Byebye Obama

Nightshade · Post by **Nightshade** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:26 pm

Looks like the left has a right to despair.

From the Daily Beast (left winger site.):

The Pew poll is devastating, just devastating. Before the debate, Obama had a 51 - 43 lead; now, Romney has a 49 - 45 lead. That's a simply unprecedented reversal for a candidate in October. Before Obama had leads on every policy issue and personal characteristic; now Romney leads in almost all of them. Obama's performance gave Romney a 12 point swing! I repeat: a 12 point swing.

Romney's favorables are above Obama's now. Yes, you read that right. Romney's favorables are higher than Obama's right now. That gender gap that was Obama's firewall? Over in one night:

Currently, women are evenly divided (47% Obama, 47% Romney). Last month, Obama led Romney by 18 points (56% to 38%) among women likely voters.

Seriously: has that kind of swing ever happened this late in a campaign? Has any candidate lost 18 points among women voters in one night ever? And we are told that when Obama left the stage that night, he was feeling good. That's terrifying. On every single issue, Obama has instantly plummeted into near-oblivion. He still has some personal advantages over Romney - even though they are all much diminished. Obama still has an edge on Medicare, scores much higher on relating to ordinary people, is ahead on foreign policy, and on being moderate, consistent and honest (only 14 percent of swing voters believe Romney is honest). But on the core issues of the economy and the deficit, Romney is now kicking the president's ass

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com ... -away.html

Woops.

(Just to skewer Slick n' Co.: Romney is now kicking the president's ass.)

vision · Post by **vision** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:38 pm

Exclamation points and saying someone is "kicking ass" are hallmarks of credible journalism.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 11:57 pm

ladies and gentlemen, schadenfreude in action.

Heretic · Post by **Heretic** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:21 am

Ferno wrote:ladies and gentlemen, schadenfreude in action.

Isn't that what this was about http://descentbb.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=19823

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:37 am

vision wrote:Exclamation points and saying someone is "kicking ass" are hallmarks of credible journalism.

Kinda like the tingles running up a certain journalist leg when he thinks of Obama.

Foil · Post by **Foil** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 8:56 am

Careful when making pronouncements like this. If your dog loses the race, it can come back to bite you. [I.e. I'm expecting lots of quotes after the election.]

CobGobbler · Post by **CobGobbler** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:33 pm

Yeah I thought polls were all skewed anyways?

Watched someone say something that I found relevant. "If Romney can survive a bad three weeks after that 47% video, Obama can certainly survive a bad week following a poor debate performance."

At least we all know that Romney ISN'T bad at debates...as everyone in his camp was saying. Well played GOP, well played. Took a walk, stole two bases, and trotted home on a wild pitch.

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:46 pm

I'm still boggled by the possibility of a single debate, no matter how well one candidate performed or how poorly the other did, influencing potential voters' decisions in any significant way. Why the hell do people put that much stock in them?

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:30 pm

TG, in the case of the first debate people got to see the real Romney and not the caricature the Dems tried to portray him as and quite possibly liked what they saw...hence the rise Romney is getting in the polls. Likewise the same people got to see the real Obama without his teleprompters and saw something quite different from what his friends in the media tried to portray him as. I think Obama now realizes that debates matter and he will actually have to prep for them if he wants a chance to be re-elected. Then again some people are whispering that Obama doesn't really want a second term.

CobGobbler · Post by **CobGobbler** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:56 pm

So Romney in the GOP primaries or the last 6 months hasn't been the real one?

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:37 pm

What you saw was what the state run media, the DNC spin machineHarry Reid and Obama's handlers wanted you to see. Now you may understand what comrade Slick was refering to about Chicago style politics. Hope you enjoyed the experience.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:45 pm

Sergeant Thorne levels a gun at Cob, and reaching up with the other hand pulls the Mission-Impossible-grade Romney mask from his face.

vision · Post by **vision** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:52 pm

Obligatory.

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 8:17 pm

woodchip wrote:What you saw was what the state run media, the DNC spin machineHarry Reid and Obama's handlers wanted you to see. Now you may understand what comrade Slick was refering to about Chicago style politics. Hope you enjoyed the experience.

