Obama Likely To Win Another Presidential Term: Gallup Poll

[jbrain]

Obama will lose. Obama WAS the worst President in history.

If you say so..............

[lomatopo]

EDITORIAL

Romney Versus the Automakers

Published: October 31, 2012

When General Motors tells a presidential campaign that it is engaging in “cynical campaign politics at its worst,” that’s a pretty good signal that the campaign has crossed a red line and ought to pull back. Not Mitt Romney’s campaign. Having broadcast an outrageously deceitful ad attacking the auto bailout, the campaign ignored the howls from carmakers and came back with more.

Mr. Romney apparently plans to end his race as he began it: playing lowest-common-denominator politics, saying anything necessary to achieve power and blithely deceiving voters desperate for clarity and truth.

This started months ago when he realized that his very public 2008 stance against the successful and wildly popular government bailout of G.M. and Chrysler was hurting him in the valuable states of Ohio and Michigan. In February, he wrote an essay for The Detroit News calling the bailout “crony capitalism on a grand scale” because unions benefited and insisting that Detroit would have been better off to refuse federal money. (This ignores the well-documented reality that there was no other cash available to the carmakers.)

When that tactic didn’t work, he began insisting at the debates that his plan for Detroit wasn’t really that different from President Obama’s. (Except for the niggling detail of the $80 billion federal investment.)

That was quickly discredited, so Mr. Romney began telling rallies last week that Chrysler was considering moving its production to China. Chrysler loudly denounced it as “fantasies,” saying it was only considering increasing production in China for sale in China, without moving a single American job.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/opinion/mitt-romney-versus-the-automakers.html?_r=0

[lomatopo]

Helen C. Whitney

Documentary filmmaker

5 Questions Romney Never Answered About Mormonism -- And Why He Should

Posted: 11/03/2012 8:04 am

Several weeks ago we invited Governor Romney to address several questions about his Mormon religion. Our invitation was our second attempt because four years ago Helen Whitney, the producer of the four-hour PBS series "The Mormons," attempted to ask him the same questions in a calmer, less politicized period, but to no avail. We do not raise these questions again in an attempt to entrap him or to embarrass the Church. Rather, we continue to ask them because, in our opinion, they allow him to address crucial unanswered issues at the intersection of his religion and his governance, in the event that he is elected President.

The "Mormon Moment--Postponed" remains postponed, for Romney neither responded to our questions nor gave any of the press detailed access to that part of his life that arguably was most important in shaping his overall character. In a radio interview in Iowa, he exploded when pressed to discuss his faith: "I am not running as a Mormon!" and abruptly ended the interview. Clearly, Governor Romney does not understand that this is an unprecedented moment in American history. Why? Because it is the first time that an ordained minister is a major party's candidate for president. As we said in our earlier article, Romney's ordination to the offices of Bishop and Stake President obligates him to answer questions more fully than other candidates never ordained to the ministry.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/helen-c-whitney/romney-mormonism_b_2068070.html

[keemapoot]

^ The primary moderator on this thread has told us many times he will not allow Romney's religion to be discussed o this thread, so let's not go there again and get people in trouble, as much as this issue is so important.

[lomatopo]

Rupert Murdoch: Chris Christie Must 'Re-Declare' For Mitt Romney 'Or Take Blame'

The Huffington Post | By Peter Finocchiaro

Posted: 11/03/2012 12:51 am EDT Updated: 11/03/2012 2:40 am EDT

Publishing titan Rupert Murdoch sent New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie what appeared to be a warning message on Friday, telling Christie to reaffirm his support for Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney "or take blame for next four dire years."

The admonition, by way of a tweet from the Murdoch's verified Twitter account, was presumably in reference to the warm relationship Christie, a Republican, showed with President Barack Obama this week, as the two toured New Jersey in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/03/rupert-murdoch-chris-christie-romney_n_2068630.html

[lomatopo]

Mitt Romney Robocall Warns Christians Obama A 'Threat To Our Religious Freedom'

The Huffington Post | By Amanda Terkel

Posted: 11/02/2012 11:27 pm EDT Updated: 11/03/2012 1:37 am EDT

WASHINGTON -- Mitt Romney's campaign, in a last-minute robocall, warns voters that President Barack Obama is hostile to the Christian faith.

The robocall, paid for by Romney's campaign, is explicitly aimed at Christian voters. A voter in Fairfax, Va. received it on Friday night, and passed it along to Shaun Dakin of StopPoliticalCalls.org.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/02/mitt-romney-robocall-christians_n_2068596.html

[notmyself]

^ The primary moderator on this thread has told us many times he will not allow Romney's religion to be discussed o this thread, so let's not go there again and get people in trouble, as much as this issue is so important.

