Monday, October 01, 2012

Here Come the Marriage Campaigns

In about a month Maryland is going to vote for or against a bill that allows same-sex couples to marry. The legislature and governor already passed a bill into law, but certain cultural forces have organized to put it on the ballot in November.

You'd think there would be a lot of furor and argument, but so far I don't think I have seen a single bumper sticker or billboard, have not received a robocall on the subject, I haven't heard anybody talking about it on the Metro or anywhere else. Even on Facebook and Twitter, the activists I follow have been mostly concerned with other things.

I'd be pretty sure most people know where they stand on the issue of marriage equality, and doubt that there will be much in the way of people changing their minds at this point. Still, The Post is warning us that the debate is about to move to center stage.
Marylanders, who have been inundated by casino ads for the past month, are about to see a campaign blossom into full view over another high-profile ballot measure: same-sex marriage.

With barely five weeks until Election Day, groups on both sides of the debate are poised to make their cases in a blitz of television ads, mailers and other appeals that will alternately try to put a human face on the relationships of gay couples and warn of the consequences of allowing them to wed.

Until now, opponents have mounted a relatively quiet campaign, mobilizing through the state’s churches and civic organizations. That included an event last week featuring the archbishop of Baltimore and plans this Sunday for clergy in churches across the state to preach against changing the definition of marriage.

Proponents of Question 6 have been most visible raising money for the fight, gathering everywhere from the homes of local supporters to a New York rooftop bar where guests mingled with an array of celebrities, including Susan Sarandon. Last week, “American Idol” runner-up Adam Lambert spoke out for equal rights between songs at a benefit concert in the District. Maryland ad war coming over same-sex marriage vote
Question 6, the “Civil Marriage Protection Act,” will appear on the ballot in this form:
Establishes that Maryland’s civil marriage laws allow gay and lesbian couples to obtain a civil marriage license, provided they are not otherwise prohibited from marrying; protects clergy from having to perform any particular marriage ceremony in violation of their religious beliefs; affirms that each religious faith has exclusive control over its own theological doctrine regarding who may marry within that faith; and provides that religious organizations and certain related entities are not required to provide goods, services, or benefits to an individual related to the celebration or promotion of marriage in violation of their religious beliefs.
Voting Yes on Question 6 supports equal marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples.

Skipping down in the Washington Post article...
Josh Levin, campaign manager for Marylanders for Marriage Equality, said his group is certainly aware of the historical significance of this year’s battle.

“Just about everybody in Maryland knows somebody who’s gay or lesbian,” Levin said. “They’re our neighbors, our family, our friends and our co-workers, and Question 6 is about treating them fairly and protecting religious freedom at the same time.”

Under the pending law, which would take effect Jan. 1 if voters approve, no religious group would be forced to perform same-sex weddings.

Recent public polling has shown proponents with an advantage of 10 or fewer percentage points. [Marriage opponent Derek] McCoy said he remains undaunted, given that in other states his side has generally performed better at the ballot box than in polling on same-sex marriage measures.
The Post's article outlines the gigantic organizing effort that has gone into opposing marriage equality in our state, led by "... Frank Schubert, a consultant who worked on the successful effort in California to pass Proposition 8, the ballot measure that banned same-sex marriages, and who has been on the winning side of a string of similar contests since then in other states." An anti-gay spokesman said that 1,000 churches were being organized to give sermons against same-sex marriage.
Proponents of same-sex marriage have also produced several dozen clergy members in recent weeks to counter the notion that all religious leaders oppose the right of gay couples to get married.

This month, the Rev. Al Sharpton and about a dozen black pastors from Maryland and well beyond held a news conference at the National Press Club to make known their support for Maryland’s same-sex marriage law.
You may belong to a religion that considers homosexuality a sin and does not recognize marriages between same-sex couples. Fine. If you subscribe to a religious faith you really should try to live within its code, if they don't allow something you should not do it. But please remember that there are other faiths, other belief systems, and in America we are promised certain kinds of freedoms, including the freedom to practice our religion and freedom not to be forced by government to follow the beliefs and practices of one religion or another.

It is hard sometimes to understand the other person's point of view, but our democracy depends on us realizing that even when we do not understand someone's thoughts or feelings we can respect them enough to give them the room to live as they believe they should. In return, they will grant us the same respect. That's how America works.

71 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

gay advocacy groups will never rest until those who believe homosexuality is wrong are eliminated from society

grant us respect?

please

Matt Birk, center for the Baltimore Ravens:

"It should come as no surprise that the National Football League supports the right of its players to share their opinions on important public matters, nor should it come as a surprise that I personally support my colleagues' rights to voice their opinions.

But the conversation during the last few weeks on the subject of same-sex marriage has told a different story -- one that appears to be drawing a false connection between supporting true American values like free speech and the institution of marriage, our most fundamental and important social institution.

I think it is important to set the record straight about what the marriage debate is and is not about, and to clarify that not all NFL players think redefining marriage is a good thing.

The union of a man and a woman is privileged and recognized by society as "marriage" for a reason, and it's not because the government has a vested interest in celebrating the love between two people. With good reason, government recognizes marriages and gives them certain legal benefits so they can provide a stable, nurturing environment for the next generation of citizens: our kids.

Children have a right to a mom and a dad, and I realize that this doesn't always happen. Through the work my wife and I do at pregnancy resource centers and underprivileged schools, we have witnessed firsthand the many heroic efforts of single mothers and fathers -- many of whom work very hard to provide what's best for their kids.

But recognizing the efforts of these parents and the resiliency of some (not all, unfortunately) of these kids, does not then give society the right to dismiss the potential long-term effects on a child of not knowing or being loved by his or her mother or father. Each plays a vital role in the raising of a child.

Marriage is in trouble right now -- admittedly, for many reasons that have little to do with same-sex unions. In the last few years, political forces and a culture of relativism have replaced "I am my brother's keeper" and "love your neighbor as yourself" with "live and let live" and "if it feels good, go ahead and do it."

The effects of no-fault divorce, adultery, and the nonchalant attitude toward marriage by some have done great harm to this sacred institution. How much longer do we put the desires of adults before the needs of kids? Why are we not doing more to lift up and strengthen the institution of marriage?

Same-sex unions may not affect my marriage specifically, but it will affect my children -- the next generation. Ideas have consequences, and laws shape culture. Marriage redefinition will affect the broader well-being of children and the welfare of society. As a Christian and a citizen, I am compelled to care about both.

I am speaking out on this issue because it is far too important to remain silent. People who are simply acknowledging the basic reality of marriage between one man and one woman are being labeled as "bigots" and "homophobic." Aren't we past that as a society?

Don't we all have family members and friends whom we love who have same-sex attraction? Attempting to silence those who may disagree with you is always un-American, but especially when it is through name-calling, it has no place in respectful conversation.

A defense of marriage is not meant as an offense to any person or group. All people should be afforded their inalienable American freedoms. There is no opposition between providing basic human rights to everyone and preserving marriage as the sacred union of one man and one woman.

I hope that in voicing my beliefs I encourage people on both sides to use reason and charity as they enter this debate. I encourage all Americans to stand up to preserve and promote a healthy, authentic promarriage culture in this upcoming election."

October 01, 2012 3:18 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

The only people trying to eliminate another group of people is the anti-gays who are trying to force everyone to be heterosexual.

The U.S. supreme court has regularly stated that marriage is a fundamental civil right. Providing basic human rights to all is in direct opposition to banning gay marriage.

October 01, 2012 3:30 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

And as the court has also said, "The right to marry means nothing if it doesn't include the right to marry a person of one's choosing."

October 01, 2012 3:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The only people trying to eliminate another group of people is the anti-gays who are trying to force everyone to be heterosexual."

I didn't say gay advocates want to physically eliminate the majority who believe homosexuality is immoral, they just want to socially eliminate them

"The U.S. supreme court has regularly stated that marriage is a fundamental civil right."

they didn't redefine it, stupid

marriage is between a man and a woman and everyone has the right to seek a partner from the opposite gender to engage in such a relationship with them

"Providing basic human rights to all is in direct opposition to banning gay marriage."

gay "marriage" is a deceitful and contradictory term

btw, the hallowed Gallup poll of registered voters is moving in the same direction as the three likely voter polls out today which show the race in a dead heat

Obama was leading the poll of "registered" voters by six two days ago and it's now four

the bottom just dropped out of the Obama campaign

he'll never ride the up elevator again

hopey-changey is over

October 01, 2012 3:40 PM  
Anonymous FOUR MORE YEARS! said...

"three likely voter polls out today which show the race in a dead heat"

Liar.

Obama leads and Romney trails in every poll out today.

The only "heat" that's dead is Romney's.

"the bottom just dropped out of the Obama campaign"

Being ahead by 3-4 points is a sure indication the only bottom that's fallen out is the one inside your head.

"hopey-changey is over"

When you're right, you're right. There is no HOPE for the country to CHANGE from supporting Obama for President to supporting Romney.

October 01, 2012 4:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Liar.

Obama leads and Romney trails in every poll out today.

The only "heat" that's dead is Romney's."

Obama leads by 2 in Post, 2 in GWU/Politico

which, within the margin of error of each poll, means it is just as possible that the race is tied or Romney up

even the Post, in its headline says race is a "dead heat"

say, you don't read very widely, do you?

