The 2012 Three Ring Circus AKA The US Presidential Election

[Wikkiwallana]

Is 'gaffer' another word for boss in the US like it is in the UK?

No, it means someone who works the lights on a recording set.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaffer_(filmmaking)

[Wamitoria]

can you imagine the shitstorm from the far right if they lose everything this time?

I'll be watching FOX the minute the race is called.

[The Emerald Dawn]

can you imagine the shitstorm from the far right if they lose everything this time?

I'll be watching FOX the minute the race is called.

Can I come over? Do you have popcorn?

[Alien Space Bats]

Rasmussen has Romney winning by 2, as of the 17th. That *has* to be a psychotic delusion.

Rasmussen's normalization model assumes that the turnout on November 6th will be 37.6% Republican, 33.3% Democrat, and 29.1% Independent.

EDIT: If you were to normalize the Gallup Organization's data using Rasmussen's model, you'd rate the race this way:

Romney - 49.1%
Obama - 45.0%
Undecided - 5.9%

So, essentially, Romney up by 4.9%.

[Wikkiwallana]

You can make the argument that Romney doesn't like Veterans because Veteran Benefits and Services spending has ballooned faster than Income Security spending, Medicare spending, Social Security spending, and Health spending since 2001 to present days.

Wars produce veterans?!? Who'd have thunk it?!?

You know what the problem here is? Too many living veterans. If we had higher battlefield casualties, we wouldn't have to pay to take care of so many of the damned parasites after they come home.

Or - better still - maybe we should just not bring any of them home...

<looks at Iran>

Yeah, that's the ticket!

Nah, occupations will piss off the libertarian wing of the party. Let's just go for the Lord Rust military strategy.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Rasmussen has Romney winning by 2, as of the 17th. That *has* to be a psychotic delusion.

Rasmussen's normalization model assumes that the turnout on November 6th will be 37.6% Republican, 33.3% Democrat, and 29.1% Independent.

If you assume (which I have to believe that they are, because 2008 was insane in turnout) that the turnout will decline in this election from 131 million to, say, 120 million voters, that'd be....carry the two....40 million dems, 45.12 million Repubs, and 34.92 million Indies.

If we assume a similar split in the Indies to what was seen in 2010, .... Ok, yeah that'd give the Republicans a 2 point win.

[Not Safe For Work]

(and, one assumes, also for the middle class)

One assumes wrongly.
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/ ... -taxes.php
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... aires-whi/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... -tax-plan/

There's more, but they were either editorials or left wing sites such as HuffPo and Think Progress, so I left them out.

I stand corrected. Romney's platform is more complicated than the fuck-the-poor image I suggested. Fuck-the-poor-AND-the-middle-class is apparently closer.

Luckily, Romney seems to be pitching his campaign at no specific class or demographic, and aiming instead squarely at 'ridiculously partisan' voters. Then again, looking back on it, that's not really news - I think most of us just thought he'd make SOME gesture towards the middle.

And I guess he did. It's just a gesture you wouldn't want your mom to see you make.

[Wikkiwallana]

I ninja'd the heck out of you all.

Ninja's don't brag about their activities.

You don't watch enough anime, obviously.

[Ashmoria]

Very.

It turns out that the Democrats are killing the Republicans in ad wars.

This is one of those things that just boggles my mind about the Romney campaign. We spent multiple months hearing about how much more they raised in funds, but not only do they not appear to be actually using that money, they're actually pulling out of states like PA!

The common wisdom is that they're going to carpet bomb the airwaves in the next few weeks, but all that ad-space would've been bought up long ago when both campaigns still had most of their coffers. There's no reason to think that, if indeed all that space has long since been bought up, that the Romney campaign has enough of it to pull of his trademark bombing campaign.

i read (but cant be bothered to find a link for) that citizens united has a half hour movie about obama kinda like the one they had about hillary clinton in '08 (but not really). i read that it features interviews with obama voters who now "regret" that vote. they are supposed to be gonna run it on network tv and big time cable stations.

seems like a wicked waste of money to me. who would bother watching it?

[The Emerald Dawn]

This is one of those things that just boggles my mind about the Romney campaign. We spent multiple months hearing about how much more they raised in funds, but not only do they not appear to be actually using that money, they're actually pulling out of states like PA!

