]

Maidu wonders: If Romney plans to cut the budget so drasticly, what's he going to cut? He claims to be able to balance the budget, yet he won't increase taxes on anyone, and intends to increase military spending by 1 to 2 trillion dollars. The numbers don't come close to adding up.

From the Washington Post:

According to The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (looking closely at Romney's proposals): If Social Security and Medicare are spared from cuts, then to get federal spending under 20 percent of GDP while holding defense spending at 4 percent of GDP, “ all other programs — including Medicaid, veterans’ benefits, education, environmental protection, transportation, and SSI — would have to be cut by an average of 40 percent in 2016 and 57 percent in 2022.”

Consider what the Romney campaign, then, is saying: If Romney is elected, then by his third year in office, every single federal program that is not Medicare, Social Security, or defense, will be cut, on average, by 40 percent. That means Medicaid, infrastructure, education, food safety, road safety, the postal service, basic research, foreign aid, housing subsidies, food stamps, the Census, Pell grants, the Patent and Trademark Office, the FDA — all of it has to be cut by, on average, 40 percent.

. end of Washington Post excerpt

Maidu adds: I'm in favor of smaller government expenditures, on both fed and state levels. But where I would recommend cutting the fat is a lot different than where Romney and Ryan would recommend. Even looking at Obama's proposals, I would cut a lot of what he won't touch. I would be unpopular by many special interest groups, but I could cut the deficit (and spending and borrowing) a lot more than either of the two major candidates.

[maidu]

This storm looks like a doozy. Bad luck for Romney, and very fortuitous for Obama. He just has to do his duty in a workmanlike manner, and he has that incumbent roll.

Obama? Do his duty? in a workmanlike manner? This is his duty, what he took an oath to do when sworn in.

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

I guess he can always claim that his "ability" is the reason he failed so horribly. If I'm wrong about that, why hasn't Obama run on his record of accomplishments the past 4 years?

I don't disagree with you, Obama's record is flimsy. My point was that taking the helm firmly when the ship is in a storm only helps the incumbent at a time like this in the final days. It's the last impression they have when they go into the voting booth, not his performance in the first debate.

Bush W and Cheney are like the Captain and First Mate of the Titanic, moments before it hit the iceburg. They go flying off on a retirement helicopter, while handing the wheel to Obama. "Good luck, my brown friend. And good luck with the ship's mates we hired from Goldman Sachs - to manage the lifeboats. Ha ha, chortle wheeze."

[Ulysses G.]

Many of Romney's positions are different from Ryan's and Romney is the Big Kahuna. I put anything that the Huffington Post says about politica right down there with Glen Beck on the believability index.

It's nice to see you criticizing a Republican. I agree that Romney is boss, and this is really all just politics now. If Romney does get get to sit in the Oval office, I'm pretty confident he will decide on most things with a measured, reasoned moderate head. He is a pragmatist in spite of his pandering to the far right to get elected.

I don't have any problem criticizing Republicans. There are a lot of things that I do not like about them. However, I much prefer them to Obama and I have actually come to have a lot of respect for Romney. I have no faith in Obama at all and think that things will just get worse with his policies. I can not be sure that things will improve with Romney in office, but I think that the chances improve considerably.

[maidu]

When Republicans wake up, the morning after the election, and see their candidate lost the electorial vote by 5 to 4, they'll blame it on the storm. They've got to blame it on something/someone. They won't be able to acknowledge the fact that the man with the better plan for America's future - won.

Edited October 30, 2012 by maidu

[Ulysses G.]

Maidu wonders: If Romney plans to cut the budget so drasticly, what's he going to cut? He claims to be able to balance the budget, yet he won't increase taxes on anyone, and intends to increase military spending by 1 to 2 trillion dollars. The numbers don't come close to adding up.

They don't add up because they don't include economic growth from getting rid of Obama's policies and changing to different ones. Economic growth is how Romney intends to balance the books..

[maidu]

Maidu wonders: If Romney plans to cut the budget so drasticly, what's he going to cut? He claims to be able to balance the budget, yet he won't increase taxes on anyone, and intends to increase military spending by 1 to 2 trillion dollars. The numbers don't come close to adding up.

