• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Gallup: Romney and Obama tied 47% each

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
Its true though there arent' many gay-bashing, woman-hating, Latino-blaming Democrats, and I'm proud of that.
That is because they are too busy hating on white men in general and rich white men in particular.

Not to mention that what you posted is a lie.

Believing in marriage is not "gay-bashing"

Not treating women like retarded children is not "women-hating"

And not giving hate and comfort to foreign invaders is not "Latino-blaming"
 

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,921
3
0
But but but Rasmussen.
9/19-25/2012
Gallup
Obama 50% (48%)
Romney 44% (45%)

Romney is probably the worst candidate for President in my lifetime.
How old are you? I'm too young to remember Dukakis (25), but I vaguely remember Bush/Clinton/Perot (I loved following the race even at 6).

Dole was pretty bad. To be fair, nobody was going to beat Clinton, but Dole was sort of just a placeholder to stand up there and act like a nominee. I actually thought Kerry was a good candidate running against a better campaign and during a time when the country was still hungover from 9/11 and the Iraq invasion. A lot of what Bush pulled off then would be laughed off now, or would be done much less effectively with a worse campaign.

From what I can tell Dukakis was terrible, but I didn't follow that race. Mondale was technically a month before I was born, but he looks worst of all.

I mean just in terms of skills as a politician rather than agreeing with any of them.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
61,166
14,018
136
How old are you? I'm too young to remember Dukakis (25), but I vaguely remember Bush/Clinton/Perot (I loved following the race even at 6).

Dole was pretty bad. To be fair, nobody was going to beat Clinton, but Dole was sort of just a placeholder to stand up there and act like a nominee. I actually thought Kerry was a good candidate running against a better campaign and during a time when the country was still hungover from 9/11 and the Iraq invasion. A lot of what Bush pulled off then would be laughed off now, or would be done much less effectively with a worse campaign.

From what I can tell Dukakis was terrible, but I didn't follow that race. Mondale was technically a month before I was born, but he looks worst of all.

I mean just in terms of skills as a politician rather than agreeing with any of them.
Dukakis was too nice. He never hit back, he never went negative, and he never went after Bush on his record. Dukakis never even hit Bush on Iran-Contra. The Bush campaign buried him in mud and he just took it, and lost. Dukakis was a technocrat who ran a flawless primary operation, wrapping up the nomination and then promptly fell flat in the general.

Mondale was a Dole-like placeholder. He never had a prayer against Reagan.
 
Last edited:

randomrogue

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2011
5,462
0
0
I was too young to vote during some of those elections you mentioned but still...as far as foot in mouth goes this one is pretty bad. Mondale was VP after all and just happened to be running against Reagan. I'll leave it to the historians to judge who is worse since like you said Dole was clearly a placeholder but I have no idea what Romney is. I look at his campaign and it seems like he's not even trying to win. Like I've said before though he really isn't cut out for this.

What worries me is this trend towards buying the Presidency. Romney is/was close to raising as much as Obama but hasn't spent as much. I haven't followed those numbers closely but it might simply be a matter of his campaign and the RNC realizing they can't raise enough money to win and diverting funds elsewhere at this point. It might explain the pathetic nature of the campaign recently at least.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/campaign-finance

At least the 1 billion dollar figure that was thrown out was wrong. Still the $$ amounts are staggering.
 

AyashiKaibutsu

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2004
9,307
3
81
How old are you? I'm too young to remember Dukakis (25), but I vaguely remember Bush/Clinton/Perot (I loved following the race even at 6).

Dole was pretty bad. To be fair, nobody was going to beat Clinton, but Dole was sort of just a placeholder to stand up there and act like a nominee. I actually thought Kerry was a good candidate running against a better campaign and during a time when the country was still hungover from 9/11 and the Iraq invasion. A lot of what Bush pulled off then would be laughed off now, or would be done much less effectively with a worse campaign.

From what I can tell Dukakis was terrible, but I didn't follow that race. Mondale was technically a month before I was born, but he looks worst of all.

I mean just in terms of skills as a politician rather than agreeing with any of them.
He's the worst in my memory and I remember up to Bush vs Clinton although I was 9 then. I thought Dole did a way better job than Kerry. Dole was up against stiff competition were as Kerry mostly lost because he had no message or real campaign during a year where it was the incumbents to lose (kind of like Romney now...).
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Administrator
Mar 5, 2001
49,619
160
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Yea, I find it very strange on the yard signs. I have seen 3 for Obama and 1 for Romney in my neighborhood.

