2012 US Election -- Round 2

[Gerald McGrew]

Funny as hell to see CES now defending Mormon missions. Further and further up the GOP's ass he goes...

Gotta wonder what the view's like from that side of the magic underpants.

[Coito ergo sum]

Funny as hell to see CES now defending Mormon missions. Further and further up the GOP's ass he goes...

Gotta wonder what the view's like from that side of the magic underpants.

I haven't defended Mormon missions. I just don't buy into the hypocrisy that you folks swallow like candy -- that getting deferments from Vietnam is bad for Romney because he went on his Missions, but you don't have any issue with Biden's 5 deferments. Obama never served in the military either, but, again, that's fine with you, right?

[Coito ergo sum]

Romney's favorability ratings top Obama's: http://washingtonexaminer.com/for-first ... IF1w8XNaSq

Rasmussen has Romney ahead 50 to 47 in Virginia: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... _president

Washington Examiner, Rasmmussen and Weekly Standard - they're all right-wing crap.

Now, before you get all defensive, I'm going to point out a couple other things. I rarely if ever post stories from Huffington or Salon or other left-biased sites like them simply because I know people like you (well, you) will call them biased, like you did when Kiki dared post something from HuffPo earlier. So don't go calling foul about how "you" people are hypocrites who put a double standard on poor Coito.

Just balancing out the constant stream of left wing biased links that are posted here.

Maybe the Examiner is just reporting a non-partisan poll, maybe not. But when you cherry-pick articles from that newspaper you're not doing yourself any favors when you try to claim that you're more objective about analyzing polls than I am. I would have found a different source.
As for Rasmussen, if they're reporting Romney up by 3% in Virginia it's pretty safe to assume that Obama is still up by a point or two there.

I haven't claimed to be "more" objective. That was your claim about yourself, not mine.

As for Virginia... http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pol ... y-vs-obama Even the HuffPo is having trouble keeping Obama even in VA..... If HuffPo has them even...well...you can safely assume Obama is behind.

[Ian]

Perhaps. No doubt Virginia will be close, however the reality ends up.

This is where Electoral-Vote.com comes in so handy. Most news sources don't say a word about 3rd party candidates, but they've had some pretty good posts about Gary Johnson and, especially with respect to Virginia, Virgil Goode. Goode is well-known in VA (especially among conservative circles) and could very well siphon off a couple points from Romney next month. I'll leave Drewish to extol the virtues and impact of Gary Johnson.
Today's: http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2012/P ... tml#item-7

[Warren Dew]

You do understand the difference between, "Obama is intentionally destroying the country as part of a secret communist/Muslim/UN plot", and "Romney's policies will destroy the country", don't you?

Yeah. It's the difference between, "Obama's policies will destroy the country" and "Romney's policies will destroy the country", viewed through a left wing lens.

And you missed the part about the Obama delegate wanting to kill Romney.

[Warren Dew]

Look Who Cleaned Up On The Auto Bailout: Mitt Romney

In other words, Obama is giving money to the rich, including Mitt Romney. Just remember that when you vote for Obama: you're voting to give more money to people like Mitt Romney.

[Coito ergo sum]

If that Obama delegate actually followed through on his threat, I wonder if it would be "optimal?"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... mment.html

Doesn't matter, though, because according to Biden, the GOP has "all their bullets aimed at" Americans anyway... http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/20 ... -and-iran/ (and, all those people Biden thinks have served in Iran....)

[Wumbologist]

I haven't defended Mormon missions. I just don't buy into the hypocrisy that you folks swallow like candy -- that getting deferments from Vietnam is bad for Romney because he went on his Missions, but you don't have any issue with Biden's 5 deferments. Obama never served in the military either, but, again, that's fine with you, right?

I do take more issue with lack of military service in politicians with more hawkish views. Romney/Ryan might not be overtly talking about putting new boots on the ground because they know to do so after Iraq/Afghan would be political suicide, but I can't help worrying that they will in Syria or Iran with how tough their talk has been on the two. And yes, I do feel strongly that if your intent is to send American troops off to war, you ought to have the experience of having been there yourself.

That's one of the reasons McCain was a significantly better Republican candidate than Romney is. McCain knew better than anyone the cost of sending troops off to war, and for all the things I could disagree with him on, I feel confident that McCain would not be as foolhardy with American lives as Bush was. I have no such confidence in Romney.