They don't add up because they don't include economic growth from getting rid of Obama's policies and changing to different ones. Economic growth is how Romney intends to balance the books..

That's akin to saying, "I'm going to increase spending with my several credit cards, even though I'm already deeply in debt, because I think I'm going to get a lot better job."

.....what about if the rosiest hopes and projections don't come in to fruition? I'll answer that. The US will be yet much deeper in debt. In essense, it appears that Romney is saying, 'Vote for me, because everyone will have great jobs soon after I'm president, and we'll spend ourselves out of the debt that's been accumulating for decades. Oh, and no new taxes on anybody, not even the wealthiest who keep their money squirreled away overseas, as I do."

Edited October 30, 2012 by maidu

[Ulysses G.]

.....what about if the rosiest hopes and projections don't come in to fruition?

Then we will be right back to where we were with Obama. There are no guarantees.

[Ulysses G.]

Romney is up in Ohio.

One week from Election Day, the presidential race has tightened dramatically in Ohio, which appears more likely than any other state to decide who will win the White House.

A Rasmussen Reports survey released Monday shows Mitt Romney overtaking President Obama in Ohio for the first time since May, with 50 percent support to Obama's 48. This follows a Cincinnati Enquirer/Ohio News poll over the weekend that showed the candidates tied at 49 percent. http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/polls/264731-presidential-race-just-got-tighter-in-election-ground-zero--ohio

[somtumlion]

That would be speculation. I don't think that most Americans trust the Huffington Post's version of what Romney supposedly said concerning FEMA and they can just look at the video of what he actually said if they do.

I'm sure most American's look to Fox News for the "Fair and Balanced" version of what Romney supposedly said 5555.

[samran]

Romney is up in Ohio.

One week from Election Day, the presidential race has tightened dramatically in Ohio, which appears more likely than any other state to decide who will win the White House.

A Rasmussen Reports survey released Monday shows Mitt Romney overtaking President Obama in Ohio for the first time since May, with 50 percent support to Obama's 48. This follows a Cincinnati Enquirer/Ohio News poll over the weekend that showed the candidates tied at 49 percent. http://thehill.com/b...ound-zero--ohio

Real Clear still have Ohio in leaning Dem.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/oh/ohio_romney_vs_obama-1860.html

But despite it being the only poll on real clear showing a Romney lead there, the Rasmussen is still nevertheless an interesting results showing things are tight.

[chuckd]

That would be speculation. I don't think that most Americans trust the Huffington Post's version of what Romney supposedly said concerning FEMA and they can just look at the video of what he actually said if they do.

I'm sure most American's look to Fox News for the "Fair and Balanced" version of what Romney supposedly said 5555.

A few of them look at MSNBC. They will vote for Obama.

[Ulysses G.]

Romney is up in Ohio.

One week from Election Day, the presidential race has tightened dramatically in Ohio, which appears more likely than any other state to decide who will win the White House.

A Rasmussen Reports survey released Monday shows Mitt Romney overtaking President Obama in Ohio for the first time since May, with 50 percent support to Obama's 48. This follows a Cincinnati Enquirer/Ohio News poll over the weekend that showed the candidates tied at 49 percent. http://thehill.com/b...ound-zero--ohio

Real Clear still have Ohio in leaning Dem.

http://www.realclear...obama-1860.html

But despite it being the only poll on real clear showing a Romney lead there, the Rasmussen is still nevertheless an interesting results showing things are tight.

Rasmussen has been the most accurate poll in the last two presidential elections, so they get a lot of attention.

[samran]

Romney is up in Ohio.

One week from Election Day, the presidential race has tightened dramatically in Ohio, which appears more likely than any other state to decide who will win the White House.

A Rasmussen Reports survey released Monday shows Mitt Romney overtaking President Obama in Ohio for the first time since May, with 50 percent support to Obama's 48. This follows a Cincinnati Enquirer/Ohio News poll over the weekend that showed the candidates tied at 49 percent. http://thehill.com/b...ound-zero--ohio

Real Clear still have Ohio in leaning Dem.

http://www.realclear...obama-1860.html

But despite it being the only poll on real clear showing a Romney lead there, the Rasmussen is still nevertheless an interesting results showing things are tight.