I did see 2 for Romney and 0 for Obama about 2 weeks ago on a walk through an upper scale neighborhood.

Signs are scarce this year.
Signs certainly aren't scarce in my area. There have been hundreds of America vs Obama signs in yards for the past 4 months or longer. We have a lot of those Earth is 6000 years old and Obama is a Muslim types of people in this area.
 

Ryan

Lifer
Oct 31, 2000
27,518
1
81
Gallup has been +6 Obama for a few days. But that will go down in the next few days, because Gallup's Obama approval number has been dropping the last few days and it leads their race numbers.
Also - keep in mind that Approval is measured as an average of three days...the Election poll is an average of 7 days.
 

Ryan

Lifer
Oct 31, 2000
27,518
1
81
Gallup has been +6 Obama for a few days. But that will go down in the next few days, because Gallup's Obama approval number has been dropping the last few days and it leads their race numbers.
Any you were right - a 1% drop to 49%. Still commanding a 5% lead over Romney.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
0
0
These are much more important -- and problematic for Romney.

Code:
Iowa: Romney vs. Obama    Des Moines Register    Obama 49, Romney 45    Obama +4
Ohio: Romney vs. Obama    Columbus Dispatch*    Obama 51, Romney 42    Obama +9
 

jman19

Lifer
Nov 3, 2000
11,105
492
126
Romney needs to come out firing in the debates or it is over. Swing states are just not in his favor.
 

Ryan

Lifer
Oct 31, 2000
27,518
1
81
Romney needs to come out firing in the debates or it is over. Swing states are just not in his favor.
The chances of this happening though....not good. Romney has rarely ever had great debate performances - his biggest advantage during the primary was being a fairly mediocre candidate among a sea of nutjobs.

At his best, he is only as good as Obama's worst. We shall see come this Wednesday.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,719
3,528
126
The chances of this happening though....not good. Romney has rarely ever had great debate performances - his biggest advantage during the primary was being a fairly mediocre candidate among a sea of nutjobs.

At his best, he is only as good as Obama's worst. We shall see come this Wednesday.
Just imagine a world in which people pin their hopes on how somebody who has shown himself ti be unfit to be President of the United States, could somehow, in a single evening, delude the nation they got him wrong. It's like saying, I hope a piece of shit can hide its smell long enough to get eaten. What a fucking curse to wish on the people.
 

randomrogue

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2011
5,462
0
0
Yeah that's an interesting take on it.

I find it amazing that Romney stays in the race. If he does poorly in the debates the best thing he could do for the country would be to drop out. Maybe then we'd get some serious debates going with 3rd party candidates and get some representatives in office who aren't just pandering for votes rather than there to fix the country.
 

jman19

Lifer
Nov 3, 2000
11,105
492
126
Yeah that's an interesting take on it.

I find it amazing that Romney stays in the race. If he does poorly in the debates the best thing he could do for the country would be to drop out. Maybe then we'd get some serious debates going with 3rd party candidates and get some representatives in office who aren't just pandering for votes rather than there to fix the country.
It's not that amazing. The country is in the tank right now, which is never good for a sitting president.
 

randomrogue

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2011
5,462
0
0
It's not that amazing. The country is in the tank right now, which is never good for a sitting president.
Yes that's what makes Romney look like an even worse candidate. With the state of the economy in general almost any candidate should look good but we have been presented with a bunch of people who are incompetent, loony, and at best are simply there to pander to sponsors.

I'm not advocating a vote for Obama. I'm not impressed by Obama and I doubt many here are. However Romney is a giant joke. Just because he looked sane next to someone like Backman does not make him a viable candidate.

I'm so tired of people voting for one candidate simply because they feel the other one is bad. That's stupid. Vote for a 3rd option or the system will stay in place and never get better. Romney is going to get annihilated in the election. Yeah he could potentially get 40% of the popular vote but the EC is going to drop a bomb on his head. Everyone I know who is voting for him admit that he's going to lose. So why vote for him? Write in a vote, vote 3rd party, do anything but vote for the same garbage every 4 years. "Yeah but Obama is terrible!". Well look - vote for someone who's actually good for a change. Obama is in place because the other candidate was terrible. Same with Bush. We haven't had a President since Clinton who people voted for because they liked him. It's been a constant vote against a candidate instead of a vote for one.

Ross Perot got 20 million votes. 19%. He was noticed. Yeah he took votes away from Bush but maybe if we kept getting 3rd party candidates we'd eventually get one with enough votes to win or to at least prompt R and D to stop presenting us with complete garbage not worthy of the office of President of the USA.