Unless it is directly related to the election.

[keemapoot]

^ The primary moderator on this thread has told us many times he will not allow Romney's religion to be discussed o this thread, so let's not go there again and get people in trouble, as much as this issue is so important.

Unless it is directly related to the election.

How isn't it directly related to the election. It goes to the heart of the man's fitness to lead.

[maidu]

Obama will lose. Obama WAS the worst President in history.

I doubt anyone will accuse you of being an intellectual giant.

I got a Republican talking head's (Michael Barone / Washington Examiner) page bookmarked. He's claiming Romney will take all the contested states. I can't wait until, right after the election, to show how wrong his predictions are.

When he's proven wrong, he won't take it lightly. He'll likely shout for weeks about how the election was stolen. If that doesn't work, he'll blame it on Romney's gaffes or the storm. ......anything but the truth: Obama is simply the better man for the job.

[notmyself]

^ The primary moderator on this thread has told us many times he will not allow Romney's religion to be discussed o this thread, so let's not go there again and get people in trouble, as much as this issue is so important.

Unless it is directly related to the election.

How isn't it directly related to the election. It goes to the heart of the man's fitness to lead.

I agree but it has at times gone off on a tangent. The post above is certainly related IMO. Anyway, back to the topic at hand.

[lomatopo]

On the 270towin site you can adjust your projected outcome on the 11 states/146 electoral votes up for grabs.

When I made my estimates I got the following result:

Romney 273

Obama 265

But If I assume Obama wins Ohio I get the following result:

Obama 274

Romney 264

[SteeleJoe]

^ The primary moderator on this thread has told us many times he will not allow Romney's religion to be discussed o this thread, so let's not go there again and get people in trouble, as much as this issue is so important.

Thank you. It's very frustrating to see it brought up and know I can't talk about it so I'd rather not see it brought up at all (that's right, it's all about me).

[SteeleJoe]

I got a Republican talking head's (Michael Barone / Washington Examiner) page bookmarked. He's claiming Romney will take all the contested states. I can't wait until, right after the election, to show how wrong his predictions are.

When he's proven wrong, he won't take it lightly. He'll likely shout for weeks about how the election was stolen. If that doesn't work, he'll blame it on Romney's gaffes or the storm. ......anything but the truth: Obama is simply the better man for the job.

Whether Obama is the better man for the job or not (I'm inclined to think he is --which isn't saying much given our choices), his election wouldn't prove that at all. In other words, if Barone winds up looking for reasons Romney lost, even if he was honest about it, it wouldn't necessarily follow that because Obama was elected because he was the best choice (wasn't that proven in 2004, for example?)

[SteeleJoe]

Obama will lose. Obama WAS the worst President in history.

Anyone care for some emotional but empty rhetoric?

Not many serious scholars of history would even attempt such a judgement yet -- and even if they did, as an avid student of history myself, I'm quite doubtful they'd reach that conclusion.

By all means tell us how he was worse than -- just to name a few off the top of my head -- Hayes, Buchanan, Carter or GW Bush...

Edited November 3, 2012 by SteeleJoe

[SteeleJoe]

There ya go !

What a convincing argument for Romney that post is!

[keemapoot]

There ya go !

What a convincing argument for Romney that post is!

Almost as convincing as you are a bigot.

[mania]

There ya go !

What a convincing argument for Romney that post is!

See there is the problem.

And the other teams cheerleaders use sensationalized tripe such as this

UNITED STATES UNINHABITABLE BY SPRING

He said: "I just hope our descendants can forgive us for what we are about to do here and that one day a flower can grow again in Washington without it being punched and then set on fire.

Where have the thinking adults all gone?

Like you said in a previous post,

Whether Obama is the better man for the job or not (I'm inclined to think he is --which isn't saying much given our choices), his election wouldn't prove that at all.

Basically we know what the performance has been or not been these last four years.

I do as I lived them in the US

Now in any other job an employee asking for a raise,bonus, or extension of contract has to show a track record.

Yet as you said & many others have too he may get re-elected

This because he is perceived as the best choice?

Or just the least worse of the two?

To make it all worse in his first term he at least had the carrot or re-election hanging in front of him.

We should know as he started campaigning about two years into his first term.

What is the carrot for the second term? In what ways has the US improved in any sustainable measurable way

under his first watch?

Edited November 3, 2012 by mania

[SteeleJoe]

There ya go !

What a convincing argument for Romney that post is!

Almost as convincing as you are a bigot.

There ya go !

What a convincing argument for Romney that post is!

Almost as convincing as you are a bigot.

