Democratic polling firm says Obama would lose if vote today

[badb0y]

Poll is irrelevant because the election is not today. There is still over a year to go.

 

[classy]

I don't think we are moving in the right direction. He has just failed to live up to his promises. He has added to the finanical problem, not helped it. I love the man though. He is the best and most likeable person we have had as President since I have been alive. But we need a true President who is a leader. Leadership is not always about pure brain power, which we know Obama has. Sometimes its just doing the things you said you would do.

 

[Macamus Prime]

I also heard that if a politician is caught dragging a dead hooker, blood around his mouth, needles sticking out of his arms and all of America is called up at 3am to vote that very second on said politician, but the request to vote is made in an ancient language no one understand - this politician would NOT get elected either.

,... just saying.

 

[DirthNader]

Unless that person was a Kennedy.

 

[matt0611]

Not surprised at all. Obama and his failed policies have made the economy worse. If the economy is not dramatically better by next summer (and I don't expect it will be) Obama has a high chance of losing.

 

[hal2kilo]

LMAO. FFS son, wake the fuck up already. (and stop posting btw kthx bai)

Romney won't even carry MICHIGAN much less the country. I prefer your off colored psuedopedo posts in L&R much better. Try to avoid making any stupid predictions again this upcoming election season. There is no senate race..............................

His posting is only going to get worse the closer we get to the election. I've seen his show before. I wonder how much he gets for being a sock puppet.

 

[Red Dawn]

Not surprised at all. Obama and his failed policies have made the economy worse. If the economy is not dramatically better by next summer (and I don't expect it will be) Obama has a high chance of losing.

Worse than what, before he took over?

But yeah he does stand a chances of losing. Of course his saving grace is that every single Republican running isn't at all compelling to the American Public and their party is split between pragmatists and the Tea Party Nut Jobs

 

[OlafSicky]

I will never vote for a Mormon, he has no chance of winning

 

[OCGuy]

Hows that global warming working out for ya?

Claiming that a heat wave is "global warming" is just as stupid as claiming that global warming is impossible because of a cold snap in the winter.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

EVERYONE is proving me wrong though.

FTFY

I post stuff like this because a large number of members keep repeating that Obama is going to win no matter what and that the Republicans don't have a candidate who can beat him so this proves them wrong.

Good to know that if the GOP overthrows the government and mandates an election today, they MIGHT win. That is earthshaking news, I must say.

But to the point, it means jack since the election isn't today, which of course means you are wrong and lied again. Since the elction is not today, this doesn't prove anything, except that you are a clueless partisan shill. Learn logic maybe?

 

[badb0y]

Not surprised at all. Obama and his failed policies have made the economy worse. If the economy is not dramatically better by next summer (and I don't expect it will be) Obama has a high chance of losing.

Obama doesn't control the economy fool.

 

[ProfJohn]

I see this election as being fundamentally similar to 2004. Obama will likely not be particularly popular at the time of the election, and the economy will still not be in stellar condition, but the Republican slate of candidates is so fundamentally unappealing that he will win re-election without great difficulty. If I'm wrong I am OK with it as long as Romney is the nominee - I would have a much harder time with any of the other candidates (as an aside, it seems to me Romney and Pawlenty are the only ones with a realistic chance of nomination).

Your recollection of history is a little fuzzy.

Bush's approval on election day was still in the 50% range and anything above 50% wins re-election.

In 2004 the economy grew in the 3.5% range which was an improvement over 2003 and unemployment was only 5.5% and was trending down.

It wasn't until late 2004 early 2005 that Bush dropped below 50% approval and stayed there.

I think it is safe to say that Bush got lucky. If the elections had been held 6 months later he may have lost.

 

[ProfJohn]

Poll is irrelevant because the election is not today. There is still over a year to go.

Every thread in this forum is irrelevant.

 

[soundforbjt]

Your recollection of history is a little fuzzy.

Bush's approval on election day was still in the 50% range and anything above 50% wins re-election.

In 2004 the economy grew in the 3.5% range which was an improvement over 2003 and unemployment was only 5.5% and was trending down.

It wasn't until late 2004 early 2005 that Bush dropped below 50% approval and stayed there.

I think it is safe to say that Bush got lucky. If the elections had been held 6 months later he may have lost.

BushCo. raising all those "phony" terror alerts helped him alot too.

 

[nick1985]

this thread sucks

 

[nick1985]

His posting is only going to get worse the closer we get to the election. I've seen his show before. I wonder how much he gets for being a sock puppet.

Awwwww thats so sweet! You are using your friends term that he throws out in 2/3 of his posts.

 

[BoomerD]

I'm a life-long Democrat who probably wouldn't vote for Obama in the next election...then again, I didn't vote for him in the LAST one either.
If it comes down to Obama or Romney...I'll write in some porn star or prostitute instead. At least then, you'd know what kind of fucking you were in for...

(or try to choose between the candidates of the "other parties" like I did last time.)

 

[KGB]

I'm a life-long Democrat who probably wouldn't vote for Obama in the next election...then again, I didn't vote for him in the LAST one either.
If it comes down to Obama or Romney...I'll write in some porn star or prostitute instead. At least then, you'd know what kind of fucking you were in for...

(or try to choose between the candidates of the "other parties" like I did last time.)

What if it came down to Michelle Bachmann vs. a hooker?

 

[BoomerD]

What if it came down to Michelle Bachmann vs. a hooker?

Is there a difference? I'd probably have to choose the drug-addicted hooker. Much more stable personality.

 

[matt0611]

Obama doesn't control the economy fool.

The policies of the government influence and effect the economy and Obama is the head of the federal executive branch, the one who signs off on laws, the position that has a great deal of influence over the rest of the government, you know, that guy? Fool.

 

[Fern]

Obama doesn't control the economy fool.

Most of us realize that the President doesn't control the economy. However, we realize that the economy does control the President.

For right or wrong, the President is always getting the credit or blame.

Fern

 

[Tom]

This. The country's best years in recent memory were when a Democrat was in the White House and the Republicans controlled Congress.

not true. reality is the reason for those good years was the sacrificial good deed of the Democratic Congress that preceded the Republican Congress you are giving credit too.

 

[Rainsford]

Isn't part of the problem with polls at this point in the race that one choice is MUCH more well known than the others? Obama is the President, and the public is very well acquainted with him, for better or worse. If they don't like him, the alternative candidates can very easily become blank slates that are just "not Obama" because they don't know a ton about them.

One thing I've seen in a number of polls is that "generic Republican" almost always does better against Obama at this point than specific Republicans. Romney might be the most generic Republican in the field, which could explain why he's doing well against Obama compared to the other candidates (who didn't do too hot in PJ's poll).

The problem, as we get closer to the election, is that voters won't be faced with "some Republican", they'll be looking at a very specific candidate as a well defined alternative to Obama. If the candidate is good, that could improve their chances against the President. If they are bad, their poll numbers could take a tumble very quickly, even if voters aren't really happy about Obama either.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I so want a "none of the above" option at the polls.

 

[senseamp]

I so want a "none of the above" option at the polls.

It is there. Just don't vote for any of the candidates.