Make your prediction. I think Romney wins a close one over Obama.

At 6/26/12 06:06 PM, TheKlown wrote: Make your prediction. I think Romney wins a close one over Obama.

it's kinda pointless to make predictions now, but recent polls show obama over romney by the margin of error, and he has been pretty consistently the past few weeks, so i'd say obama, even though it's pretty moot to say it as of now.

If it's close no matter who wins, I just hope we don't get another douche like Al Gore who wants a re-count...

At 6/26/12 06:25 PM, TheKlown wrote: If it's close no matter who wins, I just hope we don't get another douche like Al Gore who wants a re-count...

uhh, you know al gore won the popular vote, right? and the whole debacle in florida? that was a pretty reasonable request, and the supreme court shot it down.

Too close to say.

At 6/26/12 06:10 PM, Korriken wrote:

At 6/26/12 06:06 PM, TheKlown wrote: Make your prediction. I think Romney wins a close one over Obama.

I think it's gonna be one messy election year, no matter who wins. The dems will begin screaming "Racism" and the Repubs will begin yelling "Socialist"

it's like 2 kids calling each other names until the parents walk up and slap out of em across the head.

Oh please, the people who say that are radical minorities of the parties. Fact is that race was not an issue 2008 and it will not be 2012, similarly whether or not Obama is Socialist is not an issue either candidate will even acknowledge.

At 6/26/12 07:31 PM, Warforger wrote: Oh please, the people who say that are radical minorities of the parties. Fact is that race was not an issue 2008 and it will not be 2012, similarly whether or not Obama is Socialist is not an issue either candidate will even acknowledge.

Funny thing is that these are the issues that the election will be decided on.

Not very insightful to say that race was not a factor in 2008. Obama was just able to flip race on its head to become MORE popular, like Eminem. Obama being black is also why the backlash is so bad.

And don't argue about no backlash, cuz I already know you don't even know what I'm talking about.

This is hearsay, but according to what I've heard in the chat, there's this guy who has correctly predicted the past 5 or some-number presidents using 11 or some-number factors. The prediction favored Obama.

Obama, by a long shot: I think people are overestimating Romney as a viable alternative to the president. This shouldn't be a question of whether the president is deserving of a second term, it's whether the opposing candidate will make enough of a difference to warrant a new elected official.

Romney, on the other hand, has not done any of this. Romney hasn't established positions on matters besides trashing the president, so why should people vote for him other than the fact that he isn't Barack Obama? Until Romney does this, which may be too late, he's going to lose. He's currently trailing in Florida, a key state if he can't carry he's not going to win.

If I'm Romney right now, I should be campaigning in Florida, Ohio and Indiana to make sure the polls are in my favor. If Romney can't carry this Republican-controlled swing states, he's toast. He's not doing this, and it's going to sink him.

Like I've said earlier: Obama doesn't win this election. Romney loses the election for the Republicans.

At 6/26/12 08:53 PM, SenatorJohnDean wrote: Obama being black is also why the backlash is so bad.

Do you have any evidence for this whatsoever?

I think things like, you know, explicitly stating that the government should be involved in widespread redistributions of wealth probably frightened people just a little bit.

At 6/26/12 09:22 PM, BoredLooney wrote: This is hearsay, but according to what I've heard in the chat, there's this guy who has correctly predicted the past 5 or some-number presidents using 11 or some-number factors. The prediction favored Obama.

How do you predict the Election of 2000?

At 6/26/12 07:31 PM, Warforger wrote: Fact is that race was not an issue 2008

hhahahahah YEP, it was all about the issues

Curious question for conservatives (or anybody, for that matter): If Mitt Romney was running the same campaign regardless of Obama's presidency (that is, even if Obama wasn't president and assume it was someone else) would you still vote for him?

I guess a more simple way to ask is this: Is Mitt Romney campaign strong enough to support itself with issues and not attacking the President?

At 6/26/12 11:37 PM, Warforger wrote:

At 6/26/12 09:22 PM, BoredLooney wrote: This is hearsay, but according to what I've heard in the chat, there's this guy who has correctly predicted the past 5 or some-number presidents using 11 or some-number factors. The prediction favored Obama.

How do you predict the Election of 2000?

I don't know, ask GoryBlizzard, he's the one who told the chatroom about the dude.

Or you could google it, that works.

As I've said before, the dude used factors to predict the elections. For example, being the incumbent has an advantage.

It's gonna be close, unfortunately I think Romney will steal it just like Bush. We really need to strike down Citizens United.

At 6/26/12 06:06 PM, TheKlown wrote: Make your prediction. I think Romney wins a close one over Obama.

Nate Silver over at 538 Blog is predicting a 65% chance that Obama will win re-election.

However, I think it is way to premature to place a bet.

