Mitt Romney

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
The majority of the electorate hasn't voted yet so Romney wouldn't need a 30 point advantage on election day to win. A much smaller one will suffice. The problem the democrats have is they are pushing hard for their voters to show up early which leaves them with less supporters to show up on election day. It makes for some good propoganda today to say "Look! Obama has a 30 point lead among early voters!", but it will all but disappear once the polls close on election day.

That is true, but if those are national numbers that are reflected in Ohio, then that 5% isn't close to closing the gap. And what's holding up republicans? Why not vote today?
 

brett636

Well-Known Member
Polls are nice if they are in YOUR favor but in the end what suprises me is how close it is. After all the crap the left have spewed about how "Romney has no chance", "is this the best the Republicans can do", "With Paul Ryan, they have sealed their fate", you would think it would have been a major Blowout by the Messiah. Just back up a month and read some the the Loony lefts comments on BC...how hilarious!!! By their comments then, i would think they would be having major strokes right now. And with all the Lamesteam media going to bat for the Messiah it really should be a blowout. So that its this close really says something about Barry, his radical policies, class warfare, fake war on woman, and the lefty Hollywood and medias obvious love affair with everything Obama. America is getting tired of the crap. Maybe all the Messiahs negative garbage and blame game have actually helped Romney. So if Obama loses, does anyone still think Barry and Mooch will still be invited to Jay Z and Beyonces?

I agree with your stance on these polls. In the end they don't mean much to me and I can say this with Romney holding a decisive lead in most of them. The only poll worthy of paying attention to is the one held on the first Tuesday in November as that will be the one that determines if this country can move back into greatness, or as Ronald Reagan put it "take our first steps into a thousand years of darkness".
 

brett636

Well-Known Member
That is true, but if those are national numbers that are reflected in Ohio, then that 5% isn't close to closing the gap. And what's holding up republicans? Why not vote today?

I am waiting till election day to vote, and its been plainly obvious who my vote is going for. Most people are accustomed to voting on election day so they simply wait till then to do so. Also, say I wanted to vote early, I would have to drive downtown to our local city county building to cast my vote as that is the only polling location open for the entire county, but if I wait till election day my local polling place is a 10 minute walk from my house.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Then I guess no poll is accurate because they all apply their own voter prediction model to the possible outcome. This is a lot more complicated than just making the phone calls and tallying up who said they were going to support who.

That's true, but alot of it seems just crazy. Like the Colorado model showing Romney winning with 330 electoral votes.
 

Lue C Fur

Evil member
I always thought Romney had the best chance of all the repubs in the primary and that Ryan was his best choice for VP. The real question is that given the state of the economy, why is this race even close? The repubs should be winning in a landslide, no?

I agree, if you agree that most the media is in the tank for the Messiah as most level headed people can obviously see then its no wonder he is not winning by a landslide. If the media actually did their jobs...investigate and report then the chosen one might not have received the nomination and we would be talking about a Hillary/Romney election. Instead we have media lapdogs who softball Barry and dont report all the news that might be negative to him. Its not that they lie...they just dont report it all. Do you deny a blatent media bias?
 

Lue C Fur

Evil member
I am waiting till election day to vote, and its been plainly obvious who my vote is going for. Most people are accustomed to voting on election day so they simply wait till then to do so. Also, say I wanted to vote early, I would have to drive downtown to our local city county building to cast my vote as that is the only polling location open for the entire county, but if I wait till election day my local polling place is a 10 minute walk from my house.

Im 3 mins away from mine and i cant wait!!!!
 

brett636

Well-Known Member
That's true, but alot of it seems just crazy. Like the Colorado model showing Romney winning with 330 electoral votes.

That wasn't really so much a poll, but a prediction model based on economic data such as unemployment, take home pay, etc. Its the same model used to predict the winner of the last eight presidential elections, and we will see if its going to be as accurate on its 9th attempt. Whats most interesting about it is 1992 was the year it was off the most, and that was due to Ross Perot having such a strong showing in that race, but it still predicted a Clinton victory. Being that we don't have a strong third party candidate in this election its safe to say it will be more accurate now.
 

Jones

fILE A GRIEVE!
Staff member
I agree, if you agree that most the media is in the tank for the Messiah as most level headed people can obviously see then its no wonder he is not winning by a landslide. If the media actually did their jobs...investigate and report then the chosen one might not have received the nomination and we would be talking about a Hillary/Romney election. Instead we have media lapdogs who softball Barry and dont report all the news that might be negative to him. Its not that they lie...they just dont report it all. Do you deny a blatent media bias?
I think it's effects are overhyped, bias exists but everyone knows it which mitigates it's effects also I think the bias is more a reflection of people's preferences than a shaper of them, ie, people have a choice no one is forced to watch FOX or MSNBC they choose to watch the one which they think is most likely to tell them what they want to hear. You can always choose to watch neither, which is what I do. Blaming other people's choices on "media brainwashing" is just a way denying that anyone else can have a reasoned opinion that differs from your own.
If the republican party is struggling to win an election which by all rights should be a cakewalk for them, then either they are incapable of fielding a decent candidate or they need to take a look at their party platform and figure out what it is that so many people find unappealing about it. jmho.
 

brett636

Well-Known Member
Any poll can be an outlier, that's why the best thing to do is look at polling averages rather than individual polls.

I will take it a step further and say that the way the polls are trending is more important than their final outcome prediction numbers. Thats really the best way to determine what the electorate is thinking.
 

