Patrick.net

If I were an Obama Supporter...

By Rent4Ever   Follow   Mon, 30 Jul 2012, 11:32am   3,281 views   49 comments
Watch (0)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

I would be very very worried right now. For an incumbent to be essentially tied (or losing according to Rasmussen) at this early stage of the presidential campaign is almost unprecedented. And it is clearly showing in the way Obama is stumping. Incumbents are not supposed to be the candidate that goes on the attack, the challenger is. This campaign is essentially being run backwards, and that is because Romney is thrilled with his polling this early in the campaign and Obama is worried.

« First     « Previous     Viewing Comments 10-49 of 49     Last »     See most liked comments

1. freak80 Follow Befriend (4) 52 threads 4,416 comments Corning, NY Premium

   10   1:22pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   "I've voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal." Seriously who cares who wins at this point? It's all about the money.

2. StillLooking Follow Befriend 27 threads 233 comments Skokie, IL

   11   1:26pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   During the primaries when Ron Paul was there, Romney talked about getting the government out of the housing business. I have always been a Democrat, but if Romney would show that he would act on getting government out of housing I might even vote for him.

3. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,572 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   12   1:28pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   Rent4Ever says This is simply not true. Do you think that the campaigns give 2 shits about ANY of these "composite" sources? No, because they don't have the time or the $$ to screw around with unscientific and unpredictable polls. WTF are you talking about? The ONLY THING THAT FUCKING MATTERS IS HOW CLOSE THE POLL AGREES WITH THE RESULT!!!! On what planet do you think that past performance of polls can't be measured??????? You're like someone who says a runner can't possibly run a 4 minute mile after he's accomplished it in 10 prior races.

4. Rent4Ever Follow Befriend 7 threads 94 comments

   13   1:30pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   StillLooking says I have always been a Democrat, but if Romney would show that he would act on getting government out of housing I might even vote for him. I agree, I would love to see some strong statements about government getting out of housing and let the market get back to something that resembles a free one.

5. Rent4Ever Follow Befriend 7 threads 94 comments

   14   1:36pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says WTF are you talking about? The ONLY THING THAT FUCKING MATTERS IS HOW CLOSE THE POLL AGREES WITH THE RESULT!!!! Well first of all, you haven't given the link and the source of your first posting. Just said that it was "composite." Secondly, you haven't shown anything that shows these polls have actual predictive capabilities other than stating so. That might be enough for NBCNews pollsters, but it isn't enough for anyone that wants to actually understand the dynamics of an election, like oh people actually running a campaign. You also seem to be a very upset liberal. Why are you so angry?

6. freak80 Follow Befriend (4) 52 threads 4,416 comments Corning, NY Premium

   15   1:38pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   Rent4Ever says I agree, I would love to see some strong statements about government getting out of housing and let the market get back to something that resembles a free one. I'm sure Romney would have no problem telling you exactly what you want to hear, so that you vote for him. Then, once in office, he'll do the exact opposite. That's politics.

7. Rent4Ever Follow Befriend 7 threads 94 comments

   16   1:41pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   freak80 says I'm sure Romney would have no problem telling you exactly what you want to hear, so that you vote for him. Then, once in office, he'll do the exact opposite. That's politics. Come on, no faith in politics?

8. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,572 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   17   1:50pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   Rent4Ever says Well first of all, you haven't given the link and the source of your first posting. Just said that it was "composite." Because that was the question you asked. Here's the source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ Rent4Ever says Secondly, you haven't shown anything that shows these polls have actual predictive capabilities other than stating so. Untrue. I linked CNN's last poll before the 2008 election. They called it perfectly. Rent4Ever says That might be enough for NBCNews pollsters, but it isn't enough for anyone that wants to actually understand the dynamics of an election, like oh people actually running a campaign. A polling agency uses a black box that makes many different adjustments to the sample they are taking. Trying to nitpick your way into finding fault with their method is totally pointless. Again......the ONLY thing that matters is how close they get. You mentioned NBC. Here's the last NBC poll before the 2008 election: http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/081103_NBC-WSJ_Poll.pdf NBC called the election for Obama by a margin of 8% with a 3% margin of error. Obama won by 7.3%. Therefore for you to claim that NBC has a horrible polling method and must be wrong is insane.