The common wisdom is that they're going to carpet bomb the airwaves in the next few weeks, but all that ad-space would've been bought up long ago when both campaigns still had most of their coffers. There's no reason to think that, if indeed all that space has long since been bought up, that the Romney campaign has enough of it to pull of his trademark bombing campaign.

i read (but cant be bothered to find a link for) that citizens united has a half hour movie about obama kinda like the one they had about hillary clinton in '08 (but not really). i read that it features interviews with obama voters who now "regret" that vote. they are supposed to be gonna run it on network tv and big time cable stations.

seems like a wicked waste of money to me. who would bother watching it?

Karl Rove, while polishing a pickled gurkin and rocking slowly back and forth.

[Williamson]

can you imagine the shitstorm from the far right if they lose everything this time?

I'll be watching FOX the minute the race is called.

i heard they are not aloud to have any sharp objects or ropes on that day.

[Frisivisia]

I'll be watching FOX the minute the race is called.

i heard they are not aloud to have any sharp objects or ropes on that day.

No shotgun for Cheney.

[Alien Space Bats]

In other words, Mitt is gonna be hearing about these comments all the way to election day. My money is on either him or another Republican responding to the recording by saying "Well, yeah, that's totally correct" and trying to justify the comments as though they're reasonable.

Totally called it:

Washington (CNN) -- Mitt Romney on Tuesday didn't back away from remarks he made in a secretly recorded video casting supporters of President Barack Obama as dependent on welfare, and instead said the comments that generated more problems for him in a tight race were an honest reflection of his campaign's message.

"This is a message I'm carrying day and day out and will carry over the coming months," Romney said on Fox News. "This is a decision about the course of America, where we're going to head. We've seen the president's policies play out over the last four years."

There we have it, Romney has decided the best course of action is not just to own up to the comments, but to say they are a reflection of his campaign message. I'm don't think he wants his message to be "I don't care about half the country", but I don't know what other message his remarks could "reflect".

He really doesn't have a choice; it's not like he can "unsay" what he said at Marc Leder's house in May - he'd break his Etch-a-Sketch trying.

Still, there may be a little wriggle room. He can say something like this:

"That 47% number I gave - I meant Democrats, not people who don't pay taxes. If it seemed like I was saying that Obama's supporters were all those people out there who don't pay taxes, that wasn't what I meant. What I meant is that most Democrats don't pay taxes, while most Republicans do. Are there Republicans who don't pay taxes? Sure. The military - they're almost all Republicans, and they don't pay taxes on combat pay, nor should they. Senior citizens don't pay taxes on most of their Social Security, and that's a benefit they earned - so obviously I don't mean them, either.

"But Democrats as a group are selfish. They want government to give them free stuff, which is why they're Democrats. They tax good, hard-working Republicans and independents to get the money they need to pay for the stuff they want because they don't want to work for a living - that's what 'tax and spend' is all about. They'll never vote for me because I'm not going to giver them free stuff. They're takers, and they think they deserve to take what they need from everybody else because they think that society owes it to them, because they see themselves as victims.

"The rest of us - hard-working, self-reliant Republicans and independents - we're society's makers. Without us, society would collapse. The Democrats - the takers - they'll tax us to death and strangle society until its gone, and then sit in the ruins and cry because there's nothing left to take. We makers - we Republicans - we have to save the Nation for the next generation by defeating them. We have to stop government from giving them free stuff and make the Democrats - the takers - start working for themselves. That's going to be hard on them, make no mistake about it. They're going to scream, they're going to protest, they're going to riot, and who else knows what they'll do. But we have to stand strong, and see the change through. We have to force the takers, the Democrats, to fend for themselves, if not for their own good then so there's something left for the future, for our children. We have to tell people: 'You want a roof over your head? Earn it. You want food? Earn it. You want health care? Earn it. You want college? Work your way through, or find a way to get by without it, the way our parents and grandparents did. Nothing is free, and what we makers, we Republicans, have is not yours to take. We earned it, it's ours, and if you want something for yourself, you'll just have to go work to get it, like everybody else."