Rasmussen has been the most accurate poll in the last two presidential elections, so they get a lot of attention.

indeed, indeed.

[Steely Dan]

Bush W and Cheney are like the Captain and First Mate of the Titanic, moments before it hit the iceburg. They go flying off on a retirement helicopter, while handing the wheel to Obama. "Good luck, my brown friend. And good luck with the ship's mates we hired from Goldman Sachs - to manage the lifeboats. Ha ha, chortle wheeze."

Funny you mention the Titanic. It sank over 100 years ago and I expect the Democrats will still be blaming Bush 100 years from now. To continue your analogy though Obama increased the debt (he promised to halve) more than Bush did so in effect as the Captain of the Titanic Obama on spotting the iceberg ordered full steam ahead on a collision course for it. Here is a link to clear up your obvious confusion on the issue.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57400369-503544/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/

[Jingthing]

Some good information that I don't think most American voters know about, that again points to a severe character flaw in Mr. Romney because don't people want a president that actually has a core political value system instead of ONLY being driven to be president?

Romney had one term in Massachusetts. First part, yes, as a moderate. Of course he could have never been ELECTED in Massachusetts running as a real right winger. Second part, he shifted hard to the right. Why? Was he really in his heart the moderate from the first part and right winger of the second part? Who knows? Does he know? Does he care? We do know he wanted to position himself to run for president in the republican party so he had to be more right wing.

http://www.washingto...pm_opinions_pop

It rings false because Romney now repudiates his one impressive act of bipartisanship, Massachusetts’s health care law. After the law passed, Romney decided to run for president and realized that he would never be able to win the Republican primaries positioned as a moderate.

So he began his sharp move to the right, giving up any chance at a second term as governor to run for president.

People who are furthering the idea that Romney is an always reasonable and fair, moderate man might consider an item I posted before about a really despicable mean spirited policy led by Romney as governor. In it, he went out of his way to harass the BABIES (via their birth certificates which he ordered that each one be legally challenged) of legally joined same sex couples damaging the BABIES status in the future. Babies. Because the parents were gay and he didn't approve of these same sex unions which are/were LEGAL in Massachusetts. Why? Does he really hate gay people in his heart enough to do such a mean spirited hateful thing to their babies? Who knows? But a result of such actions meant he was then positioned as right wing enough to be a potential REPUBLICAN president, as the republicans are positioned as the party opposing gay civil rights. But babies? Reasonable? I think not. Yes you might call this the innocent baby card, but he really did this. Nobody made him do it. Is that really an acceptable behavior for a president?

Edited October 30, 2012 by Jingthing

[Chicog]

.....what about if the rosiest hopes and projections don't come in to fruition?

Then we will be right back to where we were with Obama. There are no guarantees.

No you won't, you'll have anywhere between 6 and 8 trillion dollars of extra debt. Romney hasn't even got a balanced budget earmarked until the 4th year, and even that would probably have to be artificially created (i.e. he'd have to borrow even more money).

Spend, Spend, Spend is not going to "grow the economy", it's going to create another bubble, the Republican's favourite.

Added: If the CBO are to be believed (and I understand it is a bipartisan organisation?)

CBO estimated in August 2011 that if laws currently "on the books" were enforced without changes, meaning the "extended baseline scenario" described above is implemented along with deficit reductions from the Budget Control Act of 2011, the deficit would decline from 8.5% GDP in 2011 to around 1% GDP by 2021.

The "alternative fiscal scenario" more closely assumes the continuation of present trends, such as permanently extending the Bush tax cuts, restricting the reach of the AMT, and keeping Medicare reimbursement rates at the current level (the so-called "Doc Fix" versus declining by one-third as mandated under current law.) Revenues are assumed to remain around the historical average 18% GDP. Under this scenario, public debt rises from 69% GDP in 2011 to 100% by 2021 and approaches 190% by 2035.

Quite scary. If you think social programs end up being the biggest burden on the US economy, think again.