[Warren Dew]

Case in point: after the first debate, I said that we'd have to wait about a week to see the full extent of how much Obama would take a hit in the polls. After the 2nd debate on Tuesday, Coito was on the next morning discussing how they polls didn't seem to have budged.

And you were both wrong. After the first debate, the effect in the polls became obvious in a day or two, when the tracking polls first started reflecting answers from after the debate. No such result was obvious immediately after the second debate.

[Gerald McGrew]

I haven't defended Mormon missions.

Oh no, you just asked, "Aren't they different ways of serving" in a lame assed attempt to equivocate between military service in a war and a Mormon mission to France. I mean....they're just different ways of serving...like being a waitress is similar to being in Afghanistan!

I just don't buy into the hypocrisy that you folks swallow like candy -- that getting deferments from Vietnam is bad for Romney because he went on his Missions, but you don't have any issue with Biden's 5 deferments. Obama never served in the military either, but, again, that's fine with you, right?

Not an issue for me. If I'd been an adult during Vietnam, I'd have done everything in my power to stay the hell out of it too.

[Gerald McGrew]

You do understand the difference between, "Obama is intentionally destroying the country as part of a secret communist/Muslim/UN plot", and "Romney's policies will destroy the country", don't you?

Yeah. It's the difference between, "Obama's policies will destroy the country" and "Romney's policies will destroy the country", viewed through a left wing lens.

And you missed the part about the Obama delegate wanting to kill Romney.

And there's my answer. You are unable to comprehend the difference.

[Ian]

You do understand the difference between, "Obama is intentionally destroying the country as part of a secret communist/Muslim/UN plot", and "Romney's policies will destroy the country", don't you?

Yeah. It's the difference between, "Obama's policies will destroy the country" and "Romney's policies will destroy the country", viewed through a left wing lens.

And you missed the part about the Obama delegate wanting to kill Romney.

How about we talk about how after the 2nd debate Tagg Romney said he wanted to punch Obama? This was right after Mitt made some point (during the gun discussion, IIRC) about how parents ought to be held responsible for their kids' violent behavior.


Not fair? Of course it isn't. But I can do tit-for-tat.

[Warren Dew]

Yesterday, realclearpolitics.com had Romney ahead on the Electoral College map.

Well, kind of. Romney is ahead on states that seem to have a preference for a candidate, but RCP has a high bar for putting states in that category. The "no tossup" map still has Obama ahead by 12. To beat that, Romney must flip Ohio, or possibly both Wisconsin and New Hampshire.

[Gerald McGrew]

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.co ... -world/?hp

A pretty good explanation for why relying on single tracking polls is almost useless, and Gallup's history of being an outlier. Also, 538 now has Obama once again pulling away and his chances of winning the electoral votes increasing. IMO, if he has another strong debate Monday and Romney comes away with more negative memorable moments, as he did Tuesday, this trend will continue as polling data continues to be updated.

[Coito ergo sum]

I haven't defended Mormon missions. I just don't buy into the hypocrisy that you folks swallow like candy -- that getting deferments from Vietnam is bad for Romney because he went on his Missions, but you don't have any issue with Biden's 5 deferments. Obama never served in the military either, but, again, that's fine with you, right?

I do take more issue with lack of military service in politicians with more hawkish views. Romney/Ryan might not be overtly talking about putting new boots on the ground because they know to do so after Iraq/Afghan would be political suicide, but I can't help worrying that they will in Syria or Iran with how tough their talk has been on the two. And yes, I do feel strongly that if your intent is to send American troops off to war, you ought to have the experience of having been there yourself.

How does Obama's hawkish positions on Libya, and on blowing nonmilitary folks up with drones, compare? He and Biden don't need military service for that, but Romney/Ryan do? And, you couldn't find a bigger hawk than Biden. He voted for the Iraq War, and he was all over the idea of forcibly knocking Hussein out of Iraq in 1998.

That's one of the reasons McCain was a significantly better Republican candidate than Romney is. McCain knew better than anyone the cost of sending troops off to war, and for all the things I could disagree with him on, I feel confident that McCain would not be as foolhardy with American lives as Bush was. I have no such confidence in Romney.

Foolhardy? Nonsense. Democrats were in favor of Iraq in 2002. If you think we wouldn't have gone into Iraq if Gore was elected President, then you know nothing of the the political position of the Democratic Party at the time.