Obama Likely To Win Another Presidential Term: Gallup Poll

[keemapoot]

Anyone wonder why the only people droning on about impeaching Obama over Benghazi are the Romney supporters on this forum? Romney has all but abandoned the Benghazi issue. Why?

Why Romney’s Not Talking About Benghazi Anymore

Now the story has taken a new twist, as Massimo Calabresi explains. It seems as through the most important actor during the attack may not have been the president, but CIA director David Petraeus. That leaves the storyline more confused than ever. Petraeus, the reputed savior of Iraq, is a hero to many of the same conservatives who have been driving the Benghazi story in an effort to burn the president. Now it seems possible that their ire could burn the general more than the president.

Although Friday’s reports indicate that the CIA responded fast and aggressively as the attack unfolded, it also appears that the agency could have been more vigilant about security at the site in advance. It also seems possible that Mitt Romney fell silent on this issue because he came to understand that Petraeus is at least as politically exposed as Obama. (Bear in mind that Romney was recently granted classified national security briefings, as is the custom for major-party nominees.)

Read more: http://swampland.tim.../#ixzz2B6kBzUKN

[keemapoot]

Here's an interesting article from that far left socialist liberal publication from the UK, the Financial Times.

Markets thrive on myths, and the biggest one out there is that Democratic presidents are bad for US investors. It has become accepted Wall Street wisdom that if Republican Mitt Romney were to carry the White House on Tuesday, shareholders would be delighted. An instant bounce, the myth runs, would be followed by a stronger market thanks to Mr Romney’s business-friendly stance.

History does not bear out that judgment. Since Barack Obama took office in January 2009, US shares have returned 92 per cent, including dividends – equal to 19 per cent a year (see chart). Mr Obama also proved either unusually astute or lucky when he called the bottom of the market in early March 2009, only a week before it began the strongest recovery in a century.

There is one final myth. Whisper it quietly, but perhaps the occupant of the White House is a little less important to asset prices than they, and the market, like to assume.

http://www.ft.com/cm...l#axzz2B6qNt3Nd

[Jingthing]

Nate Silver explains why Obama (80 percent chance) is going to win.

Like Bill Clinton said, it's about ... arithmetic.

http://fivethirtyeig...smid=tw-nytimes

What I find confounding about this is that the argument we’re making is exceedingly simple. Here it is:

Obama’s ahead in Ohio.

A somewhat-more-complicated version:

Mr. Obama is leading in the polls of Ohio and other states that would suffice for him to win 270 electoral votes, and by a margin that has historically translated into victory a fairly high percentage of the time.

He also debunks with, brace yourself, arithmetic, the wishful thinking Fox News / Romney propaganda that Romney has so called momentum. He does not.

The important endorsements still rolling in, though the biggest one remains Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

From the Economist:

"This choice turns on two questions: how good a president has Mr Obama been, especially on the main issues of the economy and foreign policy? And can America really trust the ever-changing Mitt Romney to do a better job?" it said. "On that basis, the Democrat narrowly deserves to be re-elected." The Economist said it had backed Obama "with enthusiasm" in 2008, as did millions of voters, but that Americans will in 2012 "trudge to the polls far less hopefully"

But while it said that Obama's achievements had been modest, Romney had flip-flopped on too many issues to be credible, while his plans to cut taxes and increase defence spending were unaffordable. "For all his businesslike intentions, Mr Romney has an economic plan that works only if you don't believe most of what he says. That is not a convincing pitch for a chief executive," The Economist said. "And for all his shortcomings, Mr Obama has dragged America's economy back from the brink of disaster, and has made a decent fist of foreign policy. So this newspaper would stick with the devil it knows, and re-elect him."

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21565623-america-could-do-better-barack-obama-sadly-mitt-romney-does-not-fit-bill-which-one?spc=scode&spv=xm&ah=9d7f7ab945510a56fa6d37c30b6f1709

Edited November 2, 2012 by Jingthing

[keemapoot]

We've heard Romney wants to cut big bird and the station (PBS) I relied on in my college years for my two favorite conservative programs: Wall St. Week, and Buckley's Firing Line, together with Washington Week. And, one of the things that makes life rich in many American cities is access to the arts.