* Tomorrow's healthcare will have an impact.
* Europe's economy.
* Middle Eastern stability.
* US economy.

If things stay stagnant I think the race is more of a 50/50 prospect. Furthermore, I'm not sure that Silver is taking the Bradley Effect into account. In many of the polls I'm seeing Romney is around 40% and Obama is around 46% in swing states. On the surface this is good for Obama. But if you look deeper you'll see that there are about 15% 'undecided'. Now the thing with undecided voters is they tend to break more for the challenger. Thus Obama can expect about 3-4% and Romney could take the other 12%. But if the Bradley effect is in play...Obama could only stay at 46% while Romney comes out about 52%.

But we won't know until election night...

At 6/26/12 10:45 PM, BrianEtrius wrote:

Like I've said earlier: Obama doesn't win this election. Romney loses the election for the Republicans.

This. I had a feeling that unless Ron Paul was the G.O.P.'s candidate this year, that Obama would win by default. The Republicans have looked like crap during this campaign..

At 6/26/12 06:06 PM, TheKlown wrote: Make your prediction. I think Romney wins a close one over Obama.

Obama. The economy in too many swing states is doing well for Romney to even make it close at this point. Romney is kinda just the candidate that was there for 2012, the Republicans will field a much stronger candidate in 2016 (unless of course Romney does squeak by in this election)

What would Romney do better than Obama if we elect Romney as president?

At 6/28/12 10:48 AM, TheKlown wrote: What would Romney do better than Obama if we elect Romney as president?

Good question. You support the guy, you tell me. This is what I'm saying: yes, Romney keeps on saying how he's better than Obama. Now here's the next question: What makes him different? So far: nothing! He hasn't made it clear what his alternative solutions are opposed to the President's. Then why should we elect a guy that has no plans for the office other than the fact that he's not Obama?

That's a campaign strategy that makes Machiavelli turn in his grave.

Oh yeah, and in Pennsylvania and Ohio, Obama's leading by 8% and 2.6% respectively. Where is Romney in all of this? He needs those swing states as is.

At 6/27/12 12:02 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

At 6/26/12 07:31 PM, Warforger wrote: Fact is that race was not an issue 2008

hhahahahah YEP, it was all about the issues

That was a fun clip to watch/hear. But that was three people who clearly didn't have a damn clue as to what was actually going on and most likely didn't even vote in 08' . How many people did they interview that called out the reporter for getting his facts wrong (probably quite a few)? Howard stern is a shock jock, he isn't going to air the voices of reasonable people.

Race was somewhat of an issue, but it was the determining factor in the election.

For the sake of the US (as well as the rest of the world that can't stop facepalming and headdesking at your Bushes and Clintons and Romneys), I hope he will win. With a clear margin. And that his way of thinking will affect more everyday Americans.

Depends on if America would rather have a centrist or a far right president.

At 7/6/12 10:54 AM, BumFodder wrote: Depends on if America would rather have a centrist or a far right president.

If you think Romney is far right, you have a lot to learn.

At 6/28/12 01:06 PM, BrianEtrius wrote: Oh yeah, and in Pennsylvania and Ohio, Obama's leading by 8% and 2.6% respectively. Where is Romney in all of this? He needs those swing states as is.

It's not so much the lead the incumbent has that's important but how close to 48% he is. The reason is the "undecided" or "independent" voters usually go for the challenger. The incumbent can only expect maybe a fifth of those voters. What this generally amounts to is 2-3%. Where those voters are large % (ie: 5-12%) the incumbent picking up 3-5% is possible...but that depends on how extreme the challenger is.

So in Pennsylvania Obama is where he needs to be in the polls. If the election were held today, it would most likely be an Obama pick-up.

Ohio is a mixed bag. The most recent polls show Obama where he needs to be but there are two problems:
* The most recent polling uses a Registered Voter model where I prefer Likely Voter models.
* The upswing for Obama could be a temporary bump due to his perceived win on healthcare.
But the recent polling does show another pick-up for Obama.

Finally, there is something I'm watching for on election night: the Bradley Effect. In short I think Obama's presidency has polarized us along racial lines. In 2008 there was no Bradley Effect. However, now I think people will lie to pollsters about their plans to vote against Obama so they don't appear racist. This could cost Obama between 2-3% (4-5% outside) come election day. If that's the case Romney will probably win.

But there is a lot of time between now and election day.

At 7/6/12 11:22 AM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 7/6/12 10:54 AM, BumFodder wrote: Depends on if America would rather have a centrist or a far right president.

If you think Romney is far right, you have a lot to learn.

He's from England where the Clintons are considered just right of center.

At 6/26/12 07:31 PM, Warforger wrote: Oh please, the people who say that are radical minorities of the parties. Fact is that race was not an issue 2008 and it will not be 2012, similarly whether or not Obama is Socialist is not an issue either candidate will even acknowledge.

