RomneyRyan 2012!

[Loki]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/01/us...se-ads.html?hp

Can we expect the Democrats here to pounce on Obama for the lies cited in the article?

[Lewkowski]

A lower Democratic turnout is already included in the likely voter models.

And actually, a poll of credible polls is incredibly accurate at predicting results, especially as you come closer to the event being predicted (that's not the same as saying that any individual poll would be accurate). There are some races where there is a lot of uncertainty, and polls are less reliable there. But I think the public already knows everything they'll know about Obama and Romney.

And on 09/15/08 RCP poll of polls had McCain in the lead.

[Loki]

And on 09/15/08 RCP poll of polls had McCain in the lead.

A) He was in the lead for a grand total of 9 days. The final result had Obama winning by 7.6%. The actual result was 7.2%.
B) More importantly, state polls mean much more than national ones. A 1% swing in the vote doesn't mean much if it happens in states that were already strongly Republican or Democratic. You'd need the polls in a whole bunch of states to all be wrong, and all be wrong in the same direction. That's not terribly likely.

Romney will probably get a temporary bump in the numbers due to the convention, but some major unexpected event would have to occur for him to overtake Obama in all of the battleground states.

[Lewkowski]

A) He was in the lead for a grand total of 9 days. The final result had Obama winning by 7.6%. The actual result was 7.2%.
B) More importantly, state polls mean much more than national ones. A 1% swing in the vote doesn't mean much if it happens in states that were already strongly Republican or Democratic. You'd need the polls in a whole bunch of states to all be wrong, and all be wrong in the same direction. That's not terribly likely.

Romney will probably get a temporary bump in the numbers due to the convention, but some major unexpected event would have to occur for him to overtake Obama in all of the battleground states.

Your missing the point. Polls don't mean as much as you think they do this far out.

[Loki]

Yes, they do. Temporary blips in the polls don't mean much.

[LittleFuzzy]

Fuzzy claimed leprechauns cause global warming in this thread.

It's the only explanation that makes sense!

[Nessus]

the Democrats here

How many of those do we have, anyways?

[RandBlade]

I don't see an active thread to discuss Obama but this cartoon from The Economist kind of hits the nail on the head:

[Nessus]

I like how they got the visibly aged thing going on

[Flixy]

Can we expect the Democrats here to pounce
on Obama for the lies cited in the article?

Well, I'm not a democrat, but sure, those lies suck too. And that commercial short of accusing Romney for the death of someone always seemed insanely stupid to me, too. But if you're trying to make a point you picked the wrong article, since it mentions the GOP is doing worse, which was my point here as well (that the amount of lies in your political arena is incredible, on both sides, but that during this election, one side seems even worse).

[Ominous Gamer]

Shhh liberals don't believe Fox News has anyone other than die hard conservatives. You'll upset their delicate world view.

Speaking of which, Fox finally did wake up, and removed the trending section from the front page shortly after my last post. I do believe its back now with something attacking MSNBC.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/01/us...se-ads.html?hp

Can we expect the Democrats here to pounce on Obama for the lies cited in the article?

Of course, Obama has his own set of Pants of Fire claims, I think its 1% vs Romney's 9%. Also of note is half of Obama's claims are true or mostly true, compared to less than a third for Romney.

[Flixy]

I noticed that too, but I don't know how they select their claims which makes statistics like that pretty meaningless.

[Loki]

Well, I'm not a democrat, but sure, those lies suck too. And that commercial short of accusing Romney for the death of someone always seemed insanely stupid to me, too. But if you're trying to make a point you picked the wrong article, since it mentions the GOP is doing worse, which was my point here as well (that the amount of lies in your political arena is incredible, on both sides, but that during this election, one side seems even worse).

Incumbents have less of a reason to lie since they have a track record to run on.

[Dreadnaught]

Really? I pointed that out in this thread? I'm not going to sit here and allege that the claim about politicians in our system is out-and-out wrong because I am pretty sure I've made this point in the past albeit not so strongly but I really wish you'd stop inventing things I've said in a thread and citing them to others.

My sentence was supposed to read "As Fuzzy has pointed out" to make it clear I was referencing something you have correctly noted in the past in other threads.

That's because it's a budget office comparing tax numbers and math. Revenue is revenue. It's long been considered a "non-partisan" office that's used by both parties, including right-leaners and Republicans. Is there something to suggest CBO is no longer "non-partisan" or reliable?

It's used by everyone, that doesn't make it non-partisan. The CBO answers specific requests, and either uses its own assumptions or the assumptions fed into it. They try, in their own way, to rise above the political fights. But in many ways, they are coopted for political fights.

That's where the ideological differences are -- and why there's disagreement about Trickle Down tax policy "creating jobs".

Bloated government is the ultimate "trickle down" tax policy.

