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.
I have a friend in PA who says GOP has pulled all their ads. She's fairly politically astute and says she doesn't think they'll change their minds.
If they don't run ads, they don't deserve to win.
You're mighty shallow if you're going to base your vote on how many ads a candidate puts up. The simple fact is that neither one of them is what this country needs now. Obama waited 3 years to address jobs. "The American people can not wait another 14 months." (Quote may not be exact, but the message is) The simple fact is that the American people could not wait another 14 months on the day he took office. And, I've heard nothing solid from Romney that will turn things around. There is a way, through taxes, that the President DOES have the power, but neither one is saying one word about it. One of the very worst problems for our economy is "AMERICAN TECHNOLOGY, IMPORTED FROM ABROAD". Every time another piece of American Technology is shipped off to another country, it's that many more American jobs that no longer exist. But, they expect Americans to support the "AMERICAN COMPANY" (like Apple) that's selling that technology to us. How long are we supposed to keep inventing new jobs for ourselves, only to have them shipped away?
Neither one is addressing that, so neither one deserves to be President.
There's a company in IL where the employees got to train their Chinese replacements. Then, the manufacturing moves to China. How many of those employees will start collecting food stamps for you to complain about? It's a trend that's been going on for decades, and in order to reverse our economy, you'll have to see that trend reversed. There is a way the President can have a major impact on that, but neither one is addressing it.
Look BEYOND the SMOKESCREEN they're putting up for you. Stop accepting what the news media is telling you that you are thinking, and think for yourselves. Or have you forgotten how?
The environment is going to have to be made MORE FAVORABLE for the production to take place in this country. The environment is also going to have to be made more favorable for Americans that are sitting on various technologies, rather than moving ahead with them because of liability factors, to be able to move ahead with their ideas with a reduced liability until the bugs get worked out. If they can bail out industry and the financial empires, they can also subsidize the liability of new products and industries (green or not) that show promise for American jobs. (I know several people that have concepts that would be very promising, but one person gets hurt and they lose everything. And, from the start, there will be bugs to work out. That's the reason for your warranty on a new car. I get updates for my computer software every week. They're working out the bugs.) Reduce that liability and you'll have more technology coming out, and more jobs for Americans. Then, keep those jobs here.
Which one is addressing those issues? Neither one. Neither one is able to see beyond the smokescreens they've set up for you. Even if they can see that far, neither one seems to have any idea just how to go about it.
That's what you're voting for. Business as usual no matter who gets in.
PA is peripheral Obama's support is collapsing among working class whites but he'll eke out a victory due to surburban women in the Philly suburbs. I guess these ladies care more about Planned parenthood then saddling their kids with trillions of debt and a failed state. Oh well their right.
You're already used to saying "President Obama." You'll be saying it for another four years.
By the way, did anyone notice that Virginia switched back to "slight lean" for Obama?
You could make it easy on yourself and look at all available data and trends so far, which is what Nate Silver has done:
Iowa is 73.5% in the bag for Obama. Obama has way more organizers there than Romney and has a huge surge in early voting. Not gonna happen for Romney. Sorry.
I don't particularly disagree with the first and last, which would be enough to seal the election by their own if I'm correct about the others. However, I do disagree with his assessment on Nevada. I think he's overestimating voter turnout. Lower voter turnout favors Republicans, in general.
That leaves Ohio and Iowa. If I'm correct and his numbers are correct, then in order to seal the election he needs both of those. That leaves a 52.8465% chance of a win to Obama.
It won't be Romney, but a Republican could win PA - he (or better, she) would just have to be a bit more genuine than Romney, and head a revived and rebranded party with more appeal to moderate socially-liberal suburbanites. In other words, a GOP for this century, rather than the last.
I don't particularly disagree with the first and last, which would be enough to seal the election by their own if I'm correct about the others. However, I do disagree with his assessment on Nevada. I think he's overestimating voter turnout. Lower voter turnout favors Republicans, in general.
Don't you know that voter turnout is higher in Presidential election years than in midterms? It's like conservatives have their fingers crossed that millions of Hispanics and black people will just stay home. Fat chance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TempusFugitive
That leaves Ohio and Iowa. If I'm correct and his numbers are correct, then in order to seal the election he needs both of those. That leaves a 52.8465% chance of a win to Obama.
Huh? He has a 70%+ chance of winning both states according to his calculations (and a 70% chance of winning the electoral college). How is that a 52% chance?
I've been thinking for months if we hear early in the early vote counting that Romney is going to win or make Pa competitive, then it's over...whihc it almost is. Romney has the wind at his back and Big Mo has jumped on board.
Does PA have early voting? I thought not. Just askin'.
All I'm saying is that the moderates in Del, Bucks, Mont counties are very fickle. They are economic/fiscal people mostly because many are married folks. Many could give a rat's *** about abortion, gay marriage, etc.
Oh I completely agree. Debating social issues in PA is a waste of time and money because people will tune you out here from either party. We're not very interested in who is for or against gay marriage or abortion, we care about the economy and fiscal issues and we're divided on that front. We also love to cling to our guns but that's more out in the northeast, center, and west than the southeast
Does PA have early voting? I thought not. Just askin'.
Are you being sarcastic or an idiot? I was referring to the fact that on election night, the East Coast votes will be reported prior to the West Coast where I live and the other 2 time zones....in case you didn't now.
Does PA have early voting? I thought not. Just askin'.
Nope. No early voting. And their voter suppression tactics failed, too (like Romney's economic policies in Mass). Pennsylvania is a lost cause for Romney. He's better off firing up Alabama and South Carolina so he can move up in the national polls.
PA and Mich are safe blue, regardless of what the righties on this forum say.
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.
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.