"Being ahead by 3-4 points is a sure indication the only bottom that's fallen out is the one inside your head."

you have to look at the trend, my unfriend

Gallup, which is polling registered voters at this point, has had Obama lead dropping daily

that's what happens when the bottom falls out

"When you're right, you're right. There is no HOPE for the country to CHANGE from supporting Obama for President to supporting Romney."

how about if everyone starts talking about how Obama failed to protect our embassy in Libya?

the media won't keep the mute buuton on that pushed much longer

and how about when the jobs report comes out on Friday?

and the debate focuses on Obama's lies about Romney?

here comes your 19th nervous breakdown

October 01, 2012 4:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obamacare is designed to increase the health care coverage of Americans but doing so will, in part, yield something else: Wealth distribution.

The Affordable Care Act will raise taxes by $52,000 on average for families among the top 1 percent of earners in order to finance $250 to $2,000 worth of health benefits for the poorest half of American families by 2016, a recent report from the Tax Foundation has found.

October 01, 2012 4:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In almost every civilized nation in the world, marriage is accepted as a civil institution.In the U.S. the narrow-minded religionists want to segregate any one who does not meet with their approval by denying them a civil right guaranteed by the Constitution.

If you do not support gay marriage, do not marry a gay person (ooops...that just let a huge secret out of the bag. It's surprising how many so-called "heterosexual" marriages mask spousal daliances with either gay men or women).

Nothing in the proposed law would limit a "religionist" organization to deny to marry a gay/lesbian couple. Please confice your bigotry to your own "houses of worship"!
Diogenes

October 01, 2012 5:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"even the Post, in its headline says race is a "dead heat""

Uh huh. And what else does that WaPo headline say?

Poll: The race is tight, but not in key states

And the article that headline is about adds:

"...Nationally, the race is unmoved from early September, with 49 percent of likely voters saying they would vote for Obama if the election were held today and 47 percent saying they would vote for Romney. Among all registered voters, Obama is up by a slim five percentage points, nearly identical to his margin in a poll two weeks ago.

But 52 percent of likely voters across swing states side with Obama and 41 percent with Romney in the new national poll, paralleling Obama’s advantages in recent Washington Post polls in Florida, Ohio and Virginia."...


Raise your hand if you understand the difference between the popular vote and the electoral college!

Check out these numbers.

RCP electoral college tally -- Obama 265, Romney 191, Toss ups 82

Huffington Post electoral college tally -- Obama 332, Romney 191, Toss ups 18

Rasmussen electoral college tally -- Obama 237, Romney 196, Toss ups 105

San Francisco Chronical electoral college tally -- Obama 271, Republican 191

The New Yorker electoral college tally Obama 303, Romney 206

Electoral-vote.com electoral college tally Obama 347, Romney 191

Rove.com electoral college tally Obama 196, Romney 156, Lean Obama 81, Lean Romney 35, Toss Up 70

October 01, 2012 6:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wouldn't get too comfy if I were you

the enthusiasm is on the Republican side and there are a whole bunch of issues Obama is temporarily avoiding

it won't last

the media, as biased as they are, don't want a blow-out

"Uh huh. And what else does that WaPo headline say?"

not so fast

let's stick with this one for a moment

you said:

"Liar.

Obama leads and Romney trails in every poll out today.

The only "heat" that's dead is Romney's."

but, as I pointed out, even the pollster that did the poll states that the margin in the poll represents a dead heat

perhaps you didn't realize that at first because you're not well read

but now that it's been brought to your attention and you still don't admit I was right, you are....a liar




October 01, 2012 7:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"as I pointed out, even the pollster that did the poll states that the margin in the poll represents a dead heat"

No you didn't.

Here is every use of the word phrase "dead heat" on this thread:

1. "btw, the hallowed Gallup poll of registered voters is moving in the same direction as the three likely voter polls out today which show the race in a dead heat"

2. "even the Post, in its headline says race is a "dead heat"

3. "but, as I pointed out, even the pollster that did the poll states that the margin in the poll represents a dead heat"

And here's every use of the word "pollster" in this thread:

1. "but, as I pointed out, even the pollster that did the poll states that the margin in the poll represents a dead heat"

No you didn't.

Liar.

"raise taxes by $52,000 on average for families among the top 1 percent of earners"

And for $2,000 less, they can have a nice meal while listening to Mittless tell them:

"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it -- that that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. ... These are people who pay no income tax. ... [M]y job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

Now the 100% have heard Mittless say it for free.

October 01, 2012 8:28 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Bad anonymous, your pretending what you want to be true is reality isn't going to convince anyone. Even you know Obama's got a consistent and enduring lead of 4% points. One can argue that with any single poll a spread of 2 or 3 points is within the margin of error and is therefore technically deadlocked, but every honest statistician and most people of slightly below average intelligence and above knows that when you average several polls the margin of error drops dramatically and when that average shows a 4 percentage point lead there's no disputing that Obama has a real and large lead. Further, when for months the average of several polls consistently shows a 4 percent Obama lead the margin of error is virtually zero and your guy is undeniably losing badly.

But of course you'd have to be honest to admit that and the truth is of no importance to you, only pushing your agenda matters.

This is going to be exactly like 2008 when you assured us with unmitigated confidence "president Huckabee" was going to implement all your favourite right wing policies during his two terms.

By tomorrow early voting will be underway in 35 states so the RCP average of polls showing a 4% Obama lead isn't just a prediction of what will almost certainly happenon election day, its a statment of what IS happening NOW. Romney hasn't got a prayer of undoing on election day the lead in votes Obama now is racking up as we speak.

October 01, 2012 8:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

no one cares

no one that votes considers themselves part of the 47%

this little passage is truly amazing:

"as I pointed out, even the pollster that did the poll states that the margin in the poll represents a dead heat"

No you didn't.

Here is every use of the word phrase "dead heat" on this thread:

1. "btw, the hallowed Gallup poll of registered voters is moving in the same direction as the three likely voter polls out today which show the race in a dead heat"

2. "even the Post, in its headline says race is a "dead heat"

3. "but, as I pointed out, even the pollster that did the poll states that the margin in the poll represents a dead heat"

And here's every use of the word "pollster" in this thread:

1. "but, as I pointed out, even the pollster that did the poll states that the margin in the poll represents a dead heat"

No you didn't.

Liar."

you're not fooling anyone

the Post is the pollster

they said the data represents a "dead heat"

you've lied

you're a liar

rather than double down, why don't you just admit it and gain some credibility?


October 01, 2012 8:38 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Bad anonymous said "The Affordable Care Act will raise taxes by $52,000 on average for families among the top 1 percent of earners in order to finance $250 to $2,000 worth of health benefits for the poorest half of American families by 2016, a recent report from the Tax Foundation has found.".

And that 52000 will have virtually no impact on the total income of the top 1% as the Tax Foundation said "Overall, we estimate that as a result of the health care reform, the top 1 percent would go from earning 14.7 percent of post-redistribution income to around 14.35 percent of post-redistribution income.".

$250-$2000 in savings for the poorest half of American families has a significant impact on their quality of life while a 52,000 cost for the top 1% of Americans has no effect whatsoever on their quality of life.

Keep trying to make a big deal out of how the filthy rich are so hard done by. Keep voting against your own best interests moron.

October 01, 2012 8:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Bad anonymous, your pretending what you want to be true is reality isn't going to convince anyone. Even you know Obama's got a consistent and enduring lead of 4% points."

nasty Priya, do you live to make yourself look stupid?

no poll of likely voters today show this "consistent" Obama lead

it's a strange definition of consistency

the national polls OF LIKELY VOTERS show either 2 or 3 point leads, within the margin of error

having more polls doesn't reduce the margin of error for several reasons

the latest liberal propaganda point is that even though the national lead is small, Obama is winning big-time in the swing states

let's look at the latest poll from each, as listed on RCP:

Ohio, Obama's best swing state shows a 4 point lead with a 3.3 MOE

Florida shows a 1 point lead with a 3.4 MOE

Virginia shows a 2 point lead with a 4 MOE

where's this huge blow-out the media keeps blabbering about?

Obama has a whole lot of baggage

the chances he won't drop it before the election are slim

one more thing:

"This is going to be exactly like 2008 when you assured us with unmitigated confidence "president Huckabee" was going to implement all your favourite right wing policies during his two terms."

I said this about a number of candidates

why do you keep focusing on Huckabee?

you and I know, don't we?

you thinks his name has echoes of Huck Finn and the term "hick"

you're simply exploiting bigotry against lower income rural Americans

what a hypocrite

Huckabee was a sharp interviewee and debater, with an easygoing charisma and good instincts

he exceeded expectations and would have been a better candidate than either Romney or Obama

certainly more intelligent than a cut-and-paste atheist bigot diner waitress from Saskatchewan


October 01, 2012 9:00 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

LOL, bad anonymous, you are truly stupid, actually, willfully stupid - you need to work at being as stupid as you are, you didn't come by your stupidity honestly by being born with an IQ as low as what you display here on a regular basis.

The RCP poll average has Obama up 3.5% which rounded off is 4% just as I said. Obama has consistently had around a 4% point lead which is huge and given the average of polls over a number of months has a very low margin of error. But you already know that, you're just not willing to admit the truth.

And what's going to settle this election is that Obama has AN 11 POINT LEAD IN THE SWING STATES.

http://www.boston.com/politicalintelligence/2012/10/01/mitt-romney-close-president-obama-national-poll-but-slipping-swing-states/AISS0fpIiBzyIwrxe14KwM/story.html

Once again what you pretend is true bears no relationship to reality.