[Nessus]

Bloated government is the ultimate "trickle down" tax policy.

[Loki]

[Lewkowski]

The age of the video is telling. He says that its nearly impossible to have tuition increases because the middle class looks after its own. Heh. What's the rate of tuition inflation compared to inflation?

Also SSI/Disability skews the whole SS side of things.

Furthermore any program that depends on federal income tax dollars instead of payroll taxes would always benefit the poor since the vast majority of poor people pay ZERO income tax.

[GGT]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/01/us...se-ads.html?hp

Can we expect the Democrats here to pounce on Obama for the lies cited in the article?

I'm not a Democrat, but I'll point out a couple of problems for both parties:

(1) "Outside groups" making ads, without coordination of the party, or cooperation from the candidate. They often get attributed to the candidate, unless they make a public announcement condemning the ad. Hello, Citizens United.

(2) News outlets not making the clear distinction between the campaign, the party platform, a surrogate or spokesperson, or outside groups.

(3) Confusing and competing language from Romney and Ryan (and the party platform) regarding abortion, overturning Roe v Wade, and Personhood Amendments. That leaves the door wide open for all sorts of interpretations and 'statements'.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/09/0...-platform.html

(note they're fact-checking Crist's statement, not whether a Personhood Amendment would effectively outlaw all abortions except for maternal life/health, and would automatically nullify Roe v Wade.)

It's used by everyone, that doesn't make it non-partisan. The CBO answers specific requests, and either uses its own assumptions or the assumptions fed into it. They try, in their own way, to rise above the political fights. But in many ways, they are coopted for political fights.

And they're required to note the origin of those "assumptions", and who made requests to the office. I'm fairly certain the Simpson-Bowles commission used CBO data, so would that make their recommendations "partisan"?

If the CBO predicts 12 million new jobs will be created as a natural result of a slow-growing economy, regardless of who's President or any particular policy, is Romney being "partisan" when he promises to create 12 million new jobs if he's elected?

Bloated government is the ultimate "trickle down" tax policy.

Nobody likes or defends bloat. Everyone knows beer belly "bloat" shouldn't be mistaken for pregnancy, let alone healthy growth.

However, one of the purposes of modern government is to ensure that those at the lower/poorer rungs of society have the same opportunities to rise as everyone else, without first waiting for something to "trickle down" from those higher/wealthier on the private ladder. Public Education. Public Health. Public Infrastructure. Those are the great equalizers that empower everyone in the nation, including the tax payers.

[GGT]

Furthermore any program that depends on federal income tax dollars instead of payroll taxes would always benefit the poor since the vast majority of poor people pay ZERO income tax.

Any program that depends on federal "income" tax....but gives deductions and exclusions to certain types of "income", including carried-interest or capital gains/dividends....will always benefit the rich, the corporatists, or those who make money on their money, and tax loopholes....instead of labor or payroll wages.

[Lewkowski]

Any program that depends on federal "income" tax....but gives deductions and exclusions to certain types of "income", including carried-interest or capital gains/dividends....will always benefit the rich, the corporatists, or those who make money on their money, and tax loopholes....instead of labor or payroll wages.

Not if the program doesn't benefit them...

[Loki]

The age of the video is telling. He says that its nearly impossible to have tuition increases because the middle class looks after its own. Heh. What's the rate of tuition inflation compared to inflation?

Also SSI/Disability skews the whole SS side of things.

Furthermore any program that depends on federal income tax dollars instead of payroll taxes would always benefit the poor since the vast majority of poor people pay ZERO income tax.

Sure, it's less true than before, but it's still true about the main programs. Social Security still benefits the middle class much more than the poor. Medicare does as well (especially when you take into account the fact that middle class people live much longer than poor people). Most of the farm subsidies go to people earning above the median income. Welfare has been cut. Medicaid and SSI seem to be the only major federal programs that primarily benefit the poor.

[GGT]

Not if the program doesn't benefit them...

But that's the short-sighted and skewed vision on their part. If those at the top view "income" taxes as nuisances that only reduce their income and profit margins...they're doing so at their own peril.

For the business-minded person, that means they don't recognize the importance of a strong and broad middle class, educated and healthy enough....to either buy their products or services, or provide them. For the uber-wealthy, that means they don't mind out-sourcing labor to other nations, as part of a global business-profit model, but still expect the workers in their service-world to be well-spoken, maybe bi or tri lingual, not just literate but well-educated, and anticipate their every need?

Polite doormen, smart valet parkers, savvy desk clerks, informed concierges, anticipatory housekeeping or laundry or room service, smart business and party planners, florists, bar tenders, restauranteurs.....these people don't grow on trees, or magically appear from nowhere. They come from the pool of people who've been educated and nurtured through many publicly funded projects, at local and nation levels.

