[Phil]

Nate was on Piers last night. He's moved his prediction 10 points in the last week and Pew shows Romney ahead in the popular vote.

[luke warm]

Phil, on 2012-October-09, 08:32, said:

Nate was on Piers last night. He's moved his prediction 10 points in the last week and Pew shows Romney ahead in the popular vote.

Quote

In the 11 swing states, Mitt Romney earns 49% support to Obama’s 47%. One percent (1%) likes another candidate, and three percent (3%) are undecided.

from Rasmussen

also, AARP and Big Bird tell Obama campaign to leave them out of his talking points

[luke warm]

the thurs debate won't be as easy as some think, imo... biden isn't defenseless... his main weakness comes from the fact that he was put in charge (2009 i think) of obama's "middle class" strategy, the same middle class he said has been "buried" under obama... his gaffes don't help, but aren't fatal - assuming he doesn't make any more thurs nite

[cherdano]

Phil, on 2012-October-09, 08:32, said:

Nate was on Piers last night. He's moved his prediction 10 points in the last week and Pew shows Romney ahead in the popular vote.

Since you think Romney is going to win, I am sure you have made an intrade account and bought his shares?

[Phil]

cherdano, on 2012-October-09, 16:52, said:

Since you think Romney is going to win, I am sure you have made an intrade account and bought his shares?

Of course not. When did I say he was going to win?

[luke warm]

Phil, on 2012-October-09, 17:34, said:

Of course not. When did I say he was going to win?

nobody has, though some seem to think obama will.. some have even placed bets on it

[mike777]

296 to 241

If 538 is right this has come down to a race for Ohio-18 and Virginia-13.
--


The Suffolk University Political Research Center has determined Mitt Romney is a lock to win the battleground states of Florida, Virginia and North Carolina and will not conduct additional polls there during the final four weeks of the presidential election

-


It would be interesting if Ohio becomes this years Fla with hanging chads but Nate has Ohio as an easy win at this point.

[luke warm]

i've heard everything from an obama squeaker to a romney landslide... i heard the same as you re: ohio - romney something like 54% on election day

[mike777]

Nate has the President winning the states, Jimmy

[hrothgar]

mike777, on 2012-October-10, 14:10, said:

The Suffolk University Political Research Center has determined Mitt Romney is a lock to win the battleground states of Florida, Virginia and North Carolina and will not conduct additional polls there during the final four weeks of the presidential election

Seems like a strange decision...

Suffolks own polls had Obama up in those States before the debate.

If one event can swing the polls that much, it seems strange to assume that there won't be another

[luke warm]

mike777, on 2012-October-10, 15:31, said:

Nate has the President winning the states, Jimmy

ok, i misread you... i was going by the univ of colorado @ boulder study... heard him yesterday talking about it

[mike777]

283-254 For the President.

Nate gives Romney a tiny lead in Virg, Nc, Fla and Col.

Ohio still looking good for the President.

[PassedOut]

luke warm, on 2012-October-08, 15:34, said:

PassedOut, on 2012-October-08, 14:18, said:

I suspect that there will be resistance to eliminating any of the deductions and exemptions that taxpayers enjoy today. Yet even if Romney eliminates 100% of the deductions currently available, that will not in itself pay for a 20% across the board tax cut.

compute that again, this time w/ the economy growing @ 3% rather than 1.3%... then try it @ 4%, up to 6% or so

Ending Deductions Pays for 4% Tax Cuts, Congress Study Says

Quote

Oct. 12 (Bloomberg) -- Repealing all itemized deductions in the U.S. tax code would pay for only a 4 percent cut in income tax rates, according to an estimate from the nonpartisan scorekeeper for Congress that casts doubt on Republicans’ ability to finance lower income-tax rates with base broadening.