---------------------------

Five weeks before the election, a measure to legalize same-sex marriage in Maryland has seen a surge of support and is now favored by likely voters, 49 percent to 39 percent, a new Baltimore Sun poll has found.

A high black turnout was a prospect once viewed with trepidation by the pro-family side. In March, an OpinionWorks poll found less than a third of African-Americans supported the measure.

Since then, however, there’s been a dramatic shift in the attitudes of black voters, according to the new Sun poll. It found more than half of likely black voters favor legalizing same-sex marriage, compared with a quarter who are opposed.

October 01, 2012 9:46 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

I said "This is going to be exactly like 2008 when you assured us with unmitigated confidence "president Huckabee" was going to implement all your favourite right wing policies during his two terms."

Bad anonymous said "I said this about a number of candidates.".

LOL, I can't believe you're so stupid that you think this is a point in your favour. That just further shows you couldn't care less about reality, you just pull B.S. out of your butt and pretend its as certain to come true as the sun is to rise tomorrow. Just like you're pretending Romney has any chance of winning this election.

Obama will almost certainly be sworn in in 2013 and then I'll be reminding you about how you told us with absolute certainty how the 16 years of the Romney/ryan presidency would play out as well as how you assured us "president Huckabee" would be implementing all your favourite right wing policies in 2009-2012

October 01, 2012 9:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I doubt any of you are 65 or older but these folks are fed up with Obama. It is becoming harder and harder to find a Dr. that is willing to accept Medicare patients. They have to limit these people because of the low pay back.

October 01, 2012 10:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I doubt any of you are 65 or older but these folks are fed up with Obama. It is becoming harder and harder to find a Dr. that is willing to accept Medicare patients. They have to limit these people because of the low pay back."

not only that but countless doctors across the country have decided they will retire before Obamacare takes full effect

they can afford it

October 02, 2012 5:18 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"LOL, bad anonymous, you are truly stupid, actually, willfully stupid - you need to work at being as stupid as you are, you didn't come by your stupidity honestly by being born with an IQ as low as what you display here on a regular basis."

how ironic for the nasty Priyas to say this and then this:

"The RCP poll average has Obama up 3.5% which rounded off is 4% just as I said."

as we saw the latest polls of LIKELY VOTERS shows something different

"Obama has consistently had around a 4% point lead which is huge"

by definition, a lead right at the MOE is not HUGE, just like the IQ of the nasty Priyas

"And what's going to settle this election is that Obama has AN 11 POINT LEAD IN THE SWING STATES."

thanks for the link to one liberal paper's spin

I looked at the three pivotal swing states' latest polls of LIKELY VOTERS yesterday and the Obama lead is at or less than the MOE in all three

October 02, 2012 5:26 AM  
Anonymous David S. Fishback said...

The response to Matt Birks may be summarized in two words. Zach Wahls. See http://www.zachwahls.com/?page_id=273

October 02, 2012 8:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

actually, David, Birks was responding to Wahls

inept polls that con
you into thinkin' you're the one
that can do what's never been done
that can win what's never been won

meanwhile, life outside goes on around you

October 02, 2012 8:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Hill Poll: Voters switch, saying Obama is set to win second term
By Sheldon Alberts - 10/01/12

A strong majority of likely voters now expect President Obama to win a second term after an abrupt shift in perceptions about the state of the race, according to The Hill’s latest election poll.

The survey found 53 percent of voters believe Obama will triumph on Nov. 6, a huge swing from the 43 percent who held that view immediately before the Democratic convention early last month.

During the same period, the proportion of voters who think GOP challenger Mitt Romney will win shrank from 46 percent to 41 percent, The Hill’s poll found.
The doom-laden numbers for Romney reflect the fact that 50 percent of voters say the president and the Democrats have run a better campaign, while only 41 percent give the nod to Romney and Republicans.

The poll, conducted Sept. 27 for The Hill by Pulse Opinion Research, highlights the pressure Romney will be under to deliver a strong performance at his first debate with Obama on Wednesday in Denver.

Eighty-five percent of voters said they are likely to watch the opening debate, compared to 12 percent who said they were not likely to tune in.

The Republican candidate has endured a difficult four-week stretch on the campaign trail, while Obama’s Gallup approval rating over the same period has risen to its highest level in more than a year.

Democrats were seen as having a stronger convention than Republicans, who saw actor Clint Eastwood upstage Romney.

The GOP nominee then faced criticism for his initial response to the assaults against U.S. diplomatic missions in Egypt and Libya.

That has hampered his ability to make a bigger issue of the Obama administration’s changing account of the attack on the consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens.

More problematic, Romney spent several crucial days dealing with the fallout over a secretly recorded video that showed him telling campaign donors that his “job is not to worry about” 47 percent of voters because they are dependent on government and cannot be persuaded to “take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”

The Hill Poll’s results come on the heels of a string of national and swing-state polls showing Obama maintaining a slim-to-comfortable lead over his challenger.

Gallup’s national seven-day tracking poll on Sunday showed Obama with a 49-44 percent lead. Obama also holds advantages over Romney in Ohio, Florida and Virginia: three of the most important Electoral College battlegrounds.

Perhaps not surprisingly, The Hill’s latest poll found Democrats are growing more confident and Republicans more pessimistic just five weeks before the election.

Seventy-two percent of Republicans believe Romney will win the election, down from 76 percent in The Hill’s poll on Sept. 2.

By comparison, 87 percent of Democrats now say Obama will win, up from 78 percent early in September.

More disturbing for Romney’s campaign — and more encouraging for Obama’s — is that far more centrist and non-aligned voters now feel the election is tilting in the president’s direction.

Among centrists, 65 percent think Obama will win, compared to 31 percent who say Romney.

A month ago, only 40 percent of centrist voters thought Obama would win; 44 percent picked Romney.

October 02, 2012 9:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

so, most people think Obama will win but he only leads in the likely voter poll today by one point nationally

what does that tell you?

that a whole bunch of americans want Romney to win but don't think he will

that's not that bad a place to be

any glimmer of hope is poised to set off an explosion of enthusiasm

look for it Wednesday night

the focus will be Obama's lying commercials

the punch line of the night will be a lot like "There you go again, Jimmy":

you're out of excuses, Barry

October 02, 2012 11:02 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well said, "Anonymous" - you with the earned and well-deserved title of "Lord of the Liars"!!

October 02, 2012 12:14 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wayne Besen writes:

Baltimore Ravens’ Matt Birk is upset because his teammate, Brendon Ayanbadejo, recently spoke out in favor of marriage equality. Birk, a six-time Pro Bowl selection who is the Ravens’ current center, writes in the Star Tribune:

“Marriage is in trouble right now — admittedly, for many reasons that have little to do with same-sex unions.In the last few years, political forces and a culture of relativism have replaced ‘I am my brother’s keeper’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself’ with ‘live and let live’ and ‘if it feels good, go ahead and do it.’The effects of no-fault divorce, adultery, and the nonchalant attitude toward marriage by some have done great harm to this sacred institution. How much longer do we put the desires of adults before the needs of kids? Why are we not doing more to lift up and strengthen the institution of marriage?”


Matt… In this entire editorial you don’t give Any reasons that have to do with same-sex unions. It’s "Marriages is about the welfare of children and if we let same-sex couples marry that will destroy marriage which would be a very bad thing for children. But don’t ask me why letting homosexuals get married will destroy marriage when we let heterosexual couples incapable of having children get married all the time because then I’ll have to say something like because….homosexuals! And then you’d call me a bigot and I’m not so stop trying to silence me!"

Take notice of all that "I Am Not A Bigot And Calling Me One Amounts To Censorship" hand waving at the end. His critics aren’t trying to silence him, he’s preemptively trying to silence his critics. This is "How Dare You Take Issue With My Sincerely Held Religious Beliefs You Anti-Christian Bigot!" It’s the only song they have left now apparently.

So, Birk demands that the LGBT community be his personal Jesus Christ – condemned to suffer for the relationship sins of heterosexuals? Sorry Matt, but you and other heterosexual supremacists should get your act together and stop punishing my relationship because you and your friends are fond of screwing around on your wives and divorcing them for younger models. But thanks for acknowledging the obvious: The failure of heterosexual families “have little to do with same-sex unions.”

It is interesting to see Birk cloak his bigotry in the guise of caring about the kids. However, what he is really doing is putting his own selfish desire to promote his backward religious beliefs over the welfare of children. How many thousands of children growing up in same-sex households will be made fun of, humiliated, and bullied because of this football star’s ignorant commentary? So, much for caring about the kids.

October 02, 2012 12:29 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Claiming his opinion “is not meant as an offense to any person or group,” Birk opines:

“Same-sex unions may not affect my marriage specifically, but it will affect my children — the next generation. Ideas have consequences, and laws shape culture. Marriage redefinition will affect the broader well-being of children and the welfare of society. As a Christian and a citizen, I am compelled to care about both.

I am speaking out on this issue because it is far too important to remain silent. People who are simply acknowledging the basic reality of marriage between one man and one woman are being labeled as “bigots” and “homophobic.” Aren’t we past that as a society?”