Yeah, that would make the political world explode. But it's pretty much the only course left for Mitt Romney at this point.

[Cannot think of a name]

Ninja's don't brag about their activities.

You don't watch enough anime, obviously.

Ninjas deliver lengthy monologues in front of static back grounds in profile while holding roses...

[Williamson]

Totally called it:


There we have it, Romney has decided the best course of action is not just to own up to the comments, but to say they are a reflection of his campaign message. I'm don't think he wants his message to be "I don't care about half the country", but I don't know what other message his remarks could "reflect".

He really doesn't have a choice; it's not like he can "unsay" what he said at Marc Leder's house in May - he'd break his Etch-a-Sketch trying.

Still, there may be a little wriggle room. He can say something like this:

"That 47% number I gave - I meant Democrats, not people who don't pay taxes. If it seemed like I was saying that Obama's supporters were all those people out there who don't pay taxes, that wasn't what I meant. What I meant is that most Democrats don't pay taxes, while most Republicans do. Are there Republicans who don't pay taxes? Sure. The military - they're almost all Republicans, and they don't pay taxes on combat pay, nor should they. Senior citizens don't pay taxes on most of their Social Security, and that's a benefit they earned - so obviously I don't mean them, either.

"But Democrats as a group are selfish. They want government to give them free stuff, which is why they're Democrats. They tax good, hard-working Republicans and independents to get the money they need to pay for the stuff they want because they don't want to work for a living - that's what 'tax and spend' is all about. They'll never vote for me because I'm not going to giver them free stuff. They're takers, and they think they deserve to take what they need from everybody else because they think that society owes it to them, because they see themselves as victims.

"The rest of us - hard-working, self-reliant Republicans and independents - we're society's makers. Without us, society would collapse. The Democrats - the takers - they'll tax us to death and strangle society until its gone, and then sit in the ruins and cry because there's nothing left to take. We makers - we Republicans - we have to save the Nation for the next generation by defeating them. We have to stop government from giving them free stuff and make the Democrats - the takers - start working for themselves. That's going to be hard on them, make no mistake about it. They're going to scream, they're going to protest, they're going to riot, and who else knows what they'll do. But we have to stand strong, and see the change through. We have to force the takers, the Democrats, to fend for themselves, if not for their own good then so there's something left for the future, for our children. We have to tell people: 'You want a roof over your head? Earn it. You want food? Earn it. You want health care? Earn it. You want college? Work your way through, or find a way to get by without it, the way our parents and grandparents did. Nothing is free, and what we makers, we Republicans, have is not yours to take. We earned it, its ours, and if you want something for yourself, you'll just have to go work to get it, like everybody else."

Yeah, that would make the political world explode. But it's pretty much the only course left for Mitt Romney at this point.

you should be his campain manager. I would love that. I could use some more laughter.

[Salandriagado]

while nobody was looking, it looks like the dems' chance of retaking the house has grown quite a bit:

Here is a graph based on data from 2000-2010 House elections.

(Image)

It shows that each 1.0% of popular-vote margin translates to a 6.0-seat advantage. This plot shows no long-term advantage* for either side: a nearly-tied popular vote would translate to a nearly-tied House...

Using all polls and median-based statistics to address issues of outlier data gives the median of D+4.0%...That translates to a narrow 16-seat Democratic majority in an election held today...Assume a +/-4% opinion shift between now and November, and this leads to a popular vote prediction of D+0% to D+8%. This gives a Democratic takeover probability of 74%, approximately three out of four.

can you imagine the shitstorm from the far right if they lose everything this time? i mean, they will obviously blame it on romney being a 'liberal', rather than look at the pattern of insane conservatives losing races that should be gimmes. that's how they roll. but this means quintupling down on the crazy.

forget the gold standard; they'll be calling for a return to the bronze age.

To compare, Fivethirtyeight is predicting a 4-seat Democratic majority (though this is growing rapidly), with a takeover probability of 79% (also currently growing) in his forecast. That's remarkably close to yours, considering the drastically different methods used.