What happened is that *Governor* Romney made a strong appearance in the presidential debate, who had up to then made very little appearance, especially during the primary debates. I still haven't figured which one--Governor Romney or Republican candidate Romney--is the *real* Romney, but, if elected, we would probably get the more centrist one and, if I had to guess, I would say the one that is closer to his real views.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 8:21 pm

What you saw was what the state run media, the DNC spin machineHarry Reid and Obama's handlers wanted you to see. Now you may understand what comrade Slick was refering to about Chicago style politics. Hope you enjoyed the experience.

This kind of made me giggle a little bit, simply because you're implying the GOP doesn't do the same thing. And I found the comrade part interesting. it seems like an effort to attach Slick to communism. All because he's stopped you dead at almost every turn.

Heretic wrote:
Ferno wrote:ladies and gentlemen, schadenfreude in action.
Isn't that what this was about http://descentbb.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=19823

please tell us what Schadenfreude means, Heretic.

Heretic · Post by **Heretic** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:23 am

It is the pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others or gloating at somebody else's bad luck: malicious or smug pleasure taken in somebody else's misfortune.

callmeslick wrote:
Spidey wrote:No, I think his excitement is coming from rubbing certain people’s faces in it.

well, sure, that too!

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:02 am

Jeff250 wrote:
woodchip wrote:What you saw was what the state run media, the DNC spin machineHarry Reid and Obama's handlers wanted you to see. Now you may understand what comrade Slick was refering to about Chicago style politics. Hope you enjoyed the experience.
What happened is that *Governor* Romney made a strong appearance in the presidential debate, who had up to then made very little appearance, especially during the primary debates. I still haven't figured which one--Governor Romney or Republican candidate Romney--is the *real* Romney, but, if elected, we would probably get the more centrist one and, if I had to guess, I would say the one that is closer to his real views.

sure....with Ryan as his VP, and beholden to extreme right-wing PACs for his advertising, I suspect you would be sadly mistaken.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:40 am

Ferno wrote:
What you saw was what the state run media, the DNC spin machineHarry Reid and Obama's handlers wanted you to see. Now you may understand what comrade Slick was refering to about Chicago style politics. Hope you enjoyed the experience.
This kind of made me giggle a little bit, simply because you're implying the GOP doesn't do the same thing. And I found the comrade part interesting. it seems like an effort to attach Slick to communism. All because he's stopped you dead at almost every turn.

Wrong again Fernman. The "comrade" monicker is from Slicks avowing Progressive party involvement. If you would have read that particular thread you would of found out the Progressive wing of the Democratic party has been co-opted by the old American Communist Party years ago.
And stopped me at almost every turn...heh

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 8:45 am

uh huh...

so you're telling me... I'm right.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 9:41 am

pnce again, Woodchip fails the reading exam. I never, ever, ever said anything about being part of the Progressive party. Merely, I stated that my political views are moderate Progressive in nature. There's a very real difference. Not that Woody would get that, but there is.
Anyhoo, Comrades, Slick is off to Indiana to return the grandkiddies to their parents, who have finally settled in. See yall soon!

Pandora · Post by **Pandora** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 1:41 pm

woodchip wrote:... the Progressive wing of the Democratic party has been co-opted by the old American Communist Party years ago.

you live in a very exciting world.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:02 pm

That I do Pandora. So exciting that for my evening cuisine I'm eating sardines out of a can with Ritz crackers.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:29 pm

callmeslick wrote:pnce again, Woodchip fails the reading exam. I never, ever, ever said anything about being part of the Progressive party. Merely, I stated that my political views are moderate Progressive in nature. There's a very real difference. Not that Woody would get that, but there is.
Anyhoo, Comrades, Slick is off to Indiana to return the grandkiddies to their parents, who have finally settled in. See yall soon!

dude, in his mind, as soon as you mention you're of anything left, it's suddenly communism.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:36 pm

Anything left of the new center is Communist to woody and TB. And remember, the new right wing is so far to the right in this day and age that Eisenhower, and maybe even Reagan, are now considered Commie Pinkos.

vision · Post by **vision** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:41 pm

woodchip wrote:... I'm eating sardines out of a can with Ritz crackers.

It's Obama's fault!

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:47 pm

What?! Sardines ain't cheap! Now if woody had said dark chunk tuna on a Ritz.................

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 5:21 pm

woodchip wrote:That I do Pandora. So exciting that for my evening cuisine I'm eating sardines out of a can with Ritz crackers.

enough of THAT diet could get real exciting, in a bad way......

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 5:29 pm

tunnelcat wrote:Anything left of the new center is Communist to woody and TB. And remember, the new right wing is so far to the right in this day and age that Eisenhower, and maybe even Reagan, are now considered Commie Pinkos.

very true.....I'm essentially an Eisenhower Republican, which forced me into the Dem camp 25 years ago for good. Worth noting on Reagan(who I never really cared for....too shallow) was that his big tax idea was the following: Capital gains ought to be treated as Ordinary Income on Fed Taxes, because to do otherwise gives a massive break to inherited wealth. Then, fast forward to last night's debate and what is Old Mitt espousing? ZERO, yes, freaking ZERO taxes on the first $250,000 of capital gains/interest.
Now, to put this in perspective, let's look at the lucky fellow who inherited a $10 million estate from his dad, grandmother, whatever.
At a very conservative investment risk level, he can yield $250,000 a year for life without touching the nest egg, nor risking it.
That, in Mitt's America, would be a quarter-million TAX FREE dollar income for life. Whatta deal!! How are you working fellas liking the sound of this one, especially coupled with a vow to eliminate all inheritance taxation at the Federal Level. What class group among the citizenry comes out smelling like roses on this tax plan? Is it the same old money that's been benefitting from the rule book for 200 years? As Sarah Palin used to say: You Betcha!!

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 6:05 pm

callmeslick wrote:
woodchip wrote:That I do Pandora. So exciting that for my evening cuisine I'm eating sardines out of a can with Ritz crackers.

enough of THAT diet could get real exciting, in a bad way......

Actually sardines are one of the top ten foods that are good for your heart.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 6:08 pm

true enough, but the Ritz are killers! Frankly, I was just thinking of the excitement in terms of digestive issues on a diet limited to sardines and buttery crackers......you'll live longer, but much of the time will be spent near porcelin.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:45 pm

callmeslick wrote: ZERO, yes, freaking ZERO taxes on the first $250,000 of capital gains/interest.

Now, to put this in perspective, let's look at the lucky fellow who inherited a $10 million estate from his dad, grandmother, whatever.
At a very conservative investment risk level, he can yield $250,000 a year for life without touching the nest egg, nor risking it.
That, in Mitt's America, would be a quarter-million TAX FREE dollar income for life. Whatta deal!! How are you working fellas liking the sound of this one, especially coupled with a vow to eliminate all inheritance taxation at the Federal Level. What class group among the citizenry comes out smelling like roses on this tax plan? Is it the same old money that's been benefitting from the rule book for 200 years? As Sarah Palin used to say: You Betcha!!

Wow. So easy to maipulate it's scary.

Nightshade · Post by **Nightshade** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 9:04 pm

Romney wins in a landslide -- Las Vegas oddsmaker doubles down on prediction...

...There are several specific reasons I predict a comfortable Romney victory on election day:
The news media is ignoring signs of mass revulsion towards President Obama. In the West Virginia Democrat primary, a felon got 40% of the vote versus Obama. In deep blue Massachusetts and Connecticut, GOP Senate candidates are even, or leading in recent polls. In pro-union Wisconsin, Walker won by a country mile. But worst of all for Mr. Obama, several recent polls show Romney competitive in Illinois -- Obama’s home state. Romney is actually winning by a landslide in the suburbs of Obama’s Chicago. Even in Cook County, the country’s biggest Democratic stronghold, Romney leads by double digits among independents (43-31) and white voters (53-40). These are very bad signs for Obama.

In 2008 Democrats overwhelmingly controlled the majority of governorships. Today Republicans control the majority of Governorships. Presidential elections are always steered in each state by the governor -- the most powerful force in state politics.

After the 2010 census, electoral votes were added to states that lean Republican in elections: Texas, Florida, Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, South Carolina, and Utah. Deep blue Democrat states like New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, and Massachusetts lost electoral votes.