Well, Birk, I am offended and you are offensive. I married my partner a year ago and now — with no provocation — you decide to demean our relationship and others like it, even though you admit earlier that it has no affect on your own relationship. And it is fascinating that you claim that marriage equality has no bearing on your marriage, but it will affect your children?

Huh? Do you think before you write? I’m curious as to why you believe that you have raised kids who won’t be able to navigate the issue and have successful marriages if gays can marry. If my marriage doesn’t hurt you today, then it stands to reason that it won’t harm your children tomorrow. May I suggest a little more faith in your progeny? The only impact same-sex marriage will have on your children is if one of them turns out to be gay and cannot get married.

Sorry Birk: you are a bigot and you are homophobic. And, no, we aren’t past this as a society — because in this society self-righteous zealots like yourself impose your beliefs and turn others into second class citizens. When my family has the same rights as yours we will be past it. Until then, stop shoving your religion down my throat and forcing people to live according to your church’s rules. If I wanted to belong to your church I’d have a membership card.

To summarize, here is Birk’s argument in its purest form: I’m a heterosexual Christian and you’re not. This makes me superior. Therefore, you will be second class citizens. And you have no right to criticize me for harming you and your family.

Sorry, Birk. It doesn’t work that way.

October 02, 2012 12:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Birk sure did put together a nice statement opposing the idiotic redefinition of marriage

btw, Todd Akin has come out for adding criminal sanctions to DOMA, including jail time for anyone who performs a gay "marriage"

he currently leads by one point in polls of the Missouri Senate race

October 02, 2012 1:22 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Bad anonymous said "Birk sure did put together a nice statement opposing the idiotic redefinition of marriage".

And Romney is really leading in the presidential polls, its just all the polling firms showing Obama leading (including Fox news) are in the pocket of the Democrats.

October 02, 2012 1:34 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Bad anonymous's modus operandi:

Decide what you wish was true, pretend it is true.

October 02, 2012 1:37 PM  
Anonymous Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, UNdone!! said...

HARRISBURG, Pa. - October 2, 2012 (WPVI) -- A judge postponed Pennsylvania's controversial voter identification requirement on Tuesday, ordering the state not to enforce it in this year's presidential election but allowing it to go into full effect next year.

DOCUMENT: Read the entire decision on pacourts.us

The decision by Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson on the law requiring each voter to show a valid photo ID could be appealed to the state Supreme Court.

However, Simpson based his decision on guidelines given to him days ago by the high court justices, and it could easily be the final word on the law just five weeks before the Nov. 6 election.

One lawyer for the plaintiffs said it appeared to be a "win."

His ruling came after listening to two days of testimony about the state's eleventh-hour efforts to make it easier to get a valid photo ID. He also heard about long lines and ill-informed clerks at driver's license centers and identification requirements that made it hard for some registered voters to get a state-issued photo ID.

The 6-month-old law - now among the nation's toughest - has sparked a divisive debate over voting rights and become a high-profile political issue in the contest between President Barack Obama, a Democrat, and Republican nominee Mitt Romney, for Pennsylvania's prized 20 electoral votes.

Pennsylvania, traditionally considered one of the most valuable a presidential swing states, is showing a persistent lead for President Barack Obama in independent polls. As a result, the state has been virtually empty of presidential TV ads and off the candidates' beaten paths to more contested states in recent weeks.

Pollsters say an identification requirement could mean that fewer people end up voting and, in the past, lower turnouts have benefited Republicans in Pennsylvania. But Democrats have used their opposition to the law as a rallying cry, turning it into a valuable tool to motivate volunteers and campaign contributions while other opponents of the law, including labor unions, good government groups, the NAACP, AARP and the League of Women Voters, hold voter education drives and protest rallies.

The voter ID law was a signature accomplishment of Pennsylvania's Republican-controlled Legislature and its Republican governor, Tom Corbett. Republicans, long suspicious of ballot-box stuffing in the Democratic bastion of Philadelphia, justified it as a bulwark against any potential election fraud.

But Democrats objected furiously, accusing Republicans of using old-fashioned Jim Crow tactics to steal the White House from Obama by making it harder for young adults, the poor, minorities and the disabled to vote.

Protests, warnings of Election Day chaos and voter education drives ensued, as the law's opponents - including the AARP, the NAACP and labor unions - began collecting stories of people who had no valid photo ID and had encountered stiff barriers in their efforts to get one from state driver's license centers.

It was already a political lightning rod when a top state Republican lawmaker boasted to a GOP dinner in June that the ID requirement "is going to allow Gov. Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania."

October 02, 2012 2:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

" the hallowed Gallup poll of registered voters is moving in the same direction as the three likely voter polls out today"

That was yesterday. Today's a new day!

Today Gallup once again has Obama up by 6, with an Margin of Error of +/-3 points, no doubt seen as a "tie" by Mittless lemmings.

Other tidbits from Gallup.com:

Monthly U.S. Economic Confidence Up Sharply in September -- "PRINCETON, NJ -- The Gallup Economic Confidence Index averaged -19 in September, up from -27 in August and nearly matching the -17 seen in May, the highest monthly reading since the start of Gallup Daily tracking in 2008."

Obama Beats Romney as Better for Middle-Income Americans -- "PRINCETON, NJ -- "More Americans believe middle-income earners would be better off in four years if President Barack Obama is re-elected than if Mitt Romney wins, by 53% to 43%. The public also says lower-income Americans would be better off under an Obama presidency, while, by an even larger margin, they say upper-income Americans would do better under Romney."

October 02, 2012 2:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gallup is a poll of registered voters

alot of idiots registered last time due to the historic nature of the Obama candidacy

it can only be the first time once

and those idiots won't bother to vote this time, just like they never did before

you know, Bill Clinton says we can't blame Obama because no one could undo the damage that was done in just four years

and yet, in states where GOP governors took over things are looking up after 2

and don't even bring up states with Dem guvs, like California, Illinois and New York

Keynesian train wrecks

"In pundit circles, the hot talking point is that Obama may be spared defeat because things have been bad for so long that Americans may view the country’s condition as “the new normal.”

No president has been re-elected with unemployment above 7.4 percent; the unemployment rate is now 8.1 percent. No president has been re-elected with a significant majority of Americans saying the country is on the wrong track; that number’s between three-fifths and two-thirds of all Americans. No president’s been re-elected with the Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index below 90; it’s hovering around 70.

Most important, no president has been re-elected with a job-approval rating below 50 percent; as of yesterday, the Real Clear Politics poll of polls had Obama just below 49 percent.

By those lights, Obama should be finished, and many assumed he would be by now. But he isn’t. He leads by a couple of points in the national polls. Surely there must be an explanation for it, and the “new normal” theory seems as good an explanation as any.

And of course the president talks very little about his two undeniable legislative triumphs — the $868 billion stimulus and ObamaCare, which a clear majority of Americans still opposes.

We’re told that perhaps we should assume the public isn’t angry with Obama for his failures. But we’re told less frequently that we should note how little enthusiasm there is for his successes.

So this is the challenge for Mitt Romney in the first debate tomorrow night. He wants to make a good accounting of himself and his policies, even as he reminds people whose minds aren’t made up yet what has actually happened during the Obama presidency, and the lousy results of the president’s ruinously expensive attempts to address the national crisis.

Here’s the flip side of the “new normal”: People may not be inclined to hold Obama responsible for everything bad, but there’s nothing in the polls to suggest they will be charitable in their judgment of what he has done.

After a pretty awful month for Romney, the president goes into the debates only a couple of points up on his rival. That fact suggests the voters who will decide this election are still looking for reasons to go with the new guy.

A great many people may accept that there’s a “new normal,” but Romney has a real opportunity to persuade them that they don’t have to stick with the president who mired them in it."

October 02, 2012 2:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Everybody knows who dug the hole we've been digging out of since 2008, except Mittless lemmings who want to ensure redistribution of wealth continues to flow from poor to rich.

The GOP will do ANYTHING to win the election, even this:

Businessman who GOP cut ties with [LAST WEEK] at center of voter fraud probe in Florida

"The man at the center of a voter-fraud investigation in Florida is a longtime GOP operative with a pugnacious streak and a controversial history among Republicans and Democrats for his aggressive tactics in registering voters.

Nathan Sproul is a businessman who rose rapidly in Arizona politics, heading the local Christian Coalition and the state Republican Party in his mid-20s. A series of voter-fraud allegations against him in 2004 did not slow his ascent: Sproul and firms linked to him have been paid $21.2 million by the Republican Party, its candidates and affiliated interest groups over the past nine years.

But the man who once accused his Democratic critics of having “hysterical fits” now finds himself isolated politically. Nine Florida counties reported to the state that hundreds of voter-registration forms submitted by Sproul’s firm contained irregularities such as suspicious signatures and missing information. State law enforcement authorities are investigating the allegations. A spokesman for Sproul denied any improprieties, saying Sproul’s firm “has never tolerated even minimal violations of election law when registering voters.’’

Late last week, the party that Sproul has worked so hard to build severed ties with him. GOP officials in Florida, who had paid Sproul’s Strategic Allied Consulting $1.3 million this election cycle to help register and turn out voters, filed an election complaint against his firm with state officials.

Sproul and firms linked to him also were paid $1.6 million from state parties in North Carolina, Virginia and Colorado, and Mitt Romney’s campaign paid him $72,000 for “field consulting” in this election.

“We take the integrity of elections extremely seriously,’’ Sean Spicer, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee, said Monday. “We have zero tolerance for even the mere allegation of impropriety.”

