Geoff Kilpatrick Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Only in America could Romney have a chance of being president. Yes, a US politician could only be president in the US... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusk_Till_Dawn Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Yes, a US politician could only be president in the US... Appreciate the clarification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 RCP tracking has Romney leading by the same margin as he led going into the second debate. I think if he gets the edge in this one it's a done deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chester™ Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 RCP tracking has Romney leading by the same margin as he led going into the second debate. I think if he gets the edge in this one it's a done deal. Im a bit puzzled. I've seen other polls, in various outlets, that have Obama in the lead. Is this RCP tracking the main one Uly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Im a bit puzzled. I've seen other polls, in various outlets, that have Obama in the lead. Is this RCP tracking the main one Uly? Here you go: http://www.realclear...obama-1171.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chester™ Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Here you go: http://www.realclear...obama-1171.html Cheers. So its a case of 'who might be right' it seems. I cant help but have a feeling that Obama will win this because Bush Part 3 is to go for it in 4 years time. Though IIRC, not many Democrats win a second term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigC Posted October 22, 2012 Author Share Posted October 22, 2012 Im a bit puzzled. I've seen other polls, in various outlets, that have Obama in the lead. Is this RCP tracking the main one Uly? The big difference between the polls can be accounted for by the two different types of polls. I'm not sue what Uly was quoting from, but generally speaking, the "National" polls tend to be very close, but Obama seems to have the lead in the swing states, which will ultimately decide the election. It's nowhere near as big a lead as it was though. He was 9/10 points clear in Ohio before the 1st debate. Last I heard it was 4/5% with the margin of error being 3%. It is possible for Mitt Romney to win without Ohio, but he'd have to win almost every other swing state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rand Paul's Ray Bans Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 This is the debate I've been waiting and looking forward to. It's going to be a disappointment, though. The list of topics that will be discussed is:- 1. America's role in the world 2. Our longest war -- Afghanistan and Pakistan? 3. Red lines -- Israel and Iran? 4. The changing Middle East and the new face of terrorism 5. The rise of China and tomorrow's world No mention of the Euro crisis or Latin America. Pretty shocking considering the Euro crisis is the biggest threat to the American economy, and with the shadow of the war on drug cartels still large in Mexico. It's pretty clear, and unsurprising, that this whole debate will be going over ground that has already been covered, peppered with vacuous soundbites. Romney's actual FP is not much different to Obama's - with the exception of ramping up defence spending (which doesn't fit in with his pledge to cut taxes and spending). As far as the debate itself will go in my opinion, Obama will be on the defensive a lot of the time, with Romney on the offence and trying to convey that he loves America more than Barry-O. Another prediction: I'll be pulling a lof of Cornettes and facepalms when the topic gets to China. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigC Posted October 22, 2012 Author Share Posted October 22, 2012 Watched the VP debate and the 2nd Obama v Romney on catch-up, but I'm staying up for this one! I don't think there really is a lot either can do to influence the Euro, so I don't think it could really be debated properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chester™ Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 It might have been nice to see a wee bit about Russia in there. I suppose that might come under Debate Point 1 though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 RCP tracking has Romney leading by the same margin as he led going into the second debate. I think if he gets the edge in this one it's a done deal. The latest polls are scaring the shit out of me. I actually can't understand what's going on. For Christ's sake America, don't elect this *******. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigC Posted October 23, 2012 Author Share Posted October 23, 2012 It's on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigC Posted October 23, 2012 Author Share Posted October 23, 2012 2 minutes of general bluster and talking points from Romney, not even mentioning Libya! At least Obama had a go at answering the question for 20 seconds or so! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Romney already cynically spreading fear. Though he's certainly showing he's no neo-con in the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The People's Chimp Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Romney hasn't answered a point yet. Typical bluster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Romney hasn't answered a point yet. Typical bluster. But while Obama has, it's all tech talk, all hesitant shades of grey. This won't have any effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Shaun wetting his pants again! Christ sakes man, lighten up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Shaun wetting his pants again! Christ sakes man, lighten up! Geoff, this is important! If that bozo wins, man oh man. At LSE 12 years ago, an old friend of mine couldn't understand why so many of us were so interested in her country's politics. She reasoned (this was before 9/11) that the President doesn't have much real power, so what did it all matter? But the power that the President doesn't have domestically is counter-balanced by the power they do hold internationally. OK, Romney's not an idiot - but he's a nasty, nasty piece of work. The result of the Presidential election affects all of us: that's why it matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Geoff, this is important! If that bozo wins, man oh man. At LSE 12 years ago, an old friend of mine couldn't understand why so many of us were so interested in her country's politics. She reasoned (this was before 9/11) that the President doesn't have much real power, so what did it all matter? But the power that the President doesn't have domestically is counter-balanced by the power they do hold internationally. OK, Romney's not an idiot - but he's a nasty, nasty piece of work. The result of the Presidential election affects all of us: that's why it matters. I'm not saying it doesn't matter but the idea that the American government machine is significantly different between Democrat and Republican is laughable in relation to foreign policy. Obama winning in 2008 was phenomenal in a societal context. Policy-wise? Not so much. Both candidates, I am willing to bet, will fail to tell the truth about China, i.e. it has bankrolled the debt bubble that kept Americans afloat whilst obtaining their manufacturing and cheap goods at Wal-mart, they don't respect intellectual property and ride roughshod over democracy. And because of that, they will dominate the 21st century. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I'm not saying it doesn't matter but the idea that the American government machine is significantly different between Democrat and Republican is laughable in relation to foreign policy. Obama winning in 2008 was phenomenal in a societal context. Policy-wise? Not so much. Both candidates, I am willing to bet, will fail to tell the truth about China, i.e. it has bankrolled the debt bubble that kept Americans afloat whilst obtaining their manufacturing and cheap goods at Wal-mart, they don't respect intellectual property and ride roughshod over democracy. And because of that, they will dominate the 21st century. Certainly agree on that! And while the Old World is in irreversible decline, both geopolitically and economically, that there will be no questions on the Eurozone crisis is frankly incredible. Oh, one other thing. Bob Schieffer is a joke. Has he even woken up yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Romney practically copying word for word Tina Fey's parody of Sarah Palin during the last campaign. He's in Florida, so it's Israel, Cuba, Israel, Cuba, with a dash of Iran and Chavez thrown in for good measure. Cynical, but effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Obama getting stronger as the debate continues IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Geoff, this is important! If that bozo wins, man oh man. Why? Ronald Reagan made us all afraid he was going to kill us. Remember "life in the European theatre"? We're still here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Why? Ronald Reagan made us all afraid he was going to kill us. Remember "life in the European theatre"? We're still here. My answer to that would be that the US/Europe post-war economic and geopolitical settlement has probably never been under more threat than it is now. It needs someone with a steady hand; not a loose cannon. Reagan? While the US had certainly had their problems in the 1970s - more than a few of them - the USSR had tons of them. Economically, they were like Upper Volta with nuclear weapons by the time he came to power. The supposed threat they posed had already been extinguished through economic forces: all that remained was for them to accept it. But now? Now, the West is on the wrong side of the economic equation. And because I'm absolutely convinced Romney will put more Americans out of work and increase their deficit considerably via lousy, stinking policies, he'll weaken that country still further. That's bad news for all of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I thought he was gonna say he had binders full of teachers there, for a minute... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Draw. But if anyone won it - fractionally - Romney probably did. Polls won't move off the back of that; they'll settle. Not good. Not good at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Romney had certainly done better in these debates than I expected. His visible shuffling toward the centre will have the Teabaggers in a slavering conundrum. He could barely contain his nodding at some of Obama's points. While I still think he is full of shit, anyone who thinks Romney doesn't have a very good chance of winning is deluding themselves. People shouldn't underestimate just how disliked Obama is by a large portion of the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rand Paul's Ray Bans Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 In short: Obama wins. Just. There won't be much (if any) movement in the polls. Obama was there to defend his four years as POTUS. Romney was just trying to look and sound presidential; and at times he did. MR starts off by stating that killing isn't the way forward. Then, claims that he would hunt the 'bad guys' down. Geez, Mitt, gonna simplify that for us?! Bizarre