What about the culture and the arts generally? Where do Romney and Obama stand on this?

Americans for the Arts Action Fund, the political wing of a national service organization for the nonprofit arts, has issued a checklist based on its "newly compiled analysis of the presidential candidates' arts policy positions."

It's a list of seven yes or no questions, mainly pertaining to funding of various grant-making agencies and initiatives that support arts education and arts volunteering. "Yes" answers indicate support for the arts and "no" the opposite.

Democrats Barack Obama and Joseph Biden notched six yes and one no; Republicans Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, four no and three unknown.

http://www.latimes.c...0,2375809.story

[chiangmaikelly]

Remember that Knute Rockne phrase, "lets win one for the Gipper?"

Now Obama has one, "‘Let’s Win This Motherfu**er!’: Special Assistant To The President Delivers Shock Speech at DNC National Headquarters"

Edited November 3, 2012 by chiangmaikelly

[keemapoot]

Last night on this forum, we had an ardent Christian ex-serviceman who took exception to Mormonism being called a cult, and expressed his dissatisfaction by calling me, steelejoe, and others who felt that way "Bigoted Scum." So, in fairness, we should point out that many Mormons do serve in the military - though Romney could have, but did not..., he obtained a military deferment and went on a Mormon mission to France instead.

Though, I'm sure that serviceman will be glad to know nonetheless that Romney was a strong Vietnam war supporter even if not strong enough to actually put himself in harm's way for his country. (Although I suppose trying to peddle Mormonism to Frenchmen could result in bodily harm).

Romney was a 19-year-old student at Stanford University in the spring of 1966 when opponents of the military draft occupied a campus building. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the formal name of the Mormon Church) was a strong supporter of the Vietnam War, and the clean-cut young Romney protested against the protesters. Photographs show him carrying a placard saying: "Speak Out, Don't Sit In."

And, again in fairness we should add that serving a mission in France is the same as putting your life on the line for your country - it's all doing God's work:

"Serving America is only half a step removed from serving God," he said. Mormon solders in Vietnam were basically told "you're doing God's work here strapping on your M-16 - just like Mitt Romney is doing God's work strapping on his Book of Mormon every day," Mason added.

http://news.yahoo.co...-230940180.html

[maidu]

If I was running as the Republican candidate, I would have done the same as Romney. I would have adjustment my positions/beliefs to dovetail (as best as possible) with what voters want to hear (more jobs, lower debt, less borrowing, etc.). Considering the base beliefs of the Republicans, Romney has done as well as a political chameleon can be expected to do. He won't win, but he's done a commendable job of campaigning. I like the guy. I would attend his backyard barbecue if invited (Would you like some more champagne? More poupon with your cordon bleu?).

"Halloween is a day when we all get to fool people into thinking we're someone else. Or as Mitt Romney calls it, campaigning." --Bill Maher

regarding economics: the only way the Romney/Ryan ideas will work, is if all Americans are gainfully employed, they all pay down their debt, and the US reins in its obscene spending habits. None of which have any chance of happening, so the R and R plan would only fail miserably.

Edited November 3, 2012 by maidu

[Steely Dan]

Here's an interesting article from that far left socialist liberal publication from the UK, the Financial Times.

Markets thrive on myths, and the biggest one out there is that Democratic presidents are bad for US investors. It has become accepted Wall Street wisdom that if Republican Mitt Romney were to carry the White House on Tuesday, shareholders would be delighted. An instant bounce, the myth runs, would be followed by a stronger market thanks to Mr Romney’s business-friendly stance.

History does not bear out that judgment. Since Barack Obama took office in January 2009, US shares have returned 92 per cent, including dividends – equal to 19 per cent a year (see chart). Mr Obama also proved either unusually astute or lucky when he called the bottom of the market in early March 2009, only a week before it began the strongest recovery in a century.

