patrick.net

Yes, yes, I know. There were several weeks back in '09 when Obama actually had control of the house and senate.

By the way....on the thread topic, a snapshot of what the money thinks of Romney's chances. See the red graph.

http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/graphs/graph_Pres12_WTA.cfm

The winners price will be 100.

It seems as though every Republican who runs for office has the same mantra: If you elect Republicans, they will cut government spending and increase private sector jobs. The problem is that it just isn’t true. A few days ago, I provided the evidence which proves that Republicans are much bigger government spenders than Democrats. (see: http://www.politicalmontana.com/?p=309 ).

The same is true for private sector jobs. Many more private sector jobs are created when Democrats are in power. http://www.businessinsider.com/the-data-show-democrats-are-better-at-creating-private-sector-jobs-2012-8. This article explains that the Bureau of Labor Statistics compiles these historical numbers and the data clearly shows Democrats are better for private job creation. An illustrative graph is below:

Private-sector jobs grew far more under Democratic than Republican presidents, 1961-2012

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/08/1089785/-Private-sector-jobs-grew-far-more-under-Democratic-than-Republican-presidents-1961-2012

The presidents who averaged the most jobs created per month were Bill Clinton, at 217,000; Jimmy Carter, at 188,000; and Ronald Reagan, at 153,000. That's right. Jimmy Carter beat Ronald Reagan. The only president to preside over a cumulative loss of private-sector jobs was, of course, George W. Bush.

Obama leads Wisconsin

Obama extends lead to 4.3pts Avg!

Fox shows a 5pt lead!

Presidential Polls Indicate Romney Losing: How Election 2012 Could Spark GOP Revolution

http://www.policymic.com/articles/15473/presidential-polls-indicate-romney-losing-how-election-2012-could-spark-gop-revolution