Edited October 30, 2012 by Chicog

[koheesti]

When Republicans wake up, the morning after the election, and see their candidate lost the electorial vote by 5 to 4, they'll blame it on the storm. They've got to blame it on something/someone. They won't be able to acknowledge the fact that the man with the better plan for America's future - won.

Republicans either find something to blame, anything, or they will have to accept the fact that America will have turned into a failed state because despite the indisputable, overwhelming evidence that Obama has horribly failed the past 4 years, and the 1st debate debacle proved to the world that he is a slow-thinking, teleprompter-powered puppet, someone whose entire campaign has been to lie and distract from his own pitiful record...that despite all this evidence, the American voters still voted him in for a second term of more of the same. Yes, I'd rather rationalize an Obama victory as vote stealing/bad weather/whatever than believe that the country has changed so much for the worse and that half my own citizens actually exercised their free will and chose Obama.

Ironic, when the Palestinians got a chance to vote we criticized them for voting in terrorists who will destroy their chances of peace while at the same time, half of our own country want Obama. They're no better than the low educated, brainwashed masses who believe Israelis are evil and need to be driven into the sea. It makes sense too after the Democrats took the pro-Israel language out of their party platform last month. Low-information voters are dangerous for society and we only have our media to blame for rarely shining a light on Obama's glaring flaws.

[chuckd]

.....what about if the rosiest hopes and projections don't come in to fruition?

Then we will be right back to where we were with Obama. There are no guarantees.

No you won't, you'll have anywhere between 6 and 8 trillion dollars of extra debt. Romney hasn't even got a balanced budget earmarked until the 4th year, and even that would probably have to be artificially created (i.e. he'd have to borrow even more money).

Spend, Spend, Spend is not going to "grow the economy", it's going to create another bubble, the Republican's favourite.

If "spend, spend, spend is not going to 'grow the economy', why are you so vociferously supporting the only candidate that has proven that is all he has in his repertoire?

He has a track record to prove it doesn't work with the last four years of $6 Trillion increased debt.

[Jingthing]

Funny. Obama didn't have a teleprompter for debates 2 and 3 and the wide consensus is he "won" both of those debates. Debate 1 proved Obama had an off night. Maybe something he ate. Whatever. Hardly of consequence or relevance regarding his competence to be president.

[koheesti]

*******THREAD SUMMARY*******

For those TV members checking out this thread for the first time but don't feel like reading 55 pages, I'm providing this quick summary.

This thread is mainly made up posters who believe either Obama or Romney will be very bad for America and the future of our country. There might be a small percentage of "undecideds" who don't know and/or care.

The anti-Romney crowd base their fears on TV ads run by the Obama Campaign.

The anti-Obama crowd base their fears on the actual record of Obama the past four years.

[Asiantravel]

I don't understand how this can be ?........................................

And yet they took no time to swoop on US Marine Brandon J. Raub and put him in a mental hospital just for saying he disagreed with Obama’s policies.

Reeks of the usual double standards

More than a dozen Twitter accounts that were used as a medium to publically threaten Republican candidate Mitt Romney’s life after the second presidential debate remain active, nearly two weeks later. This news comes after the Secret Service told this publication that it was “aware” of these very threats on Romney’s life.

http://weeklystandard.com/blogs/twitter-users-who-threatened-romney-s-life-remain-active_658076.html

[koheesti]

Funny. Obama didn't have a teleprompter for debates 2 and 3 and the wide consensus is he "won" both of those debates. Debate 1 proved Obama had an off night. Maybe something he ate. Whatever. Hardly of consequence or relevance regarding his competence to be president.

Maybe, maybe not - but Obama's record is relevant and that's why he keeps running from it.

[mania]

This thread is mainly made up posters who believe either Obama or Romney will be very bad for America and the future of our country.

This is the problem

These days I do not know of anyone who actually votes for someone they believe in.

They all vote against someone but not really for someone.

Even the most staunch of each side throughout this thread has pretty much also said the same.

Something is really wrong with America & has been wrong for a very long time now.

[lomatopo]

Liberal Hollywood Avengers director Joss Whedon endorses Mitt Romney...

[koheesti]

This is both hilarious and sad at the same time...