[Socialdemokraterne]

"That 47% number I gave - I meant Democrats, not people who don't pay taxes. If it seemed like I was saying that Obama's supporters were all those people out there who don't pay taxes, that wasn't what I meant. What I meant is that most Democrats don't pay taxes, while most Republicans do. Are there Republicans who don't pay taxes? Sure. The military - they're almost all Republicans, and they don't pay taxes on combat pay, nor should they. Senior citizens don't pay taxes on most of their Social Security, and that's a benefit they earned - so obviously I don't mean them, either.

"But Democrats as a group are selfish. They want government to give them free stuff, which is why they're Democrats. They tax good, hard-working Republicans and independents to get the money they need to pay for the stuff they want because they don't want to work for a living - that's what 'tax and spend' is all about. They'll never vote for me because I'm not going to giver them free stuff. They're takers, and they think they deserve to take what they need from everybody else because they think that society owes it to them, because they see themselves as victims.

"The rest of us - hard-working, self-reliant Republicans and independents - we're society's makers. Without us, society would collapse. The Democrats - the takers - they'll tax us to death and strangle society until its gone, and then sit in the ruins and cry because there's nothing left to take. We makers - we Republicans - we have to save the Nation for the next generation by defeating them. We have to stop government from giving them free stuff and make the Democrats - the takers - start working for themselves. That's going to be hard on them, make no mistake about it. They're going to scream, they're going to protest, they're going to riot, and who else knows what they'll do. But we have to stand strong, and see the change through. We have to force the takers, the Democrats, to fend for themselves, if not for their own good then so there's something left for the future, for our children. We have to tell people: 'You want a roof over your head? Earn it. You want food? Earn it. You want health care? Earn it. You want college? Work your way through, or find a way to get by without it, the way our parents and grandparents did. Nothing is free, and what we makers, we Republicans, have is not yours to take. We earned it, it's ours, and if you want something for yourself, you'll just have to go work to get it, like everybody else."

Is it unreasonable of me to believe he would deliver just such a speech?

[Cannot think of a name]

while nobody was looking, it looks like the dems' chance of retaking the house has grown quite a bit:

Here is a graph based on data from 2000-2010 House elections.

(Image)

It shows that each 1.0% of popular-vote margin translates to a 6.0-seat advantage. This plot shows no long-term advantage* for either side: a nearly-tied popular vote would translate to a nearly-tied House...

Using all polls and median-based statistics to address issues of outlier data gives the median of D+4.0%...That translates to a narrow 16-seat Democratic majority in an election held today...Assume a +/-4% opinion shift between now and November, and this leads to a popular vote prediction of D+0% to D+8%. This gives a Democratic takeover probability of 74%, approximately three out of four.

can you imagine the shitstorm from the far right if they lose everything this time? i mean, they will obviously blame it on romney being a 'liberal', rather than look at the pattern of insane conservatives losing races that should be gimmes. that's how they roll. but this means quintupling down on the crazy.

forget the gold standard; they'll be calling for a return to the bronze age.

To compare, Fivethirtyeight is predicting a 4-seat Democratic majority (though this is growing rapidly), with a takeover probability of 79% (also currently growing) in his forecast. That's remarkably close to yours, considering the drastically different methods used.

That's the Senate, not the House. I can't find anything on the House on 538.

[Williamson]

"That 47% number I gave - I meant Democrats, not people who don't pay taxes. If it seemed like I was saying that Obama's supporters were all those people out there who don't pay taxes, that wasn't what I meant. What I meant is that most Democrats don't pay taxes, while most Republicans do. Are there Republicans who don't pay taxes? Sure. The military - they're almost all Republicans, and they don't pay taxes on combat pay, nor should they. Senior citizens don't pay taxes on most of their Social Security, and that's a benefit they earned - so obviously I don't mean them, either.

"But Democrats as a group are selfish. They want government to give them free stuff, which is why they're Democrats. They tax good, hard-working Republicans and independents to get the money they need to pay for the stuff they want because they don't want to work for a living - that's what 'tax and spend' is all about. They'll never vote for me because I'm not going to giver them free stuff. They're takers, and they think they deserve to take what they need from everybody else because they think that society owes it to them, because they see themselves as victims.