Watch what will happen though. Obama will win. Clinton will run against Jeb Bush next time. It's the same dynastic crap over and over again. I'm going to vote for someone else at least.
 
Last edited:

AstroManLuca

Lifer
Jun 24, 2004
15,633
5
81
Love that site. I'm a firm believer in totally objective election analysis, and I trust Nate Silver to put the numbers ahead of his own personal views.

Polling is a hard thing to understand. It's easy to look at a simple survey of randomly selected people, get results that are within a few percentage points of each other, and declare it to be a "close race." It's entirely another to actually make sense of the polls and determine what they really mean. The difference between a poll and FiveThirtyEight is much like the difference between a still image and a movie.

He takes into account economic indicators, biases of various polling outlets, the gap between "registered" and "likely" voters, and compensates for temporary effects like convention bounces.

The final picture looks pretty favorable for Obama. Although there are a lot of close states, most of them are leaning (however slightly) towards Obama. While Romney does stand a good chance of winning some of these toss-up states, he would have to turn things around in a very big way to win enough of them to take the election.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,658
13,740
136
Romney needs to come out firing in the debates or it is over. Swing states are just not in his favor.
Firing what? A revised script of Bushonomics? All trickledown all the time? Same whore, different dress?

Broad platitudes designed as prolefeed to the Faithful?

Bill Clinton once offered that when people are thinking, that's good for Democrats, and he's right. Romney can't reduce this to "God, guns, gays, Terrarists! & smaller govt", so he's a loser before he opens his mouth.
 

IGBT

Lifer
Jul 16, 2001
17,699
47
91
obama's willing accomplices in the media are desperately trying to skew the polls with "likability" questions rather then job performance questions. Anything to confuse and obfuscate and get voters minds off the obama dismal job performance quagmire.
 

Ryan

Lifer
Oct 31, 2000
27,518
1
81
obama's willing accomplices in the media are desperately trying to skew the polls with "likability" questions rather then job performance questions. Anything to confuse and obfuscate and get voters minds off the obama dismal job performance quagmire.

Oh screw off already - even Fox News is polling Obama ahead of Willard: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/

Keep making up excuses - the American people clearly think that Obama's job performance isn't as dismal as you want to believe. Quagmire not found...doesn't exist.
 
Last edited:

OneOfTheseDays

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2000
7,052
0
0
You really can't claim the polls are skewed when Fox New's own poll shows Obama up by similar margins.

The bottom line is pollsters have been doing this for a very long time, their methods have gotten more and more refined in each election. The odds that they are all of a sudden catastrophically wrong in their predictions is pretty minuscule. It is always a good thing to analyze individual polls and take them with a grain of salt, but when the aggregate of polls is moving clearly in one direction that's usually a very big sign.
 

Screech

Golden Member
Oct 20, 2004
1,202
6
81
The economic issues in this election really come down to nominal values vs trends.

If you vote based on nominal values, then romney might be your choice, as unemployment right now is pretty high.

If, on the other hand, you vote on trends, you might prefer the guy who took you from -800,000 jobs/month to +~100,000/month to the guy who wants to use the same ideas that took us to -800,000/month in the first place.

My guess is that obama is still doing better than romney because he is both more likable (romney is a terrible candidate, 47% lol.) and enough people still remember the last 10 years.

In a couple more election cycles (ie, by 2020) this stuff will be ancient history though (electorally speaking).

edit: not that I think the president has control over employment numbers like that -- but if the economy is the issue, the reasoning behind that must suggest presidential influence.
 

IGBT

Lifer
Jul 16, 2001
17,699
47
91
The economic issues in this election really come down to nominal values vs trends.

If you vote based on nominal values, then romney might be your choice, as unemployment right now is pretty high.

If, on the other hand, you vote on trends, you might prefer the guy who took you from -800,000 jobs/month to +~100,000/month to the guy who wants to use the same ideas that took us to -800,000/month in the first place.

My guess is that obama is still doing better than romney because he is both more likable (romney is a terrible candidate, 47% lol.) and enough people still remember the last 10 years.

In a couple more election cycles (ie, by 2020) this stuff will be ancient history though (electorally speaking).

edit: not that I think the president has control over employment numbers like that -- but if the economy is the issue, the reasoning behind that must suggest presidential influence.


your obama is manipulating labor participation numbers to come up with the window dressed percentages that create the mirage of stability or growth. Liars use numbers.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY