Regardless of what swing state polls say, if Romney leads by a full point or more in the national vote, he has a greater than 50% chance of winning, assuming the national polls are right.
If the swing state polls are right, then Romney will lose and he’ll probably also lose the national vote.
We’ve been over the accuracy of the national polls, anyone have any data on how accurate state polls are? I’d be very shocked if they were more accurate than national polls.
Please try to keep your arguments straight. You’re saying they should be judged by different standards:
Actually, I’m claiming they should be judged by the same standards. My second statement was explaining why the double standard is so often employed. Four years later, a lot of really smart people who should know better still haven’t figured out that Obama is just like every other dishonest politician.
Obama is a dishonest politician, so is Romney. And a gecko is a lizard, and so is Godzilla.
Now we’re getting somewhere, but you’re still wrong. I think Obama is far more dishonest. His entire persona is a lie. Bill Clinton called it right back in 2008 in South Carolina. Nothing but a fairy tale.
Well if 20% profess “no religion” that leaves 80% to be religious - which is 1 to 4.
Then of course those 80% are not all “Christian”
Take off Judaism, Sikh, Muslem, Buddhist etc - I would say the difference is rather significant…
Yeah, you nailed us with another one of your unsubstantiated, unlinked claims adaher. Obama’s persona is a lie. This is perhaps the perfect display of the modern conservative mentality: wholly vacuous, unfalsifiable and emotionally necessary for the subject.
Back in reality Romney criticizes Obama for putting a mandate in his health care plan then turns around and criticizes him for not backing another bill which also has a mandate. I trust adaher supports all 7 of Romney’s conflicting positions here. On abortion Romney backpeddles on his lack of plans for a legislative approach to abortion. Romney says half of all green firms supported by Obama failed. That’s false of course: it’s more like less than 10%, 1% in terms of dollar value. Romney claims during the debate that he covers pre-existing conditions: false, and he knows it. Pointing out the blatant falsehoods Romney espouses is like shooting fish in a barrel.
But I concede that Obama’s persona is a lie, within the conservative mentality at least. Sometimes it’s better to humor them.
Is that all you got?
What you’re actually doing is attempting to dismiss an assessment of Romney’s record with a lazy tu quoque.
He was talking about their records on Iraq, not Obama’s persona. This is yet another distorted quote.
I find it striking that Romney’s supporters mainly have to resort to merely trashing Obama, rather than actually supporting their guy’s positions. Very little positive excitement for Romney’s “vision.” I suppose it’s hard to support something as fluid as dry sand.
With the incumbent sinking in the polls perhaps a more realistic question would be is it too early to say Obama has lost?
Obama ran as a reformer and a different kind of politician. That was a pretty big lie.
Then there’s the many dishonest, personal attacks on Romney. Has Romney been totally honest in his attacks? No, but at least he hasn’t attacked Obama personally.
Speaking from outside America,
In comparison to Bush and Romney I do see Obama as a “different sort of politician”
One who at least tries to build consensus as opposed to Bush, Romney and co cowboy attitude.
Speaking as someone who enjoys politics, I also like Obama’s “steadiness” which seems very different to Romney’s oscillating positions and outright lies - this also seems to me to be a different kind of politician.
But he’s far from perfect though.
Then the other point is - Romney DESERVES the personal attacks,
Hell - just the “47% Comment” and his position on abortion alone earn him condemnation.
What about Obama’s beliefs earn him condemnation? That people that are less fortunate should be helped? You might not agree with that but it’s hardly condmnable.
That those that are financially comfortable should be a bit more tax, that there is some concept of “noblesse obilige”? Again, you might not agree, but hardly something that deserves condemnation.
Three problems with your argument:
the problem we’re having here is that most Obama supporters are just not living in the reality-based community.
No politician deserves to be attacked personally? You just called the President’s entire persona a lie. And then you had the brass to say *his *supporters are not living in the reality-based community? Are you for real?
Care to back this up with something other than bald faced assertions?
Outside of the US Obama is viewed very positively as someone who DOES build consensus on the international stage, as one who tries diplomacy first, and someone who believes in soft power.
And if you wanna call Obama a “flip flopper” - then what’s Romney? A turnstile?
Please offer some form of objective measure.
His political persona is false. He claimed to be a reformer, he’s not. He claimed to be more transparent, he’s not.
Ah, you were referring to internationally. Okay, sure, he builds consensus. And as we saw in Libya, that gets people killed. Acting sooner would have been much better for Libyans. Same is going on in Syria. I actually hope Obama has already decided not to act in Syria, because if he’s waiting for european approval before going in, while thousands of Syrians die, that’s not a positive thing.
We are finally getting high-quality polls from the post-debate period. Obama is up by 6 points in Ohio and they are basically tied in Florida and Virginia.
Romney’s bounce is holding up better than I expected but I still don’t think he is in a good position. He hasn’t established a clear lead in Florida which is a must-win state for him and he is still clearly behind in Ohio.
In terms of broader strategy, I think his centrist pivot is coming too fast and too blatant. It has worked well for him over the last week but it’s going to be hard to sustain for the next four.
You said his entire persona. If someone said that to me, I’d take that as a personal attack. But the fact that you’re still attacking Obama instead of actually supporting any of Romney’s positions speaks volumes.
the killing of the Ambassador sucked.
But what was a win was the events in Libya AFTER his killing - look to the reaction. If this doesn’t describe a win for soft power I don’t know what does.
It’s the same for the shooting that took place in Pakistan - you can either cry about the taleban being able to do it, or you can cheer about the way it was roundly condemned by all. The condemnation it received delivers credit to Pakistan.
However the likes of you would prefer to slam Pakistan that it ever happened in the first place, and probably “punish” them, just providing more fertile ground for the taleban.