OBAMA ACCEPTS 'OSAMA BIN LADEN' DONATIONS

WASHINGTON – Using a Pakistani Internet Protocol and proxy server, a disposable credit card and a fake address, “Osama bin Laden” has successfully donated twice to Barack Obama’s presidential re-election campaign.

The “Bin Laden” donations, actually made by WND staff, included a listed occupation of “deceased terror chief” and a stated employer of “al-Qaida.”

The apparently foreign-based contributions were conducted as a test after a flurry of media reports described the ability of foreigners to donate to the Obama campaign but not to Mitt Romney’s site, which has placed safeguards against such efforts.

The acceptance of foreign contributions is strictly illegal under U.S. campaign finance law.

http://www.wnd.com/2...aden-donations/

The article goes on to say that after the initial donations, the Obama Campaign has sent requests for more money.

Edited October 30, 2012 by koheesti

[chiangmaikelly]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/29/Gallup-Shock-Romney-Up-7-with-early-voters

So when an outlet like Gallup tells me Romney is up seven-points, 52-45%, among those who have already voted, that's very big news.

"In U.S., 15% of Registered Voters Have Already Cast Ballots".

[Steely Dan]

This is both hilarious and sad at the same time...

OBAMA ACCEPTS 'OSAMA BIN LADEN' DONATIONS

WASHINGTON – Using a Pakistani Internet Protocol and proxy server, a disposable credit card and a fake address, “Osama bin Laden” has successfully donated twice to Barack Obama’s presidential re-election campaign.

The “Bin Laden” donations, actually made by WND staff, included a listed occupation of “deceased terror chief” and a stated employer of “al-Qaida.”

The apparently foreign-based contributions were conducted as a test after a flurry of media reports described the ability of foreigners to donate to the Obama campaign but not to Mitt Romney’s site, which has placed safeguards against such efforts.

The acceptance of foreign contributions is strictly illegal under U.S. campaign finance law.

http://www.wnd.com/2...aden-donations/

The article goes on to say that after the initial donations, the Obama Campaign has sent requests for more money.

Perhaps the money can go to the relatives of the Navy Seals who lost their lives when their helicopter was shot down, shortly after Obama had mentioned their involvement in taking out Bin Laden.

[maidu]

Koheesti, still trying to make a tempest out of a little puff of purple smoke.

Comparing voters who vote for Obama, with Palestinians who vote for terrorists. Oh my.

If that doesn't stick, try claiming the Osama Bin Laden donated money to Obama's re-election campaign (did he send a check from the bottom of the sea?). I've heard of grasping at straws, but now it's come to grasping at individual strands of cob webs.

Something is really wrong with America & has been wrong for a very long time now.

Most of America is doing alright, getting on with their lives, trying to make ends meet. End of election times bring out the alarmists at their shrillest. If there's something wrong with the US, it's similar to what's wrong with the rest of the 'developed' parts of the world; They think they can borrow money indefinately. It's a mindset that afflicts consumers, businesses and governments. It's a flawed way of thinking, but it's deeply embedded in the psyche of nearly everyone in developed countries.

If even affects even the poorest of the poor in Thailand. My neighbors have lot nicer motobikes than I. Why? Because, even thought they're poorer than me, they're lured in to buying a brand new Honda bike for Bt.37,000. All they're cognizent of is the Bt.1,600 downpayment. There's a vague acknowledgement of monthly payments with %, but that's all in the future, whereas now, with the dp and a signature, they can hop on a shiny new red bike and ride away, and impress all their friends and neighbors. It's only later, when the monthly bills come in, that they get bummed out, and probably still don't grasp that they're required to pay Bt.65,000 for the 37,000 bike.

Governments are the same, except they don't really expect to pay down the debt. They just want to borrow, borrow, and borrow some more, and keep upping the debt ceiling. Meanwhile 3/4 of Americans are getting some sort (or a combination) of federal hand-outs.

Obama, Romney and Ryan are American and they all suffer from the same mindset: borrow until the cows come home, and then borrow some more. The difference is, Obama is going to endeaver to cut back expenditures. Romney and Ryan want to increase expenditures.