There is one final myth. Whisper it quietly, but perhaps the occupant of the White House is a little less important to asset prices than they, and the market, like to assume.

http://www.ft.com/cm...l#axzz2B6qNt3Nd

I can't believe you fail to understand exactly why the market has rallied so much under Obama. It's all down to money printing so anything that is seen as a hedge to inflation is bound to rise. Mr Romney's so called business friendly stance is far less important to the market than the uncertainty as to whether or not he would turn the money printing tap off. The best performing stock market of all is Harare by the way.

[BEENTHEREDONETHAT]

Try to turn on a utility or open a bank account in the us and you will find you need a social security number. If you give the wrong number they know it. So I would consider that ID.If you want to claim your child as a dependent they need to have a SS# issued within the first 6 months..

[uptheos]

Rudy Giulliani really lambasted Obama for 'being in Nevada while they were still bringing out dead on Staten Island'.

[bendejo]

Idiocracy is a 2006 American film, a satirical science fiction comedy, directed by Mike Judge and starring Luke Wilson, Maya Rudolph, Dax Shepard, and Terry Crews. The film tells the story of two ordinary people who take part in a top-secret military hibernation experiment, only to awaken 500 years in the future in a dystopian society full of extremely dumb people. Advertising, commercialism, and cultural anti-intellectualism have run rampant and dysgenic pressure has resulted in a uniformly stupid society devoid of intellectual curiosity, social responsibility, and coherent notions of justice and human rights.

Which party?

That movie comes to mind a lot. When I see new TV shows advertised I always wonder if they've reached the "Ow, My Balls!" stage yet.

[lomatopo]

Yes I know the Washington Post has a liberal bias and it was a foregone conclusion they were going to endorse Obama, but this opinion article is just too spot on not to highlight:

The Salt Lake (Utah) Tribune had a similar endorsement of President Obama:

Tribune endorsement: Too Many Mitts

Obama has earned another term

Nowhere has Mitt Romney’s pursuit of the presidency been more warmly welcomed or closely followed than here in Utah. The Republican nominee’s political and religious pedigrees, his adeptly bipartisan governorship of a Democratic state, and his head for business and the bottom line all inspire admiration and hope in our largely Mormon, Republican, business-friendly state. But it was Romney’s singular role in rescuing Utah’s organization of the 2002 Olympics from a cesspool of scandal, and his oversight of the most successful Winter Games on record, that make him the Beehive State’s favorite adopted son. After all, Romney managed to save the state from ignominy, turning the extravaganza into a showcase for the matchless landscapes, volunteerism and efficiency that told the world what is best and most beautiful about Utah and its people. In short, this is the Mitt Romney we knew, or thought we knew, as one of us.

Sadly, it is not the only Romney, as his campaign for the White House has made abundantly clear, first in his servile courtship of the tea party in order to win the nomination, and now as the party’s shape-shifting nominee. From his embrace of the party’s radical right wing, to subsequent portrayals of himself as a moderate champion of the middle class, Romney has raised the most frequently asked question of the campaign: "Who is this guy, really, and what in the world does he truly believe?"

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

[notmyself]

Here's an interesting article from that far left socialist liberal publication from the UK, the Financial Times

lol

I worked for the FT during the vary late 80's. Local info from Poland and the Ukraine when the USSR was going tits up.

[keemapoot]

Here's an interesting article from that far left socialist liberal publication from the UK, the Financial Times

lol

I worked for the FT during the vary late 80's. Local info from Poland and the Ukraine when the USSR was going tits up.

Yep, always been one of my favorite rags, together with WSJ (prior to Rupert Murdoch buying them).

[notmyself]

[keemapoot]

Montrose, Colo. - Today, four days before the election, Paul Ryan told a crowd assembled on an airport tarmac that he could "smell success." And the crowd roared.

The smell, in fact, was that of cow manure, or something that smelled an awful lot like it. The tarmac is nestled in the mountains here, and as it became more and more overpowering, and as Ryan was more and more intently describing his running mate's business credentials, the VP contender paused, took a deep whiff and said, "I can smell success right now."

"That's the smell of success isn't it? That's the smell of progress. I love that smell, it makes me feel at home," Ryan said.

http://news.yahoo.com/paul-ryan-smell-success-220037132--abc-news-politics.html

Edited November 3, 2012 by keemapoot

[mania]

This thread is pretty scary

Rabid fans who speak of dung literally.

