Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-13-2012, 07:28 PM
 
8,762 posts, read 11,573,373 times
Reputation: 3398

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by db108108 View Post
I know, right? Here's the tactic, broken down into steps.

1. Pick a poll that shows Romney as close or ahead. Discount all other polls (this thread).

2. Even if Romney is down, it's because the poll is too heavily weighted towards Democrats, so that means he's really ahead. Refer to 2010 party ID, which is based on exit polls from an election in which had a significantly older electorate than in 2004 or 2008, which is proven by said exit polls. Ignore any and all age-demographics in those exit polls (see recent thread on PA).

3. Bring up the number of undecideds, and state that they will split 80-20 against the incumbent. Ignore that this "rule" is based on an article written in 1989, and has been discredited in elections since then, and as recently as 2004 (see Ohio thread).

4. If that fails, link to electoral map that awards states based upon Obama's favorability rating (whether it's above or below 50%). Ignore that Romney's favorability is FAR lower than Obama's (a recent thread).

5. If there aren't any new polls, insist that Obama's gay marriage stance will cost him the election. Ignore that gay marriage is now approved of by a plurality of the population, that it may drive younger people to the polls in support, and the people who are against gay marriage probably wouldn't have voted for Obama anyway. Oh, and that internal GOP memo from yesterday, which urged a softening on the issue because they clearly sense a landmine here. (see every thread since last Wednesday).

You guys sure know how to delude yourselves! Then again, there are people on my side who do the same. I believe that Obama will come out ahead in this election, it will be closer, but states like OR, MI, and PA aren't in play at all. In fact, I believe that Romney may come close to winning the popular vote, but the electoral college won't be near indicative of that for several reasons.

Discuss.


It is crazy that ANYONE thinks Obama will lose.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-13-2012, 08:44 PM
 
Location: Maryland
18,630 posts, read 19,418,524 times
Reputation: 6462
Quote:
Originally Posted by TempesT68 View Post
RCP has Obama +10 with some polls as high as +18. Also keep in mind and likely the strongest point is that Obama saved Detroit and america's auto industry while Willard would have left them to fail.
You would have to be out of your mind to think Willard has any chance of taking MI.
Quote:
Originally Posted by michiganmoon View Post
Those polls are all outdated. You know that - come on.

I talk politics regularly. Many democrats here wished Hillary would have challenged Obama. This is certainly in play for Romney.
Looks like we may have the beginnings of a race in MI but a few more weeks should clear things up.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...bama-1811.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2012, 08:50 PM
 
Location: Maryland
18,630 posts, read 19,418,524 times
Reputation: 6462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theliberalvoice View Post


It is crazy that ANYONE thinks Obama will lose.
SurveyUSA Election Poll #19214

It shouldn't be this close in Oregon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-14-2012, 05:55 AM
 
10,854 posts, read 9,301,747 times
Reputation: 3122
Quote:
Originally Posted by dixiegirl7 View Post
Since most auto workers know that they ended up filing organized bankruptcy just like Romney said they needed to do anyway, I doubt most of them have a problem with it...not actual auto workers anyway. Now I am sure there are some uninformed people who did not work for the auto industry and don't understand that they reorganized under bankruptcy just like Romney said they needed to that feel that way.
I post of link of auto workers protesting Mitt Romney and you post details about the bankruptcy.

The animosity have NOTHING to with bankruptcy process and EVERYTHING to do with Mitt Romney's rhetoric with regards to the federal funding the auto industry received.

Let Detroit Go Bankrupt By MITT ROMNEY

Quote:
IF General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed.
The bottom line is this many people in the auto industry are antagonistic to say the least toward Mitt Romney. That includes workers in key states like Michigan and Ohio. He is not going to get their votes, END OF STORY!

Last edited by JazzyTallGuy; 05-14-2012 at 06:25 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-14-2012, 05:58 AM
 
10,854 posts, read 9,301,747 times
Reputation: 3122
Quote:
Originally Posted by michiganmoon View Post
I am also from Michigan, I think this is close. Yes Obama is in the lead, but it is close.

P.S. GM and Chrysler did go through bankruptcy....just after the unions got theirs. A lot of Michiganders are also fed up with the lie that GM has paid back the government. GM was given over 50 Billion dollars, which included a loan for around 7 Billion dollars that they paid back with other government money. GM has not paid any of their own money back to the government from car profits.
The bottom line is:



I don't see a lot if people in Michigan fed up with THAT!