"The rest of us - hard-working, self-reliant Republicans and independents - we're society's makers. Without us, society would collapse. The Democrats - the takers - they'll tax us to death and strangle society until its gone, and then sit in the ruins and cry because there's nothing left to take. We makers - we Republicans - we have to save the Nation for the next generation by defeating them. We have to stop government from giving them free stuff and make the Democrats - the takers - start working for themselves. That's going to be hard on them, make no mistake about it. They're going to scream, they're going to protest, they're going to riot, and who else knows what they'll do. But we have to stand strong, and see the change through. We have to force the takers, the Democrats, to fend for themselves, if not for their own good then so there's something left for the future, for our children. We have to tell people: 'You want a roof over your head? Earn it. You want food? Earn it. You want health care? Earn it. You want college? Work your way through, or find a way to get by without it, the way our parents and grandparents did. Nothing is free, and what we makers, we Republicans, have is not yours to take. We earned it, it's ours, and if you want something for yourself, you'll just have to go work to get it, like everybody else."

Is it unreasonable of me to believe he would deliver just such a speech?

well most resonable would not do something like this, but it seems like nobody in the gop is resonable so.

[Salandriagado]

To compare, Fivethirtyeight is predicting a 4-seat Democratic majority (though this is growing rapidly), with a takeover probability of 79% (also currently growing) in his forecast. That's remarkably close to yours, considering the drastically different methods used.

That's the Senate, not the House. I can't find anything on the House on 538.

I really need more sleep.

[The Black Forrest]

Ninja's don't brag about their activities.

You don't watch enough anime, obviously.

Well Naruto isn't your typical Shinobi

[Sane Outcasts]

Totally called it:


There we have it, Romney has decided the best course of action is not just to own up to the comments, but to say they are a reflection of his campaign message. I'm don't think he wants his message to be "I don't care about half the country", but I don't know what other message his remarks could "reflect".[/spoiler]

He really doesn't have a choice; it's not like he can "unsay" what he said at Marc Leder's house in May - he'd break his Etch-a-Sketch trying.

Still, there may be a little wriggle room. He can say something like this:

"That 47% number I gave - I meant Democrats, not people who don't pay taxes. If it seemed like I was saying that Obama's supporters were all those people out there who don't pay taxes, that wasn't what I meant. What I meant is that most Democrats don't pay taxes, while most Republicans do. Are there Republicans who don't pay taxes? Sure. The military - they're almost all Republicans, and they don't pay taxes on combat pay, nor should they. Senior citizens don't pay taxes on most of their Social Security, and that's a benefit they earned - so obviously I don't mean them, either.

"But Democrats as a group are selfish. They want government to give them free stuff, which is why they're Democrats. They tax good, hard-working Republicans and independents to get the money they need to pay for the stuff they want because they don't want to work for a living - that's what 'tax and spend' is all about. They'll never vote for me because I'm not going to giver them free stuff. They're takers, and they think they deserve to take what they need from everybody else because they think that society owes it to them, because they see themselves as victims.

"The rest of us - hard-working, self-reliant Republicans and independents - we're society's makers. Without us, society would collapse. The Democrats - the takers - they'll tax us to death and strangle society until its gone, and then sit in the ruins and cry because there's nothing left to take. We makers - we Republicans - we have to save the Nation for the next generation by defeating them. We have to stop government from giving them free stuff and make the Democrats - the takers - start working for themselves. That's going to be hard on them, make no mistake about it. They're going to scream, they're going to protest, they're going to riot, and who else knows what they'll do. But we have to stand strong, and see the change through. We have to force the takers, the Democrats, to fend for themselves, if not for their own good then so there's something left for the future, for our children. We have to tell people: 'You want a roof over your head? Earn it. You want food? Earn it. You want health care? Earn it. You want college? Work your way through, or find a way to get by without it, the way our parents and grandparents did. Nothing is free, and what we makers, we Republicans, have is not yours to take. We earned it, it's ours, and if you want something for yourself, you'll just have to go work to get it, like everybody else."

Yeah, that would make the political world explode. But it's pretty much the only course left for Mitt Romney at this point.

He'd gag trying to say something so definitive and specific, like a cat trying to get out a hairball.

I'm sure he'd really get his base energized by making that speech, but Romney is so risk-averse with everything he says and does that it will have to remain a dream.