Voter registration is an especially sensitive issue this year as a series of restrictive voter-access laws have become a flash point in the presidential campaign. President Obama’s supporters say the measures target minorities and other pro-Obama groups. Republicans say they are needed to combat voter fraud, and it was a law passed last year in Florida that enabled the probe of Sproul to move forward: It requires groups that register voters to put their organization’s names on every application they submit.

On Monday, Democrats on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform requested an interview with Sproul about the allegations.

Sproul, 40, declined to be interviewed by The Washington Post but a spokesman, David Leibowitz, said in an e-mailed statement that Sproul’s firm is cooperating with election authorities and “will continue to do everything within our power to uncover any unethical or illegal activity in Florida.”

October 02, 2012 4:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“Obviously, everyone at [Sproul’s firm] is disappointed by the end of a years-long fruitful relationship” with the Republican Party, Leibowitz added, “but they understand why this was done. There can be no distractions right now.”

Sproul, who has operated a network of at least five Arizona-based consulting firms since 2003, said Republican National Committee officials asked him to establish a new firm to shield the party from earlier allegations against him, according to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel. Strategic Allied Consulting was incorporated in June in Virginia. Sproul’s name is not listed on corporate documents.

Spicer said he is “unaware that that ever occurred.”

[< eye roll >]

Sproul grew up in Arizona Republican politics. He moved to Tempe at age 2 and graduated from Pillsbury Baptist Bible College in Minnesota in 1994, according to a 2004 Associated Press profile of him. After briefly interning in Washington for then-Rep. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), he returned to Arizona, where he headed the Christian Coalition and, starting in 1999, the state Republican Party.

“It was pretty obvious he was talented,” said Randy Pullen, the Arizona GOP chairman from 2007 to 2011, who praised Sproul for his hard-charging tactics and effectiveness. “You can’t say that he’s milquetoast.”

Several Arizona Republicans said Sproul is known for his zeal in bringing voters into the Republican camp.

“Nathan was one of those who was willing to do or say anything possible to get a job and get the job done,” said Sean McCaffrey, who took over as state party executive director in 2007. He said he kept files of reports of complaints in the media or to the state party against Sproul and said he would not support party candidates who worked with Sproul.

In 2004, former canvassers for Sproul’s firm came forward in four states alleging that they were told to register only Republicans, with some saying that registration forms completed by Democrats were thrown out. The [Bush] Justice Department investigated the allegations but did not bring charges, according to congressional testimony.

At the time, Sproul accused Democrats of “having hysterical fits about how well we did our job” and showing their own “lack of integrity” by feigning anger when “they do the exact same thing every day of the week.”

In the statement Monday, Sproul’s spokesman, Leibowitz, called the 2004 allegations “isolated instances” and said the company was cleared of any wrongdoing."
by the Bush DOJ.

October 02, 2012 4:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"btw, Todd Akin has come out" and refused to quit his Senate race even though, according to FOX News: Romney calls on Rep. Akin to drop Senate bid over 'rape' comments

"...Romney released a statement late Tuesday saying: "As I said yesterday, Todd Akin's comments were offensive and wrong and he should very seriously consider what course would be in the best interest of our country. Today, his fellow Missourians urged him to step aside, and I think he should accept their counsel and exit the Senate race." ..."

October 02, 2012 4:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the Obama campaign was hit with a quite a wallop this evening when NBC released fresh poll results showing Obama's lead in national polls is only 3%, half what it was in the last NBC poll and right dead-on within the margin of error

reportedly, pandemonium has broken out at the White House with aides rushing from office to office screaming at each other as everyone desperately tries to position themselves so they won't become the scapegoat who lost the election for the Democrats

"Everybody knows who dug the hole we've been digging out of since 2008,"

actually, this is a lie Barry O tells in his commercials

no serious economist believes that the Bush tax cuts caused "the hole"

even if it did, Obama is planning to keep most of them, or so he says

he only wants to tax rich people more-- and it doesn't amount to much

if Sir Barry gets his wish, 460 billion will be raised from the wealthy over ten years and 10 trllion will still be added to the deficit

does that sound like digging out of a hole in the Orwellian world of the gay agenda?

"except Mittless lemmings who want to ensure redistribution of wealth continues to flow from poor to rich"

if the poor have no money, the definition of poverty, how can this non-money be redistributed to the wealthy

my guess is that not stealing as much from someone is now called a gift in the Orwellian world of the gay agenda

"...Romney released a statement late Tuesday saying: "As I said yesterday, Todd Akin's comments were offensive and wrong and he should very seriously consider what course would be in the best interest of our country. Today, his fellow Missourians urged him to step aside, and I think he should accept their counsel and exit the Senate race."

if the people of Missouri want Todd Akin to represent them in Congress, Mitt "I'm wearing my Flip-flops" Romney should mind his own flippin' business

October 02, 2012 7:20 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Bad anonymous keeps clinging to the false hope that any one poll showing an Obama lead that is within that poll's margin of error means his guy might be tied with Obama. Statistically speaking that's true given only one poll but when several polls are averaged the sample size is a great deal larger and the margin of error proportionately lower. So this means that while it would be correct for bad anonymous to say with respect to only the NBC poll Obama's lead of 3 points might actually be a tie with Romney (or a much larger lead for Obama, which you'll never hear bad anonymous admit) the same is not true when looking at the RCP average of polls which shows an Obama lead of 3.3%. Because the average of polls has a much larger sample size the margin of error is much lower than what it is with one poll so one can statistically speaking say Obama has a real lead. In other words based on the RCP average of polls the 3.3% Obama lead is accurate with a margin of error of perhaps 1% (If I'm bored later I'll calculate it out).

Further, when bad anonymous sees a single poll showing a typical 3 or 4 percent Obama lead with a 3 or 4 percent margin of error he always argues that this means the race is "neck and neck" when it could just as easily mean Obama actually has a 6 or 8 point lead on Romney.

It would be valid for bad anonymous to claim the race is neck and neck if one poll showed Obama with a lead and the next poll showed Romney with a lead and the polls were always alternating like that but unfortunately for Bad anonymous the polls aren't alternating, they consistently show Obama with a lead and once again statistically speaking when poll after poll shows Obama with a 2 to 8 point lead there is no credibility to bad anonymous's claim that "the race is neck and neck because Obama's lead in poll "C" is within the margin of error".

When poll after poll shows an Obama lead any honest statistician will tell you this accurately shows Obama really is leading and the individual margin of error for a single poll does not apply.

Polls over time naturally fluctuate a bit so every time Obama's lead shrinks a bit bad anonymous fatuously announces "Obama's campaign is in freefall!" or "The bottom has fallen out of the Obama campaign!" but the next time the fluctuation has Obama's lead increasing bad anonymous pretends it hasn't happened. So we have the situation where we see bad anonymous repeatedly claiming his guy is taking the lead but he hever actually does.

Whether its the RCP average of a number of polls or looking at the average of, Gallup poll, over several days or weeks we see Obama is consistently in the lead and one cannot honestly claim the race is really neck and neck due to a single polls margin of error because the aggregate polling number has a much lower margin of error than any individual poll. The race hasn't been neck and neck for several months, Obama is consistently leading by 3, 4, 5 percentage points.

October 02, 2012 7:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

gee, it's really important to you that everyone think Obama is winning

why?

if it's true, we'll find out soon enough

I think you have a lot of fear that the Obama error is drawing to a close

and want to enjoy the socialist moment while you can

your fear is not irrational

the Post admitted that Romney is in a dead heat

why can't you?

btw, tonight, on the eve of the debates, Biden admitted that the middle class has been "buried" for the last four years

gee, I wonder who was President the last four years

of course, they're already saying it's all Bush's fault

and I guess credit for the fact that America was in full employment for all but the last four months of Bush's presidency goes to Bill Clinton

and that great surplus Clinton had- it was the work of Bush the father

then there was Reagan, just taking credit for all Carter did

all this leads to an inescapable conclusion

someday, after Obama is long gone, the economy will boom and it will all be due to Obama wonderful policies

that being the case, let's just get a jump on this new day and throw him out in November!!

October 02, 2012 9:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

good news for Priya:

a new poll of likely voters out tonight has the race tied

it's all over now

hope you enjoyed America's little experiment with socialism

turns out it doesn't work

October 02, 2012 11:17 PM  
Anonymous double down Barry said...

gloom has enveloped the Obama debate prep team as his polling numbers continue to deteriorate

four LIKELY VOTER polls released in the last day and all show Obama losing ground

3-3-1-0, which averages to less than a two point lead

and this is before the public heard Biden admit that the middle class has been "buried" for the last four years

Obama has sought options and is reportedly distraught that there is now no way to remove Biden from the ticket

Hillary apparently had lo lock herself in a hotel room because she couldn't stop laughing

October 03, 2012 6:20 AM  
Anonymous David S. Fishback said...

Anon,

You say that Matt Birk was responding to Zach Wahls. If that is the case, then he responds with an abstraction in an attempt to counter Wahls' real life story. Evidence trumps abstractions that are not supported by evidence.

I agree that the election is not over. What is interesting is that while many national polls show it still very close, the battleground states show President Obama starting to pull away with numbers that will be very difficult for Governor Romney to overcome.

October 03, 2012 7:02 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A lead is a lead is a lead.