contradiction in any case. Most of the debate focused on the Middle East. Where the candidates agreed on a lot. Romney tried to nail Obama on the 'apology tour' - forgetting that Bush first visited Israel in the seventh year of his presidency. A weak blow. Then came the segment on defence spending. Obama roasted Romney with his bayonets and horses line. Some people may say that Obama was patronising, and he was. He was brilliant, and showed definitively that FP is not Romney's strong point at all. My favourite segment of the whole debate. Bizarrely, a segment on domestic policy followed. Annoying to a FP wonk like me, but reflective of what the American voters value more in this election: the economy. Only one, short slot on drones, with Romney agreeing with Obama. Would have been good if a whole segment was dedicated to drones. I was perky when the question on China eventually came. Romney started off by stressing that China could and should be a key partner - my ears were pricking up and I was pleasantly surprised. But, alas, came the usual drivel about labelling them as a currency manipulator. Yawn. Obama's line on Romney's Chinese investments rattled Romney and the conservatives on my Twitter timeline. Cheap shot! they cried. Fair, valid, and true point, I thought. I've probably forgotten a lot else I was gonna say. Oh, and one final thing. Is it just me that thought Bob Schieffer was a pretty crap moderator? I thought Candy Crowley and Martha Raddatz were much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigC Posted October 23, 2012 Author Share Posted October 23, 2012 Yup, the two women kicked ass. The two men were like slow old geezers trying to keep up with the young'uns talking about their iPhones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpie Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 It seems to me the debate involving the two Presidential candidates is of lesser importance than the opinions of the media "experts" who analyse every word, use fact checking and isolate comments to show strength or weaknesses in the candidates. Some here seem surprised dismayed and disappointed that candidates lie when running for election. Having watched and followed a number of elections in three Countries it is my jaded opinion that most of what they say is a lie to get elected. The proof of this is generally their post election performance after being succesful. The most common phrase then is "it's not my fault it's what I was left by the previous regime". The debate is what it is, an opportunity for the candidates to show their faces and for the TV stations to up their ratings. If you want to see Obama again watch the Late Show on Wednesday when he will be appearing there again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 It seems to me the debate involving the two Presidential candidates is of lesser importance than the opinions of the media "experts" who analyse every word, use fact checking and isolate comments to show strength or weaknesses in the candidates. Some here seem surprised dismayed and disappointed that candidates lie when running for election. Having watched and followed a number of elections in three Countries it is my jaded opinion that most of what they say is a lie to get elected. The proof of this is generally their post election performance after being succesful. The most common phrase then is "it's not my fault it's what I was left by the previous regime". The debate is what it is, an opportunity for the candidates to show their faces and for the TV stations to up their ratings. If you want to see Obama again watch the Late Show on Wednesday when he will be appearing there again. The words of a politician are well worthy of close scrutiny because the language they use is usually well crafted and deliberate. How often do you here them saying " that is not actually what I said. If you check I said...". Thats normally a loophole. Alex Salmond said (to the SNP conference)something like the journey to Scottish Home Rule was coming to an end. Note he did not say independence. The art of the politicain is to avoid being called a liar at all costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 The general consensus is that Obama was clearly better, and scored better among independent and uncommitted voters. But I don't think it will do him a great deal of good at this stage in the game. Foreign policy issues don't really move voter perceptions, and there are fewer and fewer undecided voters left at this stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boaby Ewing Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 The general consensus is that Obama was clearly better, and scored better among independent and uncommitted voters. But I don't think it will do him a great deal of good at this stage in the game. Foreign policy issues don't really move voter perceptions, and there are fewer and fewer undecided voters left at this stage. Pretty much. Romney just had to avoid shiting himself on stage or saying he's 'never really cared for the Jews'. It's going to go down to the wire. I fear that despite stronger performances in the last two weeks, Barry O might still live to regret not going for the jugular that first week. He's failed to sufficiently defend his record or to campaign on the fact that things are (slowly) getting better - certainly compared to Europe, but even in isolation. Now the debates are out the way I just wish they'd hurry up and get it over with. Can't see many minds getting changed now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted October 24, 2012 Share Posted October 24, 2012 Pretty much. Romney just had to avoid shiting himself on