Lots of clips of nefarious info usually wrong but

since it is on the internet or some blog it must be true.

All the while you never see any concrete

discussion of issues & how their chosen will address them.

No mention of budgets or viable cuts that will reign in a govt out of control

Oh you see a lot of they won't do this or that.

But solving the crisis that is still snow balling & set to crash worse than 2007-08?

Not so much.

It will be interesting to see what happens after the circus tents are taken down

& the barkers go back to what they were doing before election time.

[maidu]

This thread is pretty scary

.........

All the while you never see any concrete discussion of issues & how their chosen will address them.

No mention of budgets or viable cuts that will reign in a govt out of control

I don't agree this thread is scary. Lots of discussions of issues (does that scare you?). I mentioned budgets a few posts earlier: Admittedly, Obama spends too much, but appears to really want to lower the budget deficit. Romney and Ryan say they want to lower expenditures, but to do so, they'll have to severely cut or eradicate dozens of useful federal progams to do so, including: FEMA, CDC, Parks Service, museums, Head Start, Food Safety, innoculation programs, veteran benefits, EPA, R&D, coast guard, NASA, arts & performances, and more. Whereas Obama wants to save the $1 billion/day the US has spent on running two wars (both started under Bush and Cheney), R and R want to use that money and more to boost the US military unnecessarily.

If it were up to me, I would lower SS (especially for the rich) and lower medical expenditures (by purchasing medicines in bulk from suppliers) and lower military outlay (by proposing a leaner, meaner military). SS, Medicare and military are the ONLY 3 federal programs R and R say are 'untouchable.' I would be unpopular with nearly everyone. So orange u glad I'm not running for highest office? In other words, I recommend lowering expenditures and the national debt more than either Obama or Romney propose.

Interesting how a Utah newspaper endorses Obama. My projection of an Obama win was 6 to 5. Now it's 5 to 4 of electorial college.

[yourauntbob]

Here's a thought....in a merciful few days the US election will be done and dusted.

What chance is there that the opposing parties, boosters and cheerleaders will say: "election is done, now let's focus on the real, material issues that will impact the long term future of this country and it's 300 million+ inhabitants"........

Zero chance.

for once we agree, Cheers!

[yourauntbob]

“Glitch” wipes out 1,000 early votes in black FL neighborhood

http://americablog.c...tion-fraud.html

it happens in both directions

http://www.wtsp.com/news/local/article/280780/8/ProtectYourVote-Servicemembers-removed-from-voting-rolls

[Throatwobbler]

It all depends on if the Washington redskins win this weekend. If they win Obama wins if they lose Romney wins.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redskins_Rule

They are playing Carolina who are 1-6 so it does not look good for Romney

[mania]

[quo

I don't agree this thread is scary. Lots of discussions of issues (does that scare you?). I mentioned budgets a few posts earlier: Admittedly, Obama spends too much, but appears to really want to lower the budget deficit.

No does not scare me but the lack of it as I said does.

Yours is a classic example... "Obama Appears to really want"???

No I mean plans concrete plans. From both I might add as I have mentioned

before I think neither is good for the US.

I do not mean as in "If it were me"

As it is not you running for Office

Edited November 3, 2012 by mania

[Throatwobbler]

If Europeans could vote in the US election Obama would win by over 90%

Not only does a YouGov poll say that most Europeans would vote for Barack Obama if they voted in the US presidential elections, the odds of the incumbent president retaining his post have also shortened from 2/5 to 1/3 said William Hill this morning.

http://www.economicv...6#ixzz2AwEVZapk

Of course they would. The reason they are in the deep doodoo themselves is because they elect politicians that give them stuff that they can't afford.

5 days and ( hopefully ) Obama's gone. I'm hoping that it's a result like in Queensland the recent election, so the Republicans can save the US and the rest of us from the financial doom that awaits if Obama is re elected.

If you want to see financial doom wait to you see Romney elected, which hopefully won't happen.

[mania]

All religions are cults. We don't need anyone in positions of power making decisions on what their invisible friend says. I grew out of that when I was 5. Is it to much to ask our politicians to leave their childhoods behind too?

