Romney's Bullying/Gay Bashing High School Days

[11B4V]

I love Hans, he can trivialize the damning and make damning the trivial - all depending on who it is aimed at.

I know it is hilarious.  Does he really believe his own bullshit?

He is the anti-Raz, or Raz is the anti-Hans.  Anyway if they ever meet they explode in a fountain of crap if scientists examine correctly will display new political particals that will further the advancement of bullshit by thousands of years.

[Kleves]

Is anyone not a douchebag in High School? Why is this newsworthy? If this is the worst thing that Romney has done, he's led a pretty damn noble life.

[garbon]

Oh really? You reply to every thread now?

Besides if you don't like a thread feel free not to participate.

Only if I have something to say about it.

And not liking something is plenty of reason to comment and participate you do that all the time.  In fact you are doing it now.  So WTF?

Gentlemen, lets not get our truffles in a ruffle.

If only I was currently eating truffles.

[Valmy]

If only I was currently eating truffles.

[Hansmeister]

11B, only the first handful of those polls are relevant, since most are older samples of recently-updated polls.  I would also weight the polls of likely voters more heavily than those of registered voters, even though the "likely" factor can vary between now & election time. 

The recent trend (within the last 1.5 to 2 weeks) definitely seems to be favoring Romney.

Here will do the avg.

RCP Average   4/27 - 5/10   --   46.6   45.6   Obama +1.0

Yeah, and the "RCP Average" had been Obama 7+ in past weeks.  Even if we just went by that alone, the recent trend has favored Romney.  Would you not be concerned about that if you were Obama?

And like I said, I put more stock in the Likely Voter (LV) polls than Registered Voter polls.

But I'm not getting my hopes up & would put money on Obama winning a narrow victory.

The problem for Obama is that in none of the serious polls (i.e. that don't have an unusually large bias) can he seem to get above 45%.  And this has been so for a very long time.  No incumbent has ever won in such a position, which is why I wonder why people think this time will be different.  All traditional indicators of electoral outcome say that Obama will lose, and will lose by a wide margin.  Unless some eartshattering event happens that completely transforms the race Obama has no chance.

Prime Minister Macmillan when asked what his greatest fear was said "events, dear boy, events" and that is the only thing that can change the current trajectory.

Of course events rarely favor incumbents during election years.

[11B4V]

11B, only the first handful of those polls are relevant, since most are older samples of recently-updated polls.  I would also weight the polls of likely voters more heavily than those of registered voters, even though the "likely" factor can vary between now & election time. 

The recent trend (within the last 1.5 to 2 weeks) definitely seems to be favoring Romney.

Here will do the avg.

RCP Average   4/27 - 5/10   --   46.6   45.6   Obama +1.0

Yeah, and the "RCP Average" had been Obama 7+ in past weeks.  Even if we just went by that alone, the recent trend has favored Romney.  Would you not be concerned about that if you were Obama?

And like I said, I put more stock in the Likely Voter (LV) polls than Registered Voter polls.

But I'm not getting my hopes up & would put money on Obama winning a narrow victory.

The problem for Obama is that in none of the serious polls (i.e. that don't have an unusually large bias) can he seem to get above 45%.  And this has been so for a very long time.  No incumbent has ever won in such a position, which is why I wonder why people think this time will be different.  All traditional indicators of electoral outcome say that Obama will lose, and will lose by a wide margin.  Unless some eartshattering event happens that completely transforms the race Obama has no chance.

Prime Minister Macmillan when asked what his greatest fear was said "events, dear boy, events" and that is the only thing that can change the current trajectory.

Of course events rarely favor incumbents during election years.

You should really tryout as an intern at Fox News. 

[derspiess]

The problem for Obama is that in none of the serious polls (i.e. that don't have an unusually large bias) can he seem to get above 45%.  And this has been so for a very long time.  No incumbent has ever won in such a position, which is why I wonder why people think this time will be different. 

For me, it's probably pessimism as much as anything.  I think you're right about Obama hitting a glass ceiling on the % of voters who will vote to keep him in office, and there are many things that are working against him. 

But my gut still tells me that Romney will fall just short of making a case for swing voters to dump Obama & vote for him instead.