Lue C Fur

Evil member
I think it's effects are overhyped, bias exists but everyone knows it which mitigates it's effects also I think the bias is more a reflection of people's preferences than a shaper of them, ie, people have a choice no one is forced to watch FOX or MSNBC they choose to watch the one which they think is most likely to tell them what they want to hear. You can always choose to watch neither, which is what I do. Blaming other people's choices on "media brainwashing" is just a way denying that anyone else can have a reasoned opinion that differs from your own.
If the republican party is struggling to win an election which by all rights should be a cakewalk for them, then either they are incapable of fielding a decent candidate or they need to take a look at their party platform and figure out what it is that so many people find unappealing about it. jmho.

If you dont have Cable TV and only can watch the 3 networks then your not getting the full story. Many older folks still dont have cable and grew up with the big 3 networks so they still only know what they hear from them. Its amazing when i talk with people that only see those networks and tell them what they are missing or they tell me what they only know from watching the big 3 networks...its really sad. I thought the media was there to help protect Americans from our corrupt goverment...now they are in bed with the goverment. If a Republican had screwed up half as bad as Barry on the American Consulate murders, the Media would be all over it. The same goes for Fast and Furious. The Lamestream media burries and does not report on almost everything that can and will hurt the chosen one. I used to only watch CNN since its inception and thought it was a great news network. Then, during the 2008 campaign i noticed how they treated Hillary and then how they treated McCain...it was very blatent. I switched to the big 3 networks and noticed the same thing. Only negative coverage of Hillary and a total lovefest for the Messiah. I noticed the local newspaper was doing the same. I was complaining at work and was told to try FOX...what an eye opener. Sure, i lean right just like you lean left so we both have our Bias. But even many on the left agree with the media bias...heck even Wild Bill admitted it. Hillary got screwed by the media just as Romney is getting screwed to this day. Anyone who cant see this is either blind or a liar, or has their Obama rose colored glasses on.

 

804brown

Well-Known Member
I think it's effects are overhyped, bias exists but everyone knows it which mitigates it's effects also I think the bias is more a reflection of people's preferences than a shaper of them, ie, people have a choice no one is forced to watch FOX or MSNBC they choose to watch the one which they think is most likely to tell them what they want to hear. You can always choose to watch neither, which is what I do. Blaming other people's choices on "media brainwashing" is just a way denying that anyone else can have a reasoned opinion that differs from your own.
If the republican party is struggling to win an election which by all rights should be a cakewalk for them, then either they are incapable of fielding a decent candidate or they need to take a look at their party platform and figure out what it is that so many people find unappealing about it. jmho.

You are so right. This is a choice between a tarnished brand (the gop) and a weak economy (obama in charge). People are torn between voting for the party of the bad ideas that got us to this point, the party that deregulated us to death and let the wealthy get away with not paying their fair share vs the party IN THE WHITE HOUSE AT THE MOMENT who has tried to fix those things but not fast enough.

Jones you are correct, if you look at this from a year or 2 ago with unemployment still high, THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN A LANDSLIDE. The elephant in the room (pun intended) is the republican brand itself. If the economy was humming and unemployment did come down to 6%, obama would have had the cake walk. Lets face it the american people still do not trust repubs to fix our problems EVEN IN SUCH A SLAMDUNK ECONOMY!! If they cannot win this election, with the demograghics changing as they are, they might not win another national election for a long time. This is their hail mary. And especially since economists are predicting 12 million jobs created and brighter skies ahead, whoever wins will get the credit. if obama wins, repubs are dead in the water for a long time. if romeny wins, repubs can say "see we were right..." and take credit.

As for the polls, Oct. 28: In Swing States, a Predictable Election? - NYTimes.com Nate silver is the man to watch/read!!
 

av8torntn

Well-Known Member
The real question is that given the state of the economy, why is this race even close? The repubs should be winning in a landslide, no?

I think Romney has made some serious political errors making him a flawed candidate. For one his campaign should have borrowed money from Romney before the nomination to fight some of the goofiest attacks from the Obama campaign. The other side of that shows how flawed of a candidate Obama is that he couldn't put the race away after so many critical errors from the Romney side.

A very skilled republican candidate with a team as skilled as the Bush team was would have put this race away in the spring in my opinion.
 
M

MenInBrown

Guest
You are so right. This is a choice between a tarnished brand (the gop) and a weak economy (obama in charge). People are torn between voting for the party of the bad ideas that got us to this point, the party that deregulated us to death and let the wealthy get away with not paying their fair share vs the party IN THE WHITE HOUSE AT THE MOMENT who has tried to fix those things but not fast enough.Jones you are correct, if you look at this from a year or 2 ago with unemployment still high, THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN A LANDSLIDE. The elephant in the room (pun intended) is the republican brand itself. If the economy was humming and unemployment did come down to 6%, obama would have had the cake walk. Lets face it the american people still do not trust repubs to fix our problems EVEN IN SUCH A SLAMDUNK ECONOMY!! If they cannot win this election, with the demograghics changing as they are, they might not win another national election for a long time. This is their hail mary. And especially since economists are predicting 12 million jobs created and brighter skies ahead, whoever wins will get the credit. if obama wins, repubs are dead in the water for a long time. if romeny wins, repubs can say "see we were right..." and take credit. As for the polls, Oct. 28: In Swing States, a Predictable Election? - NYTimes.com Nate silver is the man to watch/read!!
Well the housing bubble was started by Bill Clinton so that would be the party of bad ideas you were referring too, and if the unemployment rate got to 6% under Obama that would mean the amount of people on wefare would double and the participation rate would drop to the lowest in US history. I will agree with you that if Obama wins that REPS are dead in the water for a long time....but that would be because our country would have to be brought back from ruin. I love how these economist can just think 12 mil jobs are going to be made out of thin air, by no one doing anything. Seems like a load of BS. I wonder how many they said would be made regardless if Obama or Mccain won?
 

saramay

Junior Member
We are going to have to pay taxes no matter what. What do u think Trump pays, he is one of very very rich, or some of the 3x'sa millionairpay
 
Top