If you mean me, I'll thank you to address me as "bigot scum".

(Have I quoted you correctly Baloo?)

[SteeleJoe]

Where have the thinking adults all gone?

Indeed. Perhaps on one of the few things more dire and distressing than the dearth of truly quality choices is the level to which the US electorate has fallen in it political discourse.

To make it all worse in his first term he at least had the carrot or re-election hanging in front of him.

We should know as he started campaigning about two years into his first term.

What is the carrot for the second term?

Some Presidents -- I don't think I'll debate whether this does or doesn't apply to the current one -- can't accomplish what they want or need to in the first term and can only try and lay the groundwork for a successful second term if they can get it.

The carrot for virtually any President is "The Legacy" and how they go down in history. Try to imagine how huge that is to someone who reaches that point in life -- almost certainly the biggest thing they''ll ever do and far bigger than the vast majority of people ever will. For decades or conceivably even centuries you could be remembered not just by your descendants but the whole world as someone who had a part in shaping the world into something it would't have been without you. Or a failure and a disappointment -- even a villain -- to hundreds of millions of people.

And, even aside from that, I think it would be perfectly natural for even altruistic reasons that ANY POTUS -- even my least favorite -- would prefer to leave office feeling as if he'd left the country and maybe even the world better off (and certainly plenty of solid biographical /historical evidence would support that.)

No, your argument doesn't stand up to logic: a President who isn't running for office again has no incentive to do well and is less likely to? Not necessarily true at all. (If nothing else, consider 2nd terms throughout history and you might see a problem with that idea)

Edited November 3, 2012 by SteeleJoe

[geriatrickid]

Rupert Murdoch: Chris Christie Must 'Re-Declare' For Mitt Romney 'Or Take Blame'

The Huffington Post | By Peter Finocchiaro

Posted: 11/03/2012 12:51 am EDT Updated: 11/03/2012 2:40 am EDT

Publishing titan Rupert Murdoch sent New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie what appeared to be a warning message on Friday, telling Christie to reaffirm his support for Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney "or take blame for next four dire years."

The admonition, by way of a tweet from the Murdoch's verified Twitter account, was presumably in reference to the warm relationship Christie, a Republican, showed with President Barack Obama this week, as the two toured New Jersey in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy.

http://www.huffingto..._n_2068630.html

Ahh so now the knives come out and blame game begins. I am not a fan of Gov. Christie, but I do appreciate that he is passionate about his state. He cares, albeit it is manifested in some ways I find unappealing. I listened to an analysis of the Gov's position and it is consistent with the man's positions: He does not agree with Obama on fiscal policy, but when it comes to helping and serving his NJ population, all that matters is that there is help and a positive response. This is what the Gov. was responding to and reflect's the general public's sentiment. . NJ is the primary concern of the Gov. and in a time of crisis, as the Gov. stated, politics gets pushed aside in favour of what is best for an injured population. He's dealing with millions that lost homes, livelihoods, electricity and needed food and shelter, not with political one upmanship. As a Governor, he's there to help people overcome a crisis and not to engage in political bickering. He sent the right message by being positive. The people of NJ didn't want to hear about politics, they wanted action on their problems and that's what the state and federal governments delivered. The man who comes off as a political opportunist is Rudy Giuliani that lashed out at the President. What a contrast between him and Christie. Christie reflected the people's sentiment while Giuliani was engaged in cheap petty politics that only damaged the GOP locally.

The reality is that the response to this crisis has been much better than that which followed Katrina. No one was abandoned, there was no massive crime wave, people have been cared for and help has been delivered with more coming every day. Gov. Christie's statemens cements his position as governor and as a leader in the GOP. It demonstrated maturity and common sense.

[Chicog]

What is the carrot for the second term? In what ways has the US improved in any sustainable measurable way

under his first watch?

Hasn't he managed to achieve 35 consecutive months of growth and a general reduction in unemployment after one of the worst financial f***-ups in US (and probably global) economic history. No self respecting Republican would give him credit for that, they'd rather underplay it because it focuses on just how badly the previous adminstration - a Republican one - damaged (and nearly destroyed) the economy.

Let's not forget what these people left him.

I can see a lot more reasons to put Obama in for another four years than I can to stick in a flip-flopping talking head who is going to let big banks and big business steal yet more money from the tax payer.

It's time the US voter said no to big business and bought-and-paid-for politicians. Republicans stink of this, because they love this top down nonsense that simply does not work.

As for Murdoch and his pathetic tweets, I'd like to stick Christie and him in a room together, I know who would be seeing circling birdies.

[notmyself]

These ARE Republican voters.