I'm not sure:
* During the election two members of the New Black Panther Party were videotaped in front of a Pennsylvania polling station intimidating white voters. It was open and shut, and yet Obama's DoJ dismissed the charges.
* July 2009: Obama put himself in a local racial dust-up outside Harvard involving a black professor and a cop who by all accounts was just doing his job.
* This year: Obama once again put himself in the middle of a local issue with the Trayvon Martin shooting.

I think that Obama has racially polarized this country. Last night I watched Rev. Al Sharpton accepting a BET award and his acceptance was laced with racial invective. So I don't think it's going to be outright...but I think this election will have racial undertones.

At 7/8/12 09:28 AM, TheMason wrote: Finally, there is something I'm watching for on election night: the Bradley Effect. In short I think Obama's presidency has polarized us along racial lines. In 2008 there was no Bradley Effect. However, now I think people will lie to pollsters about their plans to vote against Obama so they don't appear racist. This could cost Obama between 2-3% (4-5% outside) come election day. If that's the case Romney will probably win.

Not so sure about this. Last election there were tons of people saying the Bradley Effect would come in and throw a huge swing in McCain's favor. Yet, it didn't show up (or it turned the biggest landslide ever into just a solid victory.)

If it was the case that the Bradley Effect didn't occur last go around, how will it come around now? Especially with the white choice being part of a heretical cult? (not my views on Mormonism, just trying to reflect many people's view of the church)

At 7/8/12 09:28 AM, TheMason wrote: It's not so much the lead the incumbent has that's important but how close to 48% he is. The reason is the "undecided" or "independent" voters usually go for the challenger. The incumbent can only expect maybe a fifth of those voters. What this generally amounts to is 2-3%. Where those voters are large % (ie: 5-12%) the incumbent picking up 3-5% is possible...but that depends on how extreme the challenger is.

Show me where this happens please, because I have a very hard time thinking that This is going to happen here. As I've said earlier, Romney, despite the Democrats's weak position, is even weaker as a candidate. Hell, when John Boehner doesn't have exactly the kindest of words for you, well, you kind of know something is going sideways fast on that campaign bus.

Ohio is a mixed bag. The most recent polls show Obama where he needs to be but there are two problems:
* The most recent polling uses a Registered Voter model where I prefer Likely Voter models.

The problem using likely models, is well, they're only likely. They may be close when the final results come out but there's no way day in and day out that they're accurate. Registered voters have already put in the time and effort to make their vote count and thus are more likely at actually vote.......but I'm spilting hairs.

* The upswing for Obama could be a temporary bump due to his perceived win on healthcare.
But the recent polling does show another pick-up for Obama.

While it might be healthcare, if it's Ohio, it's the Bain ads put out by the Obama campaign attacking Romney. It's funny this way, because one of Romney's big arguments is the economy, but what's getting slammed on is his business record. This is working Romney even more as his image is being painted as an out of touch rich politician. And with the way things are going, well, you get the picture.

Finally, there is something I'm watching for on election night: the Bradley Effect. In short I think Obama's presidency has polarized us along racial lines. In 2008 there was no Bradley Effect. However, now I think people will lie to pollsters about their plans to vote against Obama so they don't appear racist. This could cost Obama between 2-3% (4-5% outside) come election day. If that's the case Romney will probably win.

People said this back in 08 and I didn't believe them then either. It makes no sense at this point: Obama done enough in office where if you quasi-didn't like him in 08 and still voted for him you have a fairly good reason not to vote for him this year. Besides, I could say the same thing about Romney's Mormonism if I wanted to, but that wouldn't be fair politics, would it?

Again: I don't see Obama victory though. It's going to be a Romney loss.

At 7/8/12 03:17 PM, NuclearWarFare wrote:

The week before election, every lunch lady wore an Obama shirt, and they are all black. It's going to be the same this year, also, NO RACISM INTENDED HERE, I'm just saying it because he was the first black president.

In my experience, whenever someone premeptively disclaims racism, or does so immediately after speaking before anyone responds, they not only are being racist, but know it and intend it.

At 7/6/12 11:22 AM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 7/6/12 10:54 AM, BumFodder wrote: Depends on if America would rather have a centrist or a far right president.

If you think Romney is far right, you have a lot to learn.

So far in the campaign, Romney has taken positions that places him significantly to the right of President George W. Bush in many respects. I suppose that if you think that Romney has just been positioning himself as a far right candidate for the purposes of winning the primaries and now that the general campaign has begun he's going to shake his etch-a-sketch and position himself as more of a moderate, then that's fair I guess, but you can't blame people for thinking he's a duck when he's been quacking like one.