Here's what OnlineWSJ says about yesterday's NBC/WSJ poll showing President Obama 3 points above Romney.

"President Barack Obama heads into the first presidential debate with a narrow lead over Mitt Romney in a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News nationwide poll that illustrates each candidate's strengths and weaknesses entering the campaign's final stretch.

The survey shows the race tightening, with Mr. Obama now leading 49% to 46% among likely voters, down slightly from the five-point lead he enjoyed in mid-September, just after the two parties' conventions. The survey of likely voters had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.4 percentage points.

Mr. Obama maintains commanding leads among Hispanics, young voters and women, with his share of the crucial Hispanic bloc appearing only to widen. A whopping 71% of likely Hispanic voters said they plan to vote for Mr. Obama.

Mr. Romney holds a strong margin of support among white voters and men, and he appears to be gaining a little strength among the college educated. His strengths there, though, aren't sufficient at this point to offset weaknesses elsewhere.

Mr. Romney's challenge as he prepares for the first of three debates is whether he can chip into Mr. Obama's strongholds, particularly women. The question for Mr. Obama is whether he can translate his support among Hispanics, the young and African-Americans into actual votes, while minimizing the erosion of support for him among white voters.

The poll of 1,000 registered voters found 832 who were likely to vote in November. Mr. Obama led by a wider margin, 51% to 44%, among all registered voters surveyed, a number that is less indicative of what voters will do on Election Day. That lead was up from 50% to 44% in mid-September.

...The poll contained signs of promise for the Obama campaign.

A majority of Americans still think the country is on the wrong track, but a larger number—57%, up from 50% in August—say the economy is improving. Just 13%, the lowest number since Mr. Obama took office, think the economy will get worse in the next four years.

Voters gave Mr. Obama higher marks over his rival on who has the clearer message and plan for what he would do if elected. A large majority, 65%, said Mr. Obama knows what he plans to do, compared with 52% who said that of Mr. Romney. The president also outpaced Mr. Romney on which candidate is seen as better prepared to lead over the next four years.

The president has preserved or strengthened his traction with voters since the summer on who would deal better with health care, Medicare, immigration and taxes. At the same time, Mr. Romney has lost ground since July on whom voters see as more likely to look out for the middle class, a core theme for both campaigns.

Mr. Romney has gained new ground on a number of fronts, including handling of foreign policy and dealing with the economy. Voters preferred the GOP challenger by healthy margins on how he would deal with the federal budget deficit and the economic challenge posed by China.

The poll found a strengthening of support for Mr. Romney among white men and college-educated voters.

But in a warning sign, Mr. Romney's support among likely Hispanic voters came in at just 21%. Republicans have widely predicted serious trouble for the Romney campaign if he can't get his support among Hispanics above 30%.

"The Hispanic numbers in this poll are a significant cautionary note, not just to Romney but across the Republican Party," said Mr. McInturff, the Republican pollster.

For the first time, the poll also tested voters on a ballot that included Green Party candidate Jill Stein and Libertarian Gary Johnson, both of whom will appear on most state ballots.

With those names included, Mr. Obama led Mr. Romney, 48%-43%, among likely voters, with Mr. Johnson fetching 3% and Ms. Stein 2%."

October 03, 2012 8:47 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I agree that the election is not over. What is interesting is that while many national polls show it still very close, the battleground states show President Obama starting to pull away with numbers that will be very difficult for Governor Romney to overcome."

as usual, you're right, David

I'm just trying to counter the hyperbolic nonsense from the other side

I think a major part of the liberal strategy is to try and convince everyone that Romney is hopeless

Ohio is definitely the biggest problem but it's closer than portrayed

the debates this year may have more impact than usual

incumbents always have something of an advantage because for them to lose, a lot of people have to admit they made a mistake

the racial element may intensify that tendency as well

most Americans, including even some that didn't vote for Obama, feel proud of our country for eliminating the racial obstacles to the highest office in the land

not many want to concude it was a mistake

hopefully we'll get over it

George Will made a great point yesterday in his column

when Frank Robinson became the first black manager of a baseball team, that didn't change things much

history was forever changed, however, a few years later when he was fired

it was at that point that blacks were fully included

see the parallel?

October 03, 2012 10:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not long ago, Independents were the go-to demographic for determining who would win elections. How the Independents swung, so too would the election.

In 2008, Barack Obama carried Independents in Ohio by 8 points and in Florida by 7 points. That victory among Independents contributed a great deal to his 2.8-point win in Florida and his 4.5 point win in Ohio. A victory by Romney among Independents could tilt both key states in his favor.

Curiously, Independents seem to be mostly ignored this election cycle, and their presidential vote preference is almost unanimously ignored by the MSM. Instead, “women” have replaced Independents as the key demographic. This emphasis and sudden fascination conveniently ties in nicely with the Democrats’ fictitious “War on Women” meme.

In both Ohio and Florida, Barack Obama’s “clear leads” all come from heavy over-sampling of Democrats, not from winning the crucial Indie vote. In fact, most of the polls that show Obama with big leads also show Romney handily winning Independent voters. Yet, somehow, Obama manages to increase his performance from 2008 despite Independents now opposing him. Let's take a look at how Romney is competing among Independents in recent polls:

Ohio – Leads Among Independents

Ohio Newspaper Organization – Romney +28

CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac – Romney +1

American Research Group – Romney +16

Fox News – Romney +4

We Ask America – Romney +3

Public Policy Polling – Romney +2

Florida - Leads Among Independents

CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac – Romney +3

Gravis Marketing – Romney +4

We Ask America – Romney +2

American Research Group – Romney +1

Florida Times Union – Romney +4

Fox News – Obama +2

Remember, these are states Obama won by small margins in 2008, primarily by winning Independents by 7 and 8 points. If Barack Obama were winning with Independents in every poll, it’s clear the media would be talking about it just as they did, to the point of annoyance, four years ago.

Independents make up roughly one third of the electorate, and one would think they might get a little attention this time of year just as they do every other election year. If Romney turns the Independent vote his way like these polls suggest, his chances of winning turnout in even Florida and Ohio are excellent. But the reality is that the way Independents are now voting simply doesn’t mix with the media’s tidy narrative that Obama is running away with the election in key battleground states.

October 03, 2012 1:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

according to the current narrative being promoted by the liberal MSM, Romney's candidacy is hopeless with the elderly and Hispanics

why then is he so close in Florida?

could it be the media got their lying mixed-up?

"WASHINGTON -- As President Barack Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney prepare to face off in their first televised debate Wednesday night, a new batch of polls shows a narrowing in Obama's lead in two critical battleground states.

Getting the most attention are three new polls conducted by NBC News, The Wall Street Journal and Marist College that indicate a tightening race in Florida and Virginia, two must-win states for Romney."

October 03, 2012 1:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Independents make up roughly one third of the electorate"

Oh goodie! Breitbart.com spin! Unlike them, most of us comprehend the difference between "independent" voters and "undecided" voters.

One third of the electorate *is* independent, but polls do not show one third of the electorate is currently "undecided" in this year's presidential race.

In fact, EVERY POLL shows only a few percentage points of the electorate is undecided now.

Even your favorite pollster gets it:

"Wednesday, October 03, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows President Obama attracting support from 49% of voters nationwide, while Mitt Romney earns the vote from 47%. One percent (1%) prefers some other candidate, and three percent (3%) are undecided."

October 03, 2012 1:55 PM  
Anonymous viva la constitution said...

"One third of the electorate *is* independent, but polls do not show one third of the electorate is currently "undecided" in this year's presidential race."

well, the independents support Romney

as you will learn in early November, pollsters are inappropriately assuming Dems will vote in the same proportion they did in 2008

that was an historic year and should not be used as a template if one actually wants to know how the election will go

I'm sure TTFers will want to head to church this Sunday to support free speech:

"It’s that time of year, again. On October 7, 2012, hundreds of Christian pastors are going to be taking to their pulpits with overtly political messages in an effort to challenge a restrictive Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) tax code. The calculated event, “Pulpit Freedom Sunday,” is an annual initiative that seeks to rally believers against the government’s regulations on pastoral political endorsements."

October 03, 2012 2:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Breitbart.com has completely ignored today's NBC/WSJ poll in the swing state of Ohio.

Among the interesting findings of the voting preferences of 931 likely voters in Ohio:

"If November's presidential election were held today, whom would you support if the candidates are:

Barack Obama and Joe Biden, the Democrats - 51%
Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, the Republicans - 43%
Other - 1
Undecided - 4

Would you say you strongly support somewhat support , or do you think you might vote differently on Election Day?

Strongly support - 86%
Somewhat support - 12%
Might vote differently - 2%

Do you consider yourself a: (party identification)

Democrat - 36%
Republican - 31%
Independent - 32%
Other - 1%"

It's plain to see one third of the voters in OH consider themselves to be "independent voters," however, most of them say their vote is not in play or likely to change.

Poor you and Breitbart for trying to spin your way out of Romney's failure to catch on, even with all that undisclosed Citizen's United money from his supporters among the 1%.

When is Mittless going to show us his income tax returns from the Bush years??