9. StillLooking Follow Befriend 27 threads 233 comments Skokie, IL

   18   2:07pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Rent4Ever says I agree, I would love to see some strong statements about government getting out of housing and let the market get back to something that resembles a free one. I'm sure Romney would have no problem telling you exactly what you want to hear, so that you vote for him. Then, once in office, he'll do the exact opposite. That's politics. I would only vote for him if he stone cold commits on this point and I don't expect him to do that.

10. Rent4Ever Follow Befriend 7 threads 94 comments

    19   2:10pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Which poll has been scientifically proven to be the most accurate in the 2008 election? Rasmussen: http://www.fordham.edu/images/academics/graduate_schools/gsas/elections_and_campaign_/poll%20accuracy%20in%20the%202008%20presidential%20election.pdf Maybe because they better qualify the participants as "likely voters." Yes I know, and Rasmussen is the poll in the news recently showing Romney leading. I know it's really unfortunate when the most accurate poll in the last election is the one at odds with your political stance. Why are you so angry?

11. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,572 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    20   2:26pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   Rent4Ever says Which poll has been scientifically proven to be the most accurate in the 2008 election? Rasmussen: No. Wrong. Rasmussen is a joke among polling agencies. The paper you've linked is propaganda. Why? Because the report was issued on November 5th, 2008 before all the results were in and it was assumed Obama won by 6%. I've seen this posted a dozen times, and every time I have to do the same stupid breakdown because y'all don't learn! Obama won the 2008 election by 7.3% after all the votes were counted. The last Rasmussen poll predicts Obama would win by 6%. Rasmussen missed by 1.3% while CNN only missed by .3%. While 1.3% isn't a bad result, it's not perfect and CERTAINLY not the best result for 2008. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html Now since 2008 Rasmussen has proven they are a complete joke. Why? Because they missed a Hawaii senate race by 40%. No I'm not kidding. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/hawaii/election_2010_hawaii_senate Furthermore REAL analysis from the 2010 election reveals that Rasmussen is by far the most biased polling agency in America. It's not even close. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/ Now my suggestion to you is that you do your own research. Look at Rasmussen's own archives, and see for yourself what miserable failures they are at predicting elections. Then maybe you'll have a bit more knowledge on this issue.

12. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,572 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    21   2:27pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   Rent4Ever says Maybe because they better qualify the participants as "likely voters." Yes I know, and Rasmussen is the poll in the news recently showing Romney leading. I know it's really unfortunate when the most accurate poll in the last election is the one at odds with your political stance. All polling agencies target likely voters. Can you explain to me why Rasmussen missed a Senate race by 40 points? Do you have any concept whatsoever what a dismal failure this is? How can you even defend them? http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/hawaii/election_2010_hawaii_senate

13. Rent4Ever Follow Befriend 7 threads 94 comments

    22   2:33pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   You have a perfect avatar.

14. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,572 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    23   2:38pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   Rent4Ever says You have a perfect avatar. Can you at least admit that the paper you cited was wrong? Obama did not win in 2008 by 6%. He won by 7.3% therefore Rasmussen is NOT in fact the most accurate polling agency. Reality is a big deal for me however for some reason Republicans don't like it.

15. HEY YOU Follow Befriend (4) 334 threads 919 comments

    24   3:49pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   I'm sure all the polls on 7-30-2012 will determine the outcome of the election.

16. mell Follow Befriend (5) 57 threads 1,324 comments Premium

    25   3:53pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   Who cares - it's a one party system. Mitt Obama or Barack Romney - your pick ;)

17. Rent4Ever Follow Befriend 7 threads 94 comments

    26   4:09pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says Furthermore REAL analysis from the 2010 election reveals that Rasmussen is by far the most biased polling agency in America. It's not even close. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/ That's funny because 538, your own source, in 2008 and 2010 rated Rasmussen very high in their pollster rankings. 3rd in 2008 in fact. Then they became associated with the NYTimes in august of 2010 and surprise surprise!!! They started writing negative articles about the Rasmussen poll. What a coincidence. http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/05/pollster-ratings-v311.html http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/06/pollster-ratings-v40-results.html

18. Rent4Ever Follow Befriend 7 threads 94 comments

    27   4:14pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   HEY YOU says I'm sure all the polls on 7-30-2012 will determine the outcome of the election. Great point, which brings me back to what I was originally saying. Obama is swinging as the incumbent, and Mitt is just doing nothing and gaining ground. This is unprecedented.

