If you want to have some real fun with the RCP site--jump on over to the
Electoral Map. I'll wait for you to come back...(Snidely smiling and
humming to self.)Oh--hello! Back again so soon? Like what you saw?
The ryancare/romney campaign will receive at least a 30 point bump in all
campaign approved polls, fact-checked by campaign approved fact-checkers.
Tom in CAVallejo, CAObama = 332Romney = 206LDS
Liberal - I hate to break the news to you, but you have reversed the names.================== I hate to break the news to you, but you
have reversed what is real and what is not real.Those Elector
College Votes I sighted were taken directly from the exact same source as this
DN article.Which clearly published, that as of today;Obama = 332Romney = 206and 270 is needed to win, no matter
what opinion poll Romney may or may not win.
Sorry, Tom in CA Nate Silver to whom Roland referred has it almost exactly like
that. One small correction Roland Nate now has it Obama 74.8% chance of victory
and Romney around 25%. By the way conservatives 538 looks and
accounts for all polls, trends, and individual events. As Roland said so far
Mr. Silver and his 538 have been 99.9% correct.
Obama = 332Romney = 206LDS Liberal - I hate to break the news
to you, but you have reversed the names.
patriot is free to not trust the polls, as they sometimes prove wrong. But what
method did he use in coming up with his own (6%) number? No one else has come up
with anything close to that. Perhaps patriot is the best forecaster of all time.
Could we have it broken down state by state, please sir?
The problem is that Mr. Romney has turned so far to the right to get the support
of the tea party that he will lose the support of the independent voters.
Exactly right Patriot, couldn't have been more right on! ....and where do
you think all the media fact checkers are going to be this week? Dead silent!
You won't hear a thing about "fact checking" from the media. They
will be to busy running cover for the ANOINTED ONE, or they won't be able
to do their job, because they have to many shivers running up their legs.
Unfortunately its the electoral vote that counts and Obama continues to be
significantly ahead in that.
Patriot, you seem awfully worried for such confidence! And what are real polls?
The ones that are in favor of your candidate?
@Dadof5sonsThat is a ridiculous assumption. History only shows that
undecideds are only more likely to vote for a challenger than an incumbant, not
that they only do that. The best you can reasonably assume is that only some
percentage of undecideds end up even voting (some will vote third party or not
voting at all) and then maybe you can justify 2/3 going for Romney with 1/3 to
I don't trust these polls. The majority over-sample democrat's. I
honestly think the real polls would have Romney ahead by as much as 6 points.
Also this DNC is going to be alot of hooha short of specifics. There is no way
the libs are going to talk about the 16 trillion debt or the 23 million out of
work or the fact that the summer months had next to zero growth nation wide.
These are cold hard facts and there is no way these people want anything to do
with facts. The DNC is going to be all HYPE and SPIN along with a heavy dose of
Romney bashing. The question Americans should worried sick about is - what is
the Dem's plan for 2013? We know what it is - more borrowing from China to
gin up another "stimulus", more tax increases and NO cost cutting. There
you go. I just saved you all 3 days of watching Eva Longoria and Sandra Fluke
and the other "deep thinkers" and their emotional double talk.
What these polls do not show is the undecided voter. historically since
President Ike. the undecided voted for the challenger. So about 11 percent of
America is undecided. Give that to Romney because of past tracking shows that is
how they vote. give Mitt 54 to Obamas 45 percent. So when History repeats it
self. it will be Romney by 11 percent over Obama.
@ KayserFor those of you who seem to believe the Democratic line
that Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000, you seem to overlook the fact that a
million absentee ballots in California were not counted, mostly from the
military who supported Bush heavily in 2000, and that every count in
Florida---every one---showed that Bush really won that state. I think the truth
is that no one knows for sure who won the popular vote in 2000, but it
wasn't a dead ringer for Gore, that's for sure. The California
ballots weren't counted because the difference was larger than the number
of uncounted ballots, so those demos who are crying for a popular vote maybe
would have helped Bush unwittingly had such been the practice; be careful what
you wish for as there are unforseen consequences.I don't think
this race will be anything but close and that is a reflection on Obama, who as a
sitting President should win hands down this cycle. He may actually lose come
@Counter Intelligence"At this point in the election, Carter was still
ahead of Reagan by 4 pointsIt isn't going to get better for
Obama"Your sample size of one person making a comeback
doesn't mean much since I can just as easily say McCain was up by a point
at this stage (post-GOP convention) but lost by almost half a dozen.
Doesn't mean Obama will win, obviously it's still close and can go
As we all learned in 2000, the popular vote is meaningless. All survey's
point to an electoral college lead for the president. Nate Silver, quoted in
this article, gives President Obama a 65% chance of victory. In the previous
election Silver called every state, but one, correctly. He missed Indiana.
Romney says cutting defense spending will cost jobs but cutting government
spending will create jobs.They believe in polls today, support a
pro-life/pro choice, pro socialist medicare/ anti socialist, anti-760 billion
saver/ 760 billion saver. Don't eat the dog - put it on top of the
car...You have no idea what you believe do you?
Republicans believe in polls? I thought.... Well what about fact checkers and
thier facts? Later? Not right now? As long as there are
electronic voting machines and widespread voter suppression - you have a chance.
"America will stay a 50/50 country, and the pendulum will keep swinging back
and forth."The reason it swings is because collectively, we dont
like the leadership of either party.The party in power typically
gets voted OUT.
At this point in the election, Carter was still ahead of Reagan by 4 pointsIt isn't going to get better for Obama
Statistically no bounce from the convention. Romney had to spend all his
efforts shoring up his base, who are uncomfortable about voting for him. They
are voting against Obama, not for Romney.Romney's strategy to
talk in general terms about election issues, while providing no detail, will
fail with the swing voters. They're smarter than the base voters.
This is far from a no-brainer. 50 percent of America want one or the other
candidate, yet the candidates use the word "Americans" as a blanket
statement, as if all Americans want the same things. Nothing could be further
from the truth. We need more than two parties to represent us; and until that
happens, America will stay a 50/50 country, and the pendulum will keep swinging
back and forth.
2008 2012Unemployment 7.8% 8.3%Federal
Debt $10 Trillion $16 Trillion$1 TRILLION FAILED STIMULUS Household Income $54K $50KGasoline $1.85
$3.85 Economy "Growing" At
Snail's PacePretty clear picture isn't it??None of
the above show ANY signs of relief - only getting worse.Baron
Scarpia - nice try, but ..........This is a no brainer.
Whatever -- George W. Bush showed us all that polls don't
matter, and votes don't matter...Obama = 332Romney =
206270 is all that is needed to win.
The general consensus is that Romney didn't get the needed bounce going
forward and that the continued chatter over Eastwood's scene-stealing
performance, just before Romney's big moment, has largely stolen the
thunder of the convention. Even DN has yet another Eastwood story...
personally, I think the Dems love it as it keeps interfering with Romney's
narrative.If the Democrats can convince America that we're
better off than we were four years ago -- Bin Laden is dead, we're pulling
out of Iraq and Afghanistan, military deaths are down due to drone technology,
GM and Chrysler are alive and thriving, etc. -- then it will blunt the
GOP's main line of offense. Unemployment is still high.
Who's got the plan to create jobs? Romney/Ryan want to gut federal
spending -- the implication? Higher unemployment for 2013, at least initially,
as government layoffs result (as well as from businesses that do government
work). Romney/Ryan will need to address growing ranks on welfare after cutting
fed spending -- that will be interesting in light of proposed tax cuts on
"job creators." (didn't Bush cut taxes -- where are all the new
jobs from that?)