October 03, 2012 3:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

you know it's hard, if you're a Romney supporter, to look at the latest poll numbers

and not get a big ol' smile on your face

Obama's position is clearly deteriorating

rapidly

Friday, the unemployment report comes out

tonight, Obama will blow it

I'll tell you a secret about Ohio

not a lot of creative minds there, and they're not too swift

they will vote whatever way they perceive everyone else is going to vote

they're a status quo kinda place

as soon as national polls show Romney in the lead (and you know that's where we're headed), Ohio will quickly step in line

they're a status quo kinda place

October 03, 2012 8:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

CNN post-debate among registered voters:

67% say Romney won

David Axelrod: oh, Romney's just been practicing

October 03, 2012 11:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the historian who likes to cite how events played out in prior elections:

Polls: Kerry won debate
NEWSWEEK


"October 03, 2004

A majority of Americans believe Sen. John Kerry won the first presidential debate of the 2004 campaign, putting him in a virtual tie with President Bush, according to polls released Saturday by Newsweek and the Los Angeles Times.

Newsweek reported that Thursday's debate in Miami, Florida, had "erased the lead" that Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have held over Kerry and running mate Sen. John Edwards since the Republican National Convention in New York.

Newsweek's post-convention poll had Bush leading among registered voters 54 percent to 43 percent. Its post-debate poll had 47 percent choosing Kerry-Edwards, and 45 percent for Bush-Cheney. Two percent said they would vote for Ralph Nader and his running mate, Peter Camejo."


We all remember how well that stellar first debate performance turned out for Kerry.

October 04, 2012 9:46 AM  
Anonymous cock-a-doodle-doooo!!!! said...

seems like just yesterday that it seemed as if Obama was a shoo-in to win re-election

I so fondly remember that time

wait a minute...that was yesterday!!

by are those rich Republicans smirking now

if you're a Dem, as we know who you are, you can look forward to a pretty damn depressing Oktoberfest season

but don't despair

the election, like the debate, will only last a day

of course, the memories will last forever

October 04, 2012 4:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon, I am an Obama supporter and I was glad to see Mitt Romney actually show himself to be competent last night. He presented himself well, he was articulate and even passionate at times.

It was a good strategy to baffle his debate opponent by advocating positions that were exactly opposite of those that got him the nomination. He sent out a few dog-whistles to the base, but generally he tried to act as if he would encourage bipartisanship and moderation, support for small businesses and the forty-seven percent, uh, the middle class, and other things that until last night he had opposed.

It is best to have a contest between two equally intelligent candidates who express distinctly different positions on the issues. It was a relief to see that Romney is not always the bumbling gaffe-generator he has been through the campaign. I expect that this encounter will toughen Obama up for the next debate, as well.

In sum, Romney's performance was not depressing to me as a hardcore Obama supporter at all, I hope that this will kick off an honest debate on the issues, with fact-checking and excellent presentations from both candidates so the American people can choose the president they think will lead them best.

October 04, 2012 4:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I hope that this will kick off an honest debate on the issues, with fact-checking and excellent presentations from both candidates so the American people can choose the president they think will lead them best."

oh, you don't have to worry about that

Romney put Barry on notice last night that he won't get away with anymore lying

Romney directly and forcefully confronted Barry with the lies he's told and Barry just shuffled his feet, looked down and sadly shook his head, acknowledging his misbehavior

after the embarassment of last night, maybe Obama has learned not to lie anyomre

October 04, 2012 5:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

PBS Statement Regarding October 3 Presidential Debate

ARLINGTON, VA – October 4, 2012 – We are very disappointed that PBS became a political target in the Presidential debate last night. Governor Romney does not understand the value the American people place on public broadcasting and the outstanding return on investment the system delivers to our nation. We think it is important to set the record straight and let the facts speak for themselves.

The federal investment in public broadcasting equals about one one-hundredth of one percent of the federal budget. Elimination of funding would have virtually no impact on the nation’s debt. Yet the loss to the American public would be devastating.

A national survey by the bipartisan research firms of Hart Research and American Viewpoint in 2011 found that over two-thirds of American voters (69%) oppose proposals to eliminate government funding of public broadcasting, with Americans across the political spectrum against such a cut.

As a stated supporter of education, Governor Romney should be a champion of public broadcasting, yet he is willing to wipe out services that reach the vast majority of Americans, including underserved audiences, such as children who cannot attend preschool and citizens living in rural areas.

For more than 40 years, Big Bird has embodied the public broadcasting mission – harnessing the power of media for the good of every citizen, regardless of where they live or their ability to pay. Our system serves as a universally accessible resource for education, history, science, arts and civil discourse.

Over the course of a year, 91% of all U.S. television households tune in to their local PBS station. In fact, our service is watched by 81% of all children between the ages of 2-8.

Each day, the American public receives an enduring and daily return on investment that is heard, seen, read and experienced in public media broadcasts, apps, podcasts and online – all for the cost of about $1.35 per person per year.

Earlier in 2012, a Harris Interactive poll confirmed that Americans consider PBS the most trusted public institution and the second most valuable use of public funds, behind only national defense, for the 9th consecutive year.

A key thing to remember is that public television and radio stations are locally owned and community focused and they are experts in working efficiently to make limited resources produce results. In fact, for every $1.00 of federal funding invested, they raise an additional $6.00 on their own – a highly effective public-private partnership.

Numerous studies -- including one requested by Congress earlier this year -- have stated categorically that while the federal investment in public broadcasting is relatively modest, the absence of this critical seed money would cripple the system and bring its services to an end.

October 04, 2012 9:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"the absence of this critical seed money would cripple the system and bring its services to an end"

cable and internet streaming have eliminated whatever jusitifcation there is for Federal subsidy

we don't what to borrow from the Chinese for this

the PBS moderator asked for specifics and g0t more than he bargained for

stop whining

October 04, 2012 9:38 PM  
Anonymous I love to crow!! said...

I bet Barry can't wait for the unemployment report to be released in the morning so everyone can see how great he's handling the economy

the panic in the halls from Tuesday has been replaced by a sullen silence now

out of answers, out of excuses, out of time and energy

Barack awaits the end

last night's funniest moment:

"WASHINGTON -- Of all the moments that left Democrats scratching their collective head following President Barack Obama's debate performance Wednesday night, his comment on Social Security appeared to sting the most.

When presented with the opportunity to contrast his vision with that of his opponent, Obama took a pass, going so far as to say he didn't think it was an issue of disagreement.

"I suspect that on Social Security, we've got a somewhat similar position," Obama said."

October 04, 2012 10:11 PM  
Anonymous NEA lashes out in frustration said...

A Philadelphia high school sophomore says she didn’t want to go back to Charles Carroll High after a geometry teacher ridiculed her for wearing a pink Mitt Romney T-shirt during the school’s uniform-free dress-down day last week.

According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, 16-year-old Samantha Pawlucy was told Carroll High is a “Democratic school,” and that wearing a pro-Romney-Ryan shirt is analogous to the teacher, who is black, wearing a KKK shirt.

"The teacher told me to get out of the classroom, I said 'no,'" Pawlucy said. "She told me to take off my shirt and said that she has another one if I need one. And then the teacher asked me … 'are your parents Republican?' I said, 'I don't know.'”

The teacher later apologized and insisted she was joking, but commented to the class next day that she could no longer crack jokes in class because a student was trying to get her in trouble.

October 05, 2012 7:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

good news for two friends of old radical hippie types

first Barry O:

"WASHINGTON, Oct 5 (Reuters) - The U.S. unemployment rate dropped to a near four-year low of 7.8 percent in September, a potential boost to President Barack Obama's re-election bid.

The Labor Department said on Friday the unemployment rate, a key focus in the race for the White House, dropped by 0.3 percentage point to its lowest point since January 2009.

A survey of households from which the jobless rate is derived showed 873,000 job gains last month, the most since June 1983. The drop in unemployment came even as Americans come back into the labor force to resume the hunt for work. The workforce had shrank in the prior two months."

then, a Manson family guy:

"LOS ANGELES -- A parole board panel has recommended the release of a former Charles Manson follower imprisoned for 40 years for a double murder Manson engineered.

The recommendation that came Thursday on the eve of Davis' 70th birthday in his 27th parole hearing."

October 05, 2012 9:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"good news for two friends of old radical hippie types"

The drop in the unemployment rate is good for the entire nation, Anon. But your comment makes it pretty clear you would you have preferred the unemployment rate to climb some more so Romney could have some "good news" instead of your fellow citizens who have long been unemployed.

What a good MitchMcConnell lockstep marcher you are!! Do you take pride in wishing for unemployment to worsen so Romney might win?

I see you are mute so far but Rasmussen still has Romney trailing Obama by 2 points today. Still waiting for the bump!

Maybe all those prognosticators pointing out how debate performances don't matter very much in campaigns are right, especially with "flubs" < wink > like this:

Romney's original 47% statement:

""There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what," Romney said in the video. "There are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it."

"Forty-seven percent of Americans pay no income tax," Romney said, and that his role "is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.""


Romney's original Etch-a-Sketch attempt:

"Initially, Romney defended his view, telling reporters at a news conference shortly after the video was posted that his remarks were "not elegantly stated" and that they were spoken "off the cuff." He didn't disavow them"

Romney's seventeen day later Etch-a-Sketch attempt:

"Well, clearly in a campaign, with hundreds if not thousands of speeches and question-and-answer sessions, now and then you're going to say something that doesn't come out right," Romney said. "In this case, I said something that's just completely wrong."

He added: "And I absolutely believe, however, that my life has shown that I care about 100 percent and that's been demonstrated throughout my life. And this whole campaign is about the 100 percent."