stage or saying he's 'never really cared for the Jews'. It's going to go down to the wire. I fear that despite stronger performances in the last two weeks, Barry O might still live to regret not going for the jugular that first week. He's failed to sufficiently defend his record or to campaign on the fact that things are (slowly) getting better - certainly compared to Europe, but even in isolation. Now the debates are out the way I just wish they'd hurry up and get it over with. Can't see many minds getting changed now. Intrade betting has swung Romney's way in the last 24 hours - from 36-64 to 45-55. I think the gamblers can smell where the money is to be won here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Palmer Posted October 24, 2012 Share Posted October 24, 2012 Right guys, what's the difference between Democrat and Republican? Isn't America a Republic anyway so why the need for Republicans? (insert vlad stupid if you want) Keep it nice and simple but what happens if I'm in between....? **Be advised the answer to these questions won't influence my role in the game thread that Ulysses has decided to put up, as I'm unlikely to take part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted October 24, 2012 Share Posted October 24, 2012 Americans seem to be polarised and set in their ways on political issues hence the importnaace of the swing states. I visit the USA fairly regularly and once asked why the apparently more' Liberal' Democrats still did well in at least some Southern states. I was told that it was largely because Abe Lincoln was a Republican. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted October 24, 2012 Share Posted October 24, 2012 Americans seem to be polarised and set in their ways on political issues hence the importnaace of the swing states. I visit the USA fairly regularly and once asked why the apparently more' Liberal' Democrats still did well in at least some Southern states. I was told that it was largely because Abe Lincoln was a Republican. And, believe it or not, there are also many who are more "liberal" in at least some Southern states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 Intrade betting has swung Romney's way in the last 24 hours - from 36-64 to 45-55. I think the gamblers can smell where the money is to be won here. And back out a little again today, now running at 40-60. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 And back out a little again today, now running at 40-60. What does that mean? I'm not up on this type of betting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 What does that mean? I'm not up on this type of betting... Have a look at these: Intrade US Presidential Election scoreboard Intrade US Presidential Election Map How Intrade prediction markets work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Draper Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 Have a look at these: Intrade US Presidential Election scoreboard Intrade US Presidential Election Map How Intrade prediction markets work Get you. So, people basically predicting who'll win, not polls of who people will vote for. Early voting has already started here. Big lines, apparently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 ....people basically predicting who'll win.... Yep - and paying to do so. Intrade was eerily accurate in 2004 and 2008. In 2004 it predicted every state EC vote decision correctly. In 2008 it got the EC vote score correct, but missed out the right results in two states - swapping them over between the two parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rand Paul's Ray Bans Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 Today's Politico cartoon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southside1874 Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Did Romney actually say that Syria was friends with Iran because it needed access to the sea?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalamazoo Jambo Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Did Romney actually say that Syria was friends with Iran because it needed access to the sea?? He has said that Syria is Iran's route to the sea - multiple times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 He has said that Syria is Iran's route to the sea - multiple times. And he's not the only one to say similar. It isn't actually that stupid an argument, as long as people realise what is meant by it, and that he isn't (I think...) suggesting it is Iran's, as a country with a huge coastline, only route to the sea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalamazoo Jambo Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 And he's not the only one to say similar. It isn't actually that stupid an argument, as long as people realise what is meant by it, and that he isn't (I think...) suggesting it is Iran's, as a country with a huge coastline, only route to the sea. Considering that Syria and Iran don't even share a border, I have to say that I don't really understand the argument... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Considering that Syria and Iran don't even share a border, I have to say that I don't really understand the argument... If by "the sea" he means the Mediterranean, it makes more sense, given the Syrians are probably Iran's only real chums in the Arabian world. They can easily fly people, bombs, terrorists, flying pigs etc. into Damascus then take it from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rab Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Some really interesting statistical analysis on the various polls on the NYTimes 538 blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.