[Ominous Gamer]

So Ryan finally admitted that he lied about one of his stats during an interview. The all important correction? His marathon time was over 4 hours, not under 3.

[GGT]

What does Ryan admit about misrepresenting the Janesville GM plant closure?

[GGT]

Also, it's fascinating to watch RNC/GOP and Romney/Ryan belittling Obama's Hope and Change slogan....while trying to morph it into their own slogan of Hope and Change.

Taking the country back, restoring work ethic principles, promoting growth and innovation, leading the world in democracy....suggesting these things haven't been present since Jan. '09 when Barack Obama was inaugurated as President. Insisting the US is inherently "exceptional" and super powerful, but can be brought to the edge of abject failure in 3 1/2 short years, by one election, and one president. No fear, we can be restored to our previous magnificence and international admiration, even superpower global dominance, by one election, and one president.

Romney/Ryan makes fun of Obama's campaign promises as if he was going to slow the rise of the oceans, and heal the planet. haha. Then they proceed to make their own campaign promises to help every American and their family. A 21st century that's led by American innovation, American workers, American consumers. How? By cutting taxes for public education, public health, federally funded research and infrastructure. By deregulating all industry, including banks and energy companies. Sacrifices will be necessary, including safe drinking water, ocean eco-systems, and any mining safety. Drill, baby drill. Lend, baby lend. Borrow against ALL future generations, at any cost, to keep the Empire alive.

[GGT]

I can't remember in which thread I mentioned political family dynasties....but there's a "documentary" on CNN about Poppy Bush. He openly admits their family privileges were part of their ordinary life. Escaping city life every summer, when they went to their family "compound" in Maine, with fresh sea air, boating and fishing. Not for their livelihood but for their entertainment. It made an impression on him, in his developmental years, but he didn't pose that impression as a comparison to others who couldn't possibly do the same, or escape the stifling city for respite in their family vacation estate.

It follows into WWII and Poppy's personal anecdotes. That means more to me, to see and hear his stories, and personal sacrifices, and is so endearing. But I've always had a soft spot in my heart for Poppy Bush. Hard to explain. It's just not a practical political strategy, to hoist the child or relative into the same sphere of power, riding paternal coattails as if they're sails on a ship.

[Loki]

http://www.economist.com/node/21561890

[Lewkowski]

But that's the short-sighted and skewed vision on their part. If those at the top view "income" taxes as nuisances that only reduce their income and profit margins...they're doing so at their own peril.

For the business-minded person, that means they don't recognize the importance of a strong and broad middle class, educated and healthy enough....to either buy their products or services, or provide them. For the uber-wealthy, that means they don't mind out-sourcing labor to other nations, as part of a global business-profit model, but still expect the workers in their service-world to be well-spoken, maybe bi or tri lingual, not just literate but well-educated, and anticipate their every need?

Polite doormen, smart valet parkers, savvy desk clerks, informed concierges, anticipatory housekeeping or laundry or room service, smart business and party planners, florists, bar tenders, restauranteurs.....these people don't grow on trees, or magically appear from nowhere. They come from the pool of people who've been educated and nurtured through many publicly funded projects, at local and nation levels.

Your missing my the reason for my response. As long as they actually have part of their income tax taken then if the program doesn't benefit them then they are worse off than the poor because the poor had to pay 0. The poor don't pay income tax.

[Nessus]

[Dreadnaught]

And they're required to note the origin of those "assumptions", and who made requests to the office. I'm fairly certain the Simpson-Bowles commission used CBO data, so would that make their recommendations "partisan"?

If the CBO predicts 12 million new jobs will be created as a natural result of a slow-growing economy, regardless of who's President or any particular policy, is Romney being "partisan" when he promises to create 12 million new jobs if he's elected?

They recommendations are partisan when someone from one party makes requests using their specific assumptions and presents the data as the Word of Allah. The recommendations are bi-partisan when people from two parties make requests using their specific assumptions and presents the data as the Word of Allah.

Much like factchecking sites, the CBO allows people to use its status as a third party as a smokescreen. Sure, both factcheckers and the CBO could be right. But they exist partially as tools used to bludgeon for any given agenda on any given day.

Nobody likes or defends bloat. Everyone knows beer belly "bloat" shouldn't be mistaken for pregnancy, let alone healthy growth.

However, one of the purposes of modern government is to ensure that those at the lower/poorer rungs of society have the same opportunities to rise as everyone else, without first waiting for something to "trickle down" from those higher/wealthier on the private ladder. Public Education. Public Health. Public Infrastructure. Those are the great equalizers that empower everyone in the nation, including the tax payers.

Agree to disagree. The things you listed are great corrupters that promise heady things and often deliver stasis and benefits for the few. Hence, government as the ultimate trickle-down system.