Yeah we can tell how much Romney cares about 100 of Americans with comments like this:

"I'm not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there."

And we can tell how well you "get" what's going on with the middle class these days with comments like this:

"I should tell my story. I'm also unemployed."

< eye roll >

October 05, 2012 10:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"But your comment makes it pretty clear you would you have preferred the unemployment rate to climb some more so Romney could have some "good news" instead of your fellow citizens who have long been unemployed."

hmmmm..I looked again and didn't see that anywhere in my comment

say, you haven't been smoking a joint this early, have you?

"I see you are mute so far but Rasmussen still has Romney trailing Obama by 2 points today. Still waiting for the bump!"

people vote emotionally when they get into the ballot box

Obama embarassed the nation on Wednesday night

to the world we are saying, this mumbling bumbler is the best we can do

""There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what," Romney said in the video."

right now, this statement by Romney is the center of Obama's campaign

it won't be enough because actions speak louder than words

Romney contributed 20 times as much to charity as Obama last year and stories abound about help he has given to struggling families through his charity work

but the biggest gift the 1 %, the 47%, the 99% and the 100% could get would be a competent President who knows how to responsibly create an environment that will allow our economy to grow

The experiment is over, trickle down government has failed the 1 %, the 47%, the 99% and the 100%

and the look on Obama's face Wednesday night told America that he knows that better than anyone

and thank you for sharing, Aunt unBealievable

October 05, 2012 10:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here we go -- Romney's post debate bounce begins

"A Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Thursday after Wednesday's first presidential debate showed that Romney gained ground and is now viewed positively by 51 percent of voters. Obama's favorability rating remained unchanged at 56 percent."

October 05, 2012 10:30 AM  
Anonymous cock-a-doodle-doobie!! said...

don't wanna scare any true blue liberal nutcakes

but today's polls, the first post-debate ones taken, show Romney leading in Florida, Virginia and Ohio

maybe if you guys go get stoned, you can forget it all

worked for you at Woodstock, right?

October 05, 2012 1:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oh my, there goes the electoral college

I can just see the hair-pulling, teeth-grinding and screams of despair from Saskatchewan Kid

Obama-style socialism is headed for the ash heap of history

October 05, 2012 1:50 PM  
Anonymous Bounce or "statistical noise?" said...

Hmmmm

That's a nice little bounce or is it "statistical noise?" And if it is a bounce, how high will it be and how long will it last?

Rasmussen Reports: Daily Swing State Tracking Poll
Swing State Daily Tracking: Obama 50%, Romney 45%


"Friday, October 05, 2012

The full Swing State tracking update offers Rasmussen Reader subscribers a combined view of the results from 11 key states won by President Obama in 2008 and thought to be competitive in 2012. The states collectively hold 146 Electoral College votes and include Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin. If you do not already have a Rasmussen Reader account, subscribe now.

Platinum Members have access to detailed demographic information.

In the 11 swing states, the president earns 50% support to Mitt Romney’s 45%. Two percent (2%) are undecided.

This is now the fifth day in a row that the president has been at the 50% mark or better, the only time either candidate has done that well in this survey. But Romney now earns his highest level of support this year.

In 2008, Obama won these states by a combined margin of 53% to 46%, virtually identical to his national margin.

Nationally, Obama is slightly ahead in the
Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll:

"Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

Friday, October 05, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows President Obama attracting support from 49% of voters nationwide, while Mitt Romney earns the vote from 47%. One percent (1%) prefers some other candidate, and three percent (3%) are undecided. See daily tracking history.

These results are based upon nightly interviews and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. As a result, only about one-third of the interviews for today’s update were conducted after the presidential debate. The single night of polling conducted after the debate did show some improvement for Romney, but it remains to be seen whether that will continue or if it was merely statistical noise. Sunday morning’s update will be the first national polling based entirely upon post-debate interviews."

October 05, 2012 2:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the 11 states are aritrary and meaningless

the states that matter, and there is wide agreement on this, are Florida, Ohio and Virginia

polls out today show Romney ahead in all three

most dramatic is Ohio where Obama was solidly ahead right before the poll

as I explained the other day, Ohio voters are followers who will go with whoever they think is going to win

the debate flipped that expectation dramatically

btw, I can tell who will win those other eight states, they are already a lock

let me know

October 05, 2012 3:45 PM  
Anonymous Debate Etch-a-Sketch already?!? said...

Top Romney Adviser: States Will Have To Cover People With Pre-Existing Conditions Under President Romney

"After the first presidential debate at the University of Denver in Colorado on Wednesday night, one of Mitt Romney’s top advisers acknowledged that, as a result Romney’s plan to repeal Obamacare, people with pre-existing medical conditions would likely be unable to purchase insurance.

The admission directly contradicts the GOP candidate’s claim during the debate that “pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan” — a contention Romney has repeated on the trail and that his campaign has repeatedly walked back.

“With respect to pre-existing conditions, what Governor Romney has said is for those with continuous coverage, he would continue to make sure that they receive their coverage,” said Eric Fehrnstrom, referring to existing laws which require insurance companies to sell coverage to people who already have insurance, or within 90 days of losing their employer coverage.

Pressed by TPM’s Evan McMorris-Santoro, Fehrnstrom said those who currently lack coverage because they have pre-existing conditions would need their states to implement their own laws — like Romney’s own Massachusetts health care law — that ban insurance company from discriminating against sick people.

“We’d like to see states do what Massachusetts did,” Fehrnstrom said. “In Massachusetts we have a ban on pre-existing conditions.”

Romney’s plan, of course, became the model for Obamacare — a fact Obama happily reminded Romney and debate watchers Wednesday night."

October 05, 2012 4:33 PM  
Anonymous Forward!! said...

It's going to be fun to Romney's poll numbers bump up from his debate performance Wednesday night and then disappear under Obama's poll numbers bump from the unemployment numbers released yesterday.

Everybody except the GOP seems to be thrilled the unemployment rate has dropped below 8% for the first time since the Great Bush Recession.

And what's this, more good economic news for President Obama?

"Stocks ended narrowly mixed Friday, erasing an earlier rally fueled by the monthly government jobs report, but all three major indexes still posted their first positive week in three and the Dow finished at its best level since December 2007."

Have fun today posting comments today. I'm headed to a swing state to canvass for Obama.

October 06, 2012 8:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Romney’s plan, of course, became the model for Obamacare — a fact Obama happily reminded Romney and debate watchers Wednesday night"

I joyously watched that entire debate and did not see one moment, not one, where Obama seemed to be doing anything happily

Romney carefully explained to Barry that he supports allowing states to fromulate their own health care policies

"It's going to be fun to Romney's poll numbers bump up from his debate performance Wednesday night and then disappear under Obama's poll numbers bump from the unemployment numbers released yesterday"

wow, only took four years

if we re-elect Obama, do we get to relive it all again?

will unemployment go through the roof while he works on some other liberal agenda crap and then right before the next election, when we're deciding between Marc Rubio and Al Franken, the unemployment rate will magically return to what it was when Barry took office?

don't be surprised if the numbers are adjusted next month

it happens all the time, and there's alot of illogical stuff in these numbers

does anybody really believe we would have had this much unemployment this long under any competent President?

Obama promised to clean the mess up in three years and now is crowing that it's back where he started in four?

I only hope Biden starts rambling about how wonderful 7.8% unemployment is on Thursday night

it's not going to be pretty

if you have small children, have them leave the room

"Everybody except the GOP seems to be thrilled the unemployment rate has dropped below 8% for the first time since the Great Bush Recession."

oh yeah, what a thrill

Mr. Change-you-can-believe-in is now bragging that he changed nothing but has returned to the state the nation was in when they voted to change parties because everthing was such a mess

huh?

"And what's this, more good economic news for President Obama?

"Stocks ended narrowly mixed Friday, erasing an earlier rally fueled by the monthly government jobs report, but all three major indexes still posted their first positive week in three and the Dow finished at its best level since December 2007."

they're all excited because the odds of a pro-growth Romney administration increased dramtically this week

you might want to get some stats and compare the unemployment rate in states with GOP governors vs the rate in states with Dem governors

or, if that's too complicated, compare the unemloyment rate in Texas, Virginia and Ohio to California, Illnois and New York

on Thursday night, Paul Ryan will

"Have fun today posting comments today. I'm headed to a swing state to canvass for Obama."

Virginia?

Obama is a lost cause there

you'd have better luck trying to scare seniors with your lies in Florida

Barack Obama, our national embarassment:

the guy who thought he didn't have to prepare for the debate because he had it all wrapped up

the guy who campaigned on change and now tries to be re-elected by boasting that unemployment is just where it was when he started

can you imagine if someone had told you four years ago that you'd be thrilled by such a situation?

how Obama has deflated our expectations

for that alone he should be thrown out

and count the White House china when he leaves

remember what happened with Bill Clinton

October 06, 2012 9:41 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the latest poll reporting this morning on RCP, which includes yesterday, has Romney up by two among likely voters nationally

he also leads in Florida, Virginia and Ohio

meanwhile, Mr Hopey-Changey criss-crosses the country telling everyone he's done a great job because unemployment is the same as it was when he got here

Earth to Barry: you campaigned to bring change because everything was so horrible

if you didn't change the horrible situation you campaigned against, why should anyone vote for you?

why?

October 06, 2012 11:05 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home