[craigt3365]

One post violating forum rules has been removed from view:

22) Not to post any copyrighted material except as fair use laws apply (as in the case of news articles)

Generally accepted principles are to provide a link to the news source along with 2-3 paragraphs. No more.

[maidu]

The top corporate donaters to Romney's election campaign are ALL banking and investment firms (except for AIS, which is insurance) from Wall Street. ALL OF THEM received taxpayer bail-out money, ALL OF THEM got hand-outs from the $7.7 trillion package started by Bush Jr. and continued by Obama. Much of those hand-outs weren't wanted or needed by the fat cats, but were taken nevertheless. Also, much of those hand-outs were %-free loans, so banks could loan out those hand-outs for % - in other words: make money from free money, not a bad deal, eh? That's their reward for running their businesses so badly. Oh, and they all awarded their top-execs (friends of Romney) multi-million $$ gifts for running their corporations so badly.

It's not just corporations which lavish money on Romney. According to an AP article in the Denver Post; "Casino mogul Sheldon Adelson. Worth an estimated $25 billion, has donated $44.2 million so far to aid Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney" ....and he's just one of many billionaires who have showered Romney's campaign with money (one's we know about, anyway).

There are also so-called 'bundled' donations which ooze from groups of very rich people and/or groups of badly run Wall Street corps. "Obama periodically identifies his bundlers, but Romney has resisted calls to do the same." according to stephen Braun of Associated Press.

full article / source

[mania]

The top corporate donaters to Romney's election campaign

That is something I like to look at & it is quite a change that in 2008 Obama's top contributors were

the ones you mention. The Too Big To Fail.

Goldman Sachs

JP Morgan Chase

CitiGroup

Morgan Stanley

But interesting in 2008 & 2012 his biggest all time contributor is University of California.

Who again is his biggest "single" contribution this year.

Aside from that if you would like to look at a nice breakout of 2012 contributors

here is a link that does not offer any rhetoric just the facts.

https://www.opensecr...res12/index.php

Especially interesting is the break out by sectors.

As you said Finance, Insurance & Real Estate sector gave Romney 3x as much as Obama

But in your post you intimate the Too Big To Fail back Romney

The ones that got the hand outs.

But remember they backed Obama & then got the handouts

So either they are turncoats or they believe one is better for business than the other.

Interesting that Health is evenly split

Interesting that Lawyers & Lobbyist gave Obama twice as much

Agriculture gave Romney twice as much

Defense gave evenly

Energy & Natural Resources 4x as much roughly to Romney

As I said a interesting read without the rhetoric

Just give adults the facts & let them chew on them is always a good way IMO

https://www.opensecr...res12/index.php

Edited November 4, 2012 by mania

[geriatrickid]

These ARE Republican voters.

Oh jeez, looks like some of TVF's most vociferous Obama bashers were interviewed........

The interviews would be laughable if these were not real voters. The ignorance is palpable and frightening.

[geriatrickid]

*Deleted quote edited out*

I think you have engaged in hyperbole. How does recoiling at ignorance demonstrate a hatred of Americans? I can assure you that there are tens of millions of patriotic US nationals that would have had far worse to say.

Edited November 4, 2012 by Scott

[maidu]

a creative series of maps indicating where campaign money is being spent

[keemapoot]

For those of you political junkies who want to plan your Wednesday in Thailand, here is the complete schedule of voting etc., by hour and important milestones and what to watch for hour by hour. Unfortunately, I must attend important meetings Weds. morning, but will be watching results anyway.

The next President will hopefully be decided by midnight (11am Weds. here), but networks will likely be calling the election for Obama or Romney earlier.

Thailand is 11 hrs ahead of EST times listed.

http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/story/19992360/hour-by-hour-what-to-watch-on-election-night

[keemapoot]

If you believe in mathematics & science, Obama will win. If you believe in divine intervention Romney will win. Kind of sounds like the difference between Democrats and Republicans don't it?

Michael Tomasky on the Coming Post-Election GOP Freak Out

The conservatives I read, and certainly my conservative commenters, just can't wait for Tuesday, when the American people will arise out of their torpor and finally send Obama to the dugout. I'm continually struck--nay, impressed, even--by the iron certainty with which they say this, and by their unswerving ability to pluck out the favorable polls (getting fewer and farther between, incidentally) and throw a bucket of ice-cold water on the ones they don't like.

Objective reality says Obama is ahead. But to conservatives, there's always something wrong in objective-reality land, always a reason to claim that the world is in fact spinning in the opposite direction.

If Obama wins, the excuses will start coming; the excuses will mushroom into reasons why the victory was illegitimate; then the next mission will be to oppose Obama at every turn.

http://www.thedailyb...-freak-out.html