Last edited by JazzyTallGuy; 05-14-2012 at 06:26 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-14-2012, 07:19 AM
 
Location: Maryland
18,630 posts, read 19,418,524 times
Reputation: 6462
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazzyTallGuy View Post
The bottom line is:



I don't see a lot if people in Michigan fed up with THAT!
LOL whatever gets you through the day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-14-2012, 12:22 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,325 posts, read 44,944,793 times
Reputation: 7118
Quote:
Originally Posted by db108108 View Post
I know, right? Here's the tactic, broken down into steps.

1. Pick a poll that shows Romney as close or ahead. Discount all other polls (this thread).

Okay, let's look at the other polls shall we?

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - Michigan: Romney vs. Obama

Notice the last three are much, much closer than the older polls.


2. Even if Romney is down, it's because the poll is too heavily weighted towards Democrats, so that means he's really ahead. Refer to 2010 party ID, which is based on exit polls from an election in which had a significantly older electorate than in 2004 or 2008, which is proven by said exit polls. Ignore any and all age-demographics in those exit polls (see recent thread on PA).

Just because you don't like the 2010 results doesn't mean you get to ignore them. MI went Completely RED in 2010, an unprecedented event.

Governor, House and Senate. In the Senate, the GOP gained 4 seats to increase their majority.

In the HOUSE, before 2010 the dems had 65-42 advantage.....AFTER the 2010 election....the GOP had a 63-47 advantage in the House.

You cannot use the 2008 election as a baseline for the party ID. Too much has changed over the last 2 years.


3. Bring up the number of undecideds, and state that they will split 80-20 against the incumbent. Ignore that this "rule" is based on an article written in 1989, and has been discredited in elections since then, and as recently as 2004 (see Ohio thread).

It is a known fact that most undecideds break for the challenger. They already know the incumbent, obviously don't like him too much if they can't commit to vote for him.

As a rule, putting aside that one election, they mostly do.


4. If that fails, link to electoral map that awards states based upon Obama's favorability rating (whether it's above or below 50%). Ignore that Romney's favorability is FAR lower than Obama's (a recent thread).

Favorability ratings will not win elections. Obama may be likeable, but the people hate his policies and give him low numbers in the economy, jobs, gas prices, spending, taxes and debt....but they like.


5. If there aren't any new polls, insist that Obama's gay marriage stance will cost him the election. Ignore that gay marriage is now approved of by a plurality of the population, that it may drive younger people to the polls in support, and the people who are against gay marriage probably wouldn't have voted for Obama anyway. Oh, and that internal GOP memo from yesterday, which urged a softening on the issue because they clearly sense a landmine here. (see every thread since last Wednesday).

Remember, the ONLY polls that count are at the ballot box and EVERYWHERE, in EVERY state GM has been put to the VOTERS, it goes DOWN. Forget what those biased polls say, listen to the voters.

Might want to listen to those black ministers that are upset with him now.


You guys sure know how to delude yourselves! Then again, there are people on my side who do the same. I believe that Obama will come out ahead in this election, it will be closer, but states like OR, MI, and PA aren't in play at all. In fact, I believe that Romney may come close to winning the popular vote, but the electoral college won't be near indicative of that for several reasons.

Discuss.
I wonder why obama is running ads in PA....he must know something YOU don't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2012, 06:36 PM
 
26,497 posts, read 15,074,947 times
Reputation: 14644
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazzyTallGuy View Post
The bottom line is:



I don't see a lot if people in Michigan fed up with THAT!
The US auto numbers started to improve the moment the Japanese Tsunami hit and got increasingly better as the Japanese fell further behind.

But going through bankruptcy did help GM and especially Chrysler in terms of shaking off consumer fears that the company would no longer be there in terms of service/parts etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2012, 06:37 PM
 
26,497 posts, read 15,074,947 times
Reputation: 14644
Obama is spending in Michigan...he must have some advisers who think the state is in play.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2012, 06:41 PM
 
14,022 posts, read 15,022,389 times
Reputation: 10466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theliberalvoice View Post


It is crazy that ANYONE thinks Obama will lose.
Its crazy to be certain about anything 6 months out.
Hel people thought Martha Coakly had her election in the bag 6 days out, look how that turned out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top