Hey personally I opted for the Religion Of Pizza & see your point,

But it would be tough to tell any person running for the highest office in the US whose oath is to protect the Constitution

to give up their First Amendment Rights as a job requirement.

[Throatwobbler]

All religions are cults. We don't need anyone in positions of power making decisions on what their invisible friend says. I grew out of that when I was 5. Is it to much to ask our politicians to leave their childhoods behind too?

Hey personally I opted for the Religion Of Pizza & see your point,

But it would be tough to tell any person running for the highest office in the US whose oath is to protect the Constitution

to give up their First Amendment Rights as a job requirement.

You are right but it just scares me that in times of trouble people look to their make believe friend for help rather than making decisions on facts.

[mania]

You are right but it just scares me that in times of trouble people look to their make believe friend for help rather than making decisions on facts.

+1

[Chicog]

Remember that Knute Rockne phrase, "lets win one for the Gipper?"

Now Obama has one, "‘Let’s Win This Motherfu**er!’: Special Assistant To The President Delivers Shock Speech at DNC National Headquarters"

Did you read this bit?

After the impassioned speech, Dale began making calls for the president. TheBlaze approached him and asked him to clarify his remarks.

Did they need any clarification?!

[Jingthing]

The most extreme and important example of Romney's toxic and cynical flip games is the entire history of Romneycare-Obamacare. Most offensively, he has now blatantly lied that he approves of the preexisting conditions feature of Obamacare but when you check his official campaign positions he does not. The preexisting conditions feature of Obamacare which the public DOES overwhelmingly like needs the MANDATE feature (again: this was Romney's idea but now he wants to kill Obamacare) to make that fiscally possible. Romney does not want the public to think he is a meanie on this now, but he is. His actual position is very clear, he does NOT support insurance companies having to accept people with preexisting conditions UNLESS they have had continuous coverage (that is ALREADY national law before Obamacare!). That is absolutely nothing like actual Obamacare policy on preexisting conditions, yet he is trying to fool low information voters that it is. It's idiotic really. How can everyone be covered if there is not a finance aspect? (Mandates.) Which is made even more disgusting because really no politician on earth knows that better than Romney because Romneycare MANDATES was his program! How can you trust a man like that? Character is a big issue in choosing presidents and he is a big fail. I think there is no way to trust him. He doesn't even deserve basic respect I would give to an honest working man like a trash collecter in my view and I would tell him that to his face.

There are so many other examples that anyone with a first grader's googling skills can find in one second. Don't expect people to write long essays when the examples are easily there for everyone. Even his own campaign insider bragged about Etch-A-Sketch.

Another kind of amusing one is Romney's flip on gay rights. When running for governor and there is video to prove it he said he is more pro gay rights than Ted Kennedy. Then when in office he went out of his way to damage the future lives of BABIES born to LEGALLY joined same sex couples by legally challenging ALL of their birth certificated (an odious example of blatant discrimination, yes I am sorry he IS a meanie). Now he is on public record supporting an anti-gay civil rights constitutional amendment.

Edited November 3, 2012 by Jingthing

[Chicog]

Accusations and generalizations were made with absolutely no specifics. This is what the looney left does: Accuse and fantasize without ANY examples. So you don't want to give examples and now you want me prove you wrong. <deleted>. Give me something to work with! YOU made the statement now back it up.

Looney left my arse, there are 15 pages in this thread alone and Romney's constant position changes to please various sections of potential voters have been amply documented on this and all of the other threads.

Here are some summations if you wish to remind yourself.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/mitt-romneys-biggest-flip-flops-20120801

The guy is slippier than a greased eel. How anyone trusts him I have no idea.

[bendejo]

I'm really surprised how some of you guys argue point-for-point about what Romney says. He proved full-on during the clown-car primaries last year at this time that he'll say anything to make the sale get elected. Doesn't matter what he said or did before, that was the past, even if it was only an hour ago.

No one knows what he will do if he wins, not even himself. For this reason I won't be upset if he wins. I think the biggest hazard of him winning will be what the RNC leadership forces him to do, most likely via blackmail.