The analysis by the Joint Committee on Taxation shows the arithmetical difficulty of an approach that assumes long-favored tax breaks such as deductions for mortgage interest and charitable contributions could be repealed instantly and completely. Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney proposes a 20 percent income-tax cut and says he would pay for it by limiting tax deductions, credits and exemptions.

Arithmetic.

[cherdano]

I can close the deficit by passing a law that mandates a 5% growth rate.

[luke warm]

cherdano, on 2012-October-14, 02:38, said:

I can close the deficit by passing a law that mandates a 5% growth rate.

yeah, well at least you seem to understand the issue... passed out types "arithmetic" as if it's the same regardless of growth

[PassedOut]

luke warm, on 2012-October-14, 10:01, said:

passed out types "arithmetic" as if it's the same regardless of growth

Reagan did not believe in arithmetic either and reversed decades of fiscal responsibility. Naturally the deficits and the debt ballooned.

Clinton did believe in arithmetic and left office with a budget surplus.

GW Bush did not believe in arithmetic and left office with a budget deficit of well over $1 trillion, which Obama has only been able to trim slightly so far. But it is going in the right direction again.

You do the math.

[mike777]

PassedOut, on 2012-October-14, 11:06, said:

Reagan did not believe in arithmetic either and reversed decades of fiscal responsibility. Naturally the deficits and the debt ballooned.

Clinton did believe in arithmetic and left office with a budget surplus.

GW Bush did not believe in arithmetic and left office with a budget deficit of well over $1 trillion, which Obama has only been able to trim slightly so far. But it is going in the right direction again.

You do the math.

to be fair Reagan was involved in a war, cold war with true evil and bush in a world wide war but you make good points.

Perhaps in hindsight Bush should have asked for a war tax.



If the President made the argument I am the world leader involved in a global war, a war where Americans are being attacked and killed and costs a lot of money.....that would be a good point.

If he thinks it is best to raise taxes to pay for it or help pay for it, fair point.

[kenberg]

mike777, on 2012-October-14, 19:27, said:

Perhaps in hindsight Bush should have asked for a war tax.

In any sight, Bush should have asked for a repeal of his tax cuts. The argument for the cuts was that the government was taking in more money than it knew what to do with. There were, even at the beginning, some suggestions that the well was not as deep as advertised, but certainly lots of cash was flowing in. 9/11 changed all that. He had the entire country behind him and if he had said that the attack had to be dealt with, it will cost money, the tax cuts would have to go, no one except maybe Grover Norquist would have disagreed. Wars virtually never are as simple as planned, a thought we should keep in mind before we go bomb Iran, and the simple precaution of restoring the revenue base to what it was before he took office would have helped immensely.

Every president, before taking office, should be required to read old proclamations about how easy and cheap this or that war will be. The troops will be home by Christmas. We can have guns and butter. We can fight the war on poverty and the war in Viet Nam. How many times do we have to keep making the same ***** mistake?

[mike777]

The argument for the cuts was that the government was taking in more money than it knew what to do with. There were, even at the beginning, some suggestions that the well was not as deep as advertised, but certainly lots of cash was


Ken that was not the argument at the time and you should know that


The argument was there was a huge shock to the system and taxes should not be raised when consumers are afraid to spend, there was a huge drop in demand.... ahuge increase in fear/uncertainty... that was the argument


He had the entire country behind him and if he had said that the attack had to be dealt with, it will cost money


that was the other side....

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



btw you explained the sine law and how it works and why it is important better than my HS teacher ever did.

[PassedOut]

mike777, on 2012-October-14, 19:27, said:

to be fair Reagan was involved in a war, cold war with true evil and bush in a world wide war but you make good points.

Perhaps in hindsight Bush should have asked for a war tax.

To be even more fair: Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, and Carter were involved in that same cold war. Beyond that, Truman and Eisenhower were involved in a hot war in Korea. Johnson and Nixon were involved in a hot war in Vietnam. Nevertheless, every one of those administrations reduced the national debt as a percent of GDP -- until Reagan.