That brings up an interesting point. Why is everyone running away from these ultra liberal, high tax states in the first place? Isn’t that alone proof of the failure of Democrat ideas?

Next, follow the money trail. Yes, Obama is raising plenty of money, although there is now a major question about whether it's coming from illegal foreign contributors. But forget all that. What matters is that in 2008 Obama overwhelmed McCain by out-spending him 10 to 1 down the stretch. That won’t happen in 2012. Romney is even, or can out-spend Obama, in the last 2 weeks of the election. That makes a huge difference in the outcome.

Christians will turn out in record numbers this year. Obama has offended Christians again and again. Last election 20 million evangelical Christians did not vote. They will turn out in record numbers in 2012 to defeat the most anti-Christian President in US history. How motivated are Christians? Did you see the long lines around the country to support Chick-fil-A this summer? You’ll see those same lines on election day.

Voter rolls have been purged in 2012 of felons and illegals in many states -- particularly Florida and Ohio. Turnout of Democrats will be nothing like 2008.

Which brings up another important question. What kind of political party relies on felons and people illegally in the country to win elections?

The “Enthusiasm Factor” for Romney is huge. Conservatives are focused, intense, motivated, and enthusiastic. Democrats turned out for Obama in record numbers in 2008. Today they are demoralized. A big edge goes to Romney on Election Day as conservatives, white voters, middle class voters and independents turn out in record numbers for Romney.

I know several people who voted for Obama in 2008, but never again. Does anyone know a McCain voter who will vote for Obama in 2012? There are none.

Finally, history proves that a majority of undecided voters break for the challenger. Romney will take most of the undecided voters on election day -- just like Reagan did versus Jimmy Carter in 1980. Romney’s fantastic debate performance gave them confidence to choose the challenger...

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/ ... p=trending

You may hate the messenger, but is the message really that far fetched?

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 9:51 pm

All I know amongst women, Blacks and Latinos, is that the revulsion factor is highest against Romney. Fox News in living in another world, a world that only white males and Christians live in. After last night, liberals finally have seen a President with a backbone, who got in the last punch of the night.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:35 pm

ThunderBunny wrote:You may hate the messenger, but is the message really that far fetched?

That's about as accurate as a month-away weather prediction.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Thu Oct 18, 2012 5:48 am

tunnelcat wrote:All I know amongst women, Blacks and Latinos, is that the revulsion factor is highest against Romney. Fox News in living in another world, a world that only white males and Christians live in. After last night, liberals finally have seen a President with a backbone, who got in the last punch of the night.

Curious how Romney is now tied with women voters. And Obama's backbone was stiffened by Ms Candyass the moderator who allowed him 4 extra minutes of time and played fact checker against Romney. "Hey! You didn't build that backbone, someone else did"

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:31 am

Maybe when Romney's "binders full of women" pimpish comment finally sinks in, they'll start thinking differently. He's nothing but a condescending flip-flopper, who's running mate voted against the Lilly Ledbetter Act. Although Romney's stated that he wouldn't repeal the Act, he was against it when it was going through Congress. He has the same mindset he's always had. Nothing's changed except he wants to be pres this time.

Nearly ever job I've worked at in my life, I was paid less, sometimes way less, than any male counterpart in the current job I had at the time, even though I had the same skills and abilities and never took child leave. Do I resent that fact, yes.

CobGobbler · Post by **CobGobbler** » Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:33 am

So...not letting someone insinuate the President is telling a blatant lie is a bad thing? Romney's claim was 100% wrong but you're saying it was more wrong to call that out??

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:52 am

CobGobbler wrote:So...not letting someone insinuate the President is telling a blatant lie is a bad thing? Romney's claim was 100% wrong but you're saying it was more wrong to call that out??

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:53 pm

tunnelcat wrote:Nearly ever job I've worked at in my life, I was paid less, sometimes way less, than any male counterpart in the current job I had at the time, even though I had the same skills and abilities and never took child leave. Do I resent that fact, yes.

Did you put in the same amount of hours as your male counterparts? Did you take any 'mental health days' off? Any sick days off? Any 'finding yourself' days off? How much vacation time did you take?

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Thu Oct 18, 2012 10:00 pm

I believe in equal pay for equal work, not just doing the same job.