[11B4V]

 

But my gut still tells me that Romney will fall just short of making a case for swing voters to dump Obama & vote for him instead.

Hans knows it too.

"Poor soul, he' just too high strung"

"The strain is more than he can bear"

[Hansmeister]

The problem for Obama is that in none of the serious polls (i.e. that don't have an unusually large bias) can he seem to get above 45%.  And this has been so for a very long time.  No incumbent has ever won in such a position, which is why I wonder why people think this time will be different. 

For me, it's probably pessimism as much as anything.  I think you're right about Obama hitting a glass ceiling on the % of voters who will vote to keep him in office, and there are many things that are working against him. 

But my gut still tells me that Romney will fall just short of making a case for swing voters to dump Obama & vote for him instead.

Romney doesn't have to make the case for himself.  He only has to make the case against Obama, which is very easy to do.  "Are you better off than you were 4 years ago" worked for Reagan and for Clinton, and will work for Romney as well.

Remember, Clinton was not popular in '92, but he won on that argument (and not just because of Perot, exit polls at the time showed that Perot voters would've mostly gone to Clinton if he had not been on the ticket).

Romney has to make one argument: "Do you think if Obama is reelected he will do a better job than the first time around?"

That's it.  Against that Obama can put that Romney once had a dog on the top of his car and bullied hippies in High School.

Obamatons can delude themselves in believing that 6 months of Romney-bashing will bring victory, but that is pure fantasy.

[11B4V]

Man that Kool-Aid your trying to serve is 100 Proof vintage Jonestown.

[Admiral Yi]

Romney doesn't have to make the case for himself.  He only has to make the case against Obama, which is very easy to do.  "Are you better off than you were 4 years ago" worked for Reagan and for Clinton, and will work for Romney as well.

Everybody is better off than they were four years ago.

[derspiess]

Romney doesn't have to make the case for himself.  He only has to make the case against Obama, which is very easy to do.  "Are you better off than you were 4 years ago" worked for Reagan and for Clinton, and will work for Romney as well.

Remember, Clinton was not popular in '92, but he won on that argument (and not just because of Perot, exit polls at the time showed that Perot voters would've mostly gone to Clinton if he had not been on the ticket).

Romney has to make one argument: "Do you think if Obama is reelected he will do a better job than the first time around?"

That's it.  Against that Obama can put that Romney once had a dog on the top of his car and bullied hippies in High School.

Obamatons can delude themselves in believing that 6 months of Romney-bashing will bring victory, but that is pure fantasy.

Bush-41 and Carter are relevant examples, but unfortunately Bush-43 in 2004 is as well.  I checked his approval numbers and they were almost exactly the same in mid-May 2004 as Obama's are now.  He was able to squeak by against a pretty bad candidate.  If Mitt doesn't bring his A-game, I fear that Obama may do the same.

[11B4V]

Romney doesn't have to make the case for himself.  He only has to make the case against Obama, which is very easy to do.  "Are you better off than you were 4 years ago" worked for Reagan and for Clinton, and will work for Romney as well.

Everybody is better off than they were four years ago.

Cant disagree. But i did like old GW.  Like the old regular drunk at the local watering hole. GW was comedic gold. Something that I will probably only see once in my lifetime.

What Hans doesnt realize is that I only say Obama will win. Not that I support him. I'm center, leaning a tade to the right. UNDECIDED.

I see Romney as an elitist snob. He offers nothing right now.

 

[derspiess]

Everybody is better off than they were four years ago.

How do you figure that?  Unemployment was 5.8% in 2008 and it's 8.2% now (not sure if that's before or after the weekly "revised upward" figure).  Gas prices are double what they were when Obama took office.

Regardless of whose fault things actually are, your statement is hard to defend unless you're trying to make some vague philosophical statement.

[Admiral Yi]

How do you figure that?  Unemployment was 5.8% in 2008 and it's 8.2% now (not sure if that's before or after the weekly "revised upward" figure).  Gas prices are double what they were when Obama took office.

Regardless of whose fault things actually are, your statement is hard to defend unless you're trying to make some vague philosophical statement.

Was unemployment really that low in IV Q 08?  Anyway, I'm talking about the trough of the recession.