19. CL Follow Befriend (12) 140 threads 1,355 comments Emeryville, CA

    28   4:17pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Rent4Ever says That's funny because 538, your own source, in 2008 and 2010 rated Rasmussen very high in their pollster rankings. Rasmussen has gone steadily downhill, and is routinely considered an outlier. I believe Rasmussen started selling is services to groups that manipulate the questions so as to give a rightward tilt. Even with Rasmussen included, Obama leads. Realclearpolitics is a rightwing site too. But the aggregate polling is quite good.

20. CL Follow Befriend (12) 140 threads 1,355 comments Emeryville, CA

    29   4:20pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/75161/the-rasmussen-problem

21. Rent4Ever Follow Befriend 7 threads 94 comments

    30   4:20pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   CL says Rasmussen has gone steadily downhill, and is routinely considered an outlier. I believe Rasmussen started selling is services to groups that manipulate the questions so as to give a rightward tilt. Even with Rasmussen included, Obama leads. Whatever the status of the polling, my point is that at this stage of the campaigns, an incumbent is not supposed to be statistically tied with their challenger. Obama was up a lot more just a short time ago. The gap isn't supposed to close this quickly.

22. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,572 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    31   4:27pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike   Protected   Rent4Ever says Whatever the status of the polling, my point is that at this stage of the campaigns, an incumbent is not supposed to be statistically tied with their challenger. Your point is invalid. Obama is not statistically tied with his challenger. You focus on the popular vote, and Obama is ahead in every poll except the corrupt Rasmussen. However in the Electoral college, it's another matter entirely. Romney doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning if the election was held today, and he has NOT been gaining ground. Rent4Ever says Then they became associated with the NYTimes in august of 2010 and surprise surprise!!! They started writing negative articles about the Rasmussen poll. Stop worrying about who publishes the data and start looking at the data yourself. That's where your problem is. Here's Rasmussen data from Rasmussen. What's your explanation for a 40% massive failure? How could this be possible? Furthermore how can you EVER cite a Rasmussen poll again knowing how much they screwed up? http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/hawaii/election_2010_hawaii_senate

23. CL Follow Befriend (12) 140 threads 1,355 comments Emeryville, CA

    32   4:29pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Rent4Ever says Whatever the status of the polling, my point is that at this stage of the campaigns, an incumbent is not supposed to be statistically tied with their challenger. Why not? As the election progresses, and as Iwog said, the debates will solidify Obama's lead. Romney has a lot of timebombs just waiting to blow up on him. Obama hasn't even pointed out his myriad positions on, well, every issue. http://newsone.com/2006845/mitt-romney-gay-rights-bay-windows/ To wit: "I'll be better than Ted Kennedy on gay rights". This guy is the worst possible candidate to run against Obama, if you want to win. Your only hope is some bizarre even at the convention and they select someone else. Seriously. RE: 538 http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/ "Rasmussen Polls Were Biased and Inaccurate; Quinnipiac, SurveyUSA Performed Strongly"

24. Rent4Ever Follow Befriend 7 threads 94 comments

    33   4:31pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   My point and original post has nothing to do with the specifics of the polls. But rather that the trends of both the polls and the events of the campaign indicate a worried and panicked Obama campaign and a calm Romney Campaign. Something that Obama supporters should be concerned with and is very surprising at this stage of the game.

25. JodyChunder Follow Befriend (3) 16 threads 1,379 comments Victorville, CA Premium

    34   4:32pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   I am voting for Roseanne Barr http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/07/real-obama-vs-fantasy-obama

26. Rent4Ever Follow Befriend 7 threads 94 comments

    35   4:34pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   CL says Why not? As the election progresses, and as Iwog said, the debates will solidify Obama's lead. Romney has a lot of timebombs just waiting to blow up on him. Obama hasn't even pointed out his myriad positions on, well, every issue. You do realize that Obama was the candidate that said things like, "Cling to their guns and religion" and "You didn't build that, someone else did." Ha ha ha, which one is the timebomb? The struggling incumbent, and if the economy goes south from now til November....forget it.

27. CL Follow Befriend (12) 140 threads 1,355 comments Emeryville, CA

    36   4:39pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Rent4Ever says My point and original post has nothing to do with the specifics of the polls I thought the premise of your post was, "Look at the polls. Obama and Romney are so close, it must worry Obama and his supporters. " I'm worried about fundraising, but I think that this could be a case of too much is too much. Extra money is always helpful, but it may not really change the trajectory of Romney's failed campaign. And he certainly doesn't get better with experience or opportunity. Every time he talks he alienates another group he needs to broaden the base, and to therefore, win. Given that his base already contains many shaky constituents, he's all but doomed.