[Cannot think of a name]

Okay, so I saw this ad on MSNBC a minute ago looking for donations to the Romney campaign...


...not the first time, there have been ads for that 2016 movie, Mike Hukabee occasionally discusses his fetish about things shoved down one's throat...most of these I assume are cable buys or Direct TV buys, slots that are reserved for the provider to sell.

But here's my 'wheels within wheels' theory on this particular ad and why (all ffma*)

The ad made two big points, if the election was held tomorrow, Obama would win by 5% and the Democratic National Committee (or the Obama campaign, don't remember) has outraised Romney last month. Basically, the ad was, "Shitballs, we're losing, give us money!"

But why...why such a desperate ad? You would think that would be dispiriting as much as it would a call to arms...

...except it's on MSNBC...perhaps, and here comes the FFMA part, perhaps it's all part of a strategy. Because back when Obama was thought to destroy the clown show that was the Republican primary field, money was on the Republican side. Democratic donors weren't donating because they were either disillusioned or just didn't think it was needed because it was 'in the bag.' Maher even made a big show of donating a giant chunk of cash to point out that wasn't the case.

So, they're trying to create that latter notion all over again. "Obama's got this, he doesn't need your cash. Don't worry about it, your friends will vote that's enough. It's in the bag, nothing to see here."

And that's my theory. Well, the one from my ass...


*fresh from my ass

[TaQud]

Apparently Obama isn't the one that Romney is attacking.

“We have an issue in three states—Michigan, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania—where we are fighting litigation to keep me off the ballot. We are confident we will win.” So who’s trying to block the Libertarian Party’s nominee from appearing on November ballots? “The Republicans are behind this,” Johnson says. “Republican lawyers in suits getting well paid are taking on our volunteer lawyers over the most obscure objections you’ve ever heard. I don’t get it. Mitt Romney should have nothing to fear from me. But apparently he does, since they are spending a lot of resources trying to keep me off the ballot. I have no knowledge of Barack Obama spending any money to do anything to me. It’s completely the Republicans.”

Now my reaction to this was but why is he playing the blame game? (when getting votes that is)

[Ashmoria]

"That 47% number I gave - I meant Democrats, not people who don't pay taxes. If it seemed like I was saying that Obama's supporters were all those people out there who don't pay taxes, that wasn't what I meant. What I meant is that most Democrats don't pay taxes, while most Republicans do. Are there Republicans who don't pay taxes? Sure. The military - they're almost all Republicans, and they don't pay taxes on combat pay, nor should they. Senior citizens don't pay taxes on most of their Social Security, and that's a benefit they earned - so obviously I don't mean them, either.

"But Democrats as a group are selfish. They want government to give them free stuff, which is why they're Democrats. They tax good, hard-working Republicans and independents to get the money they need to pay for the stuff they want because they don't want to work for a living - that's what 'tax and spend' is all about. They'll never vote for me because I'm not going to giver them free stuff. They're takers, and they think they deserve to take what they need from everybody else because they think that society owes it to them, because they see themselves as victims.

"The rest of us - hard-working, self-reliant Republicans and independents - we're society's makers. Without us, society would collapse. The Democrats - the takers - they'll tax us to death and strangle society until its gone, and then sit in the ruins and cry because there's nothing left to take. We makers - we Republicans - we have to save the Nation for the next generation by defeating them. We have to stop government from giving them free stuff and make the Democrats - the takers - start working for themselves. That's going to be hard on them, make no mistake about it. They're going to scream, they're going to protest, they're going to riot, and who else knows what they'll do. But we have to stand strong, and see the change through. We have to force the takers, the Democrats, to fend for themselves, if not for their own good then so there's something left for the future, for our children. We have to tell people: 'You want a roof over your head? Earn it. You want food? Earn it. You want health care? Earn it. You want college? Work your way through, or find a way to get by without it, the way our parents and grandparents did. Nothing is free, and what we makers, we Republicans, have is not yours to take. We earned it, it's ours, and if you want something for yourself, you'll just have to go work to get it, like everybody else."

Is it unreasonable of me to believe he would deliver just such a speech?

yes it is.

if he hasnt done it yet he isnt going to.