28. CL Follow Befriend (12) 140 threads 1,355 comments Emeryville, CA

    37   5:22pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Rent4Ever says "Cling to their guns and religion" That, too, was out of context. But I agree even with the out-of-context quote. Desperate people DO cling to guns and religion at desperate times. Gun-owners and religious folks would agree. What's the problem there, except for politics?

29. Rent4Ever Follow Befriend 7 threads 94 comments

    38   7:52pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Fundraising matters, and it matters a lot, so you should be worried about that. Fair or not, but if the economy stalls in any significant way, or unemployment goes up, Obama will have a very hard time to win and there is no way around it.

30. JodyChunder Follow Befriend (3) 16 threads 1,379 comments Victorville, CA Premium

    39   8:04pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   CL says Desperate people DO cling to guns and religion at desperate times. This is true and I don't get what's so controversial about it. Just dumb. Guns and Bibles and desperation go together like cheese and crackers. Big deal.

31. deepcgi Follow Befriend 100 comments

    40   8:21pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   I would say the left-leaning cling to their entitlements and fiat money supply. The right leans on the fiat as well...in fact, both sides are Keynesian. I will not vote Keynesian again, because for all of my agnostic attitude, I am morally opposed to the reckless destruction of the wealth of those who primarily are the most frugal, by those who are the most foolhardy. In the economic sense, it's true that we are choosing between two of the same cloth.

32. JodyChunder Follow Befriend (3) 16 threads 1,379 comments Victorville, CA Premium

    41   8:26pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   What we see being touted as Keynesian economic policy is a big fat bastardization of actual Keynesian policy by snot-nosed baby boomers. First off, Keynes suggested that in rich times, we salt away the better portion of our profits for the inevitable hard times. Sounds good, right? In other words, don't piss it away in a bacchanalia live-for-today manner. He also states that his policies work best in a non-globalized economy.

33. jvolstad Follow Befriend (4) 992 threads 1,125 comments San Antonio, TX jvolstad's website

    42   8:26pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says I'm an Obama supporter and Obama is not tied. Polls have shown Obama winning the November election easily for more than a year, and polls have also remained nearly unchanged during that time. I hope you are right iwog. I'd vote for anybody except for the Chief Chickenhawk Mitt Romney.

34. JodyChunder Follow Befriend (3) 16 threads 1,379 comments Victorville, CA Premium

    43   8:27pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   jvolstad says I hope you are right iwog. I'd vote for anybody except for the Chief Chickenhawk Mitt Romney. http://www.roseanneforpresident2012.org/ A brave murican.

35. jvolstad Follow Befriend (4) 992 threads 1,125 comments San Antonio, TX jvolstad's website

    44   8:33pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   JodyChunder says jvolstad says I hope you are right iwog. I'd vote for anybody except for the Chief Chickenhawk Mitt Romney. http://www.roseanneforpresident2012.org/ A brave murican. Well, maybe not anyone.....

36. Bellingham Bill Follow Befriend 30 threads 1,488 comments Bellingham, WA Premium

    45   9:59pm Mon 30 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   iwog says However in the Electoral college, it's another matter entirely. Romney doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning if the election was held today, and he has NOT been gaining ground. http://electoral-vote.com

37. freak80 Follow Befriend (4) 52 threads 4,416 comments Corning, NY Premium

    46   7:11am Tue 31 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   JodyChunder says He also states that his policies work best in a non-globalized economy. That's just it. Any "stimulus" we do just creates new Wal-Mart "associates" and new slave-labor jobs in China.

38. marcus Follow Befriend (5) 168 threads 5,098 comments

    47   8:31am Tue 31 Jul 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   IF you like Romney's chances, bet on him winning either in Vegas or online. Currently you can get close to 3:2 odds. That is for every $100 you bet on Romney, you will win $140 if he wins (actually 7:5 odds) Unfortunately, if you wanted to vote on Obama winning, you have to bet $170 to win $100. http://sports.bovada.lv/sports-betting/political-props.jsp

39. AlexS Follow Befriend (1) 1 threads 284 comments

    48   11:48am Wed 1 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   &feature=player_embedded

40. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,572 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    49   2:15pm Wed 1 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   Ruki says See folks how shrill the ObamaCommies become as they become more and more desperate. I agree. It's like a parent yelling at a child for eating paste. Your problem is you keep eating the paste.

« First     « Previous comments