Obama vs Romney - POTUS 2012

[-TSS-]

The latest poll is showing that states leaning to Obama would give him 221 electoral colege votes and the states leaning to Romney would him him 191 votes. The rest being too close to call. Florida and Ohio among such states.

[punked]

The latest poll is showing that states leaning to Obama would give him 221 electoral colege votes and the states leaning to Romney would him him 191 votes. The rest being too close to call. Florida and Ohio among such states.

Yah like Pennsylvania a state that is so close to call (Obama leads by 10 points) that Romney has pulled all his add money out of it? Come on the media wants a horse race that they are telling you silly things and you believe them. There is still a race but your Obama number is just wrong.

[waldo]

first, the Mitt enlightened with his, "Corporations are People, My Friend"... only to be championed with his latest, "America is a Company"! Oh my!

[GostHacked]

The Corporation of the United States of America. Might not be far from the truth. And if that is the truth, Romney is will just be the president of this corporation.

[waldo]

in spite of the U.S. Republican Party becoming synonymous with being the 'anti-science party', it has agreed to participate in a 'debate' answering science policy based questions. A group sponsored by prestigious scientific organizations, 'Science Debate 2012', was successful in securing participation from both the Republican and Democratic campaigns... with Romney and Obama to provide answers to the following 14 questions... answers to be forthcoming later this week - the questions:

1. Innovation and the Economy. Science and technology have been responsible for over half of the growth of the U.S. economy since WWII, when the federal government first prioritized peacetime science mobilization. But several recent reports question America’s continued leadership in these vital areas. What policies will best ensure that America remains a world leader in innovation?

2. Climate Change. The Earth’s climate is changing and there is concern about the potentially adverse effects of these changes on life on the planet. What is your position on cap-and-trade, carbon taxes, and other policies proposed to address global climate change—and what steps can we take to improve our ability to tackle challenges like climate change that cross national boundaries?

3. Research and the Future. Federally funded research has helped to produce America’s major postwar economies and to ensure our national security, but today the UK, Singapore, China, and Korea are making competitive investments in research. Given that the next Congress will face spending constraints, what priority would you give to investment in research in your upcoming budgets?

4. Pandemics and Biosecurity. Recent experiments show how Avian flu may become transmissible among mammals. In an era of constant and rapid international travel, what steps should the United States take to protect our population from emerging diseases, global pandemics and/or deliberate biological attacks?

5. Education. Increasingly, the global economy is driven by science, technology, engineering and math, but a recent comparison of 15-year-olds in 65 countries found that average science scores among U.S. students ranked 23rd, while average U.S. math scores ranked 31st. In your view, why have American students fallen behind over the last three decades, and what role should the federal government play to better prepare students of all ages for the science and technology-driven global economy?

6. Energy. Many policymakers and scientists say energy security and sustainability are major problems facing the United States this century. What policies would you support to meet the demand for energy while ensuring an economically and environmentally sustainable future?

7. Food. Thanks to science and technology, the United States has the world's most productive and diverse agricultural sector, yet many Americans are increasingly concerned about the health and safety of our food. The use of hormones, antibiotics and pesticides, as well as animal diseases and even terrorism pose risks. What steps would you take to ensure the health, safety and productivity of America's food supply?

8. Fresh Water. Less than one percent of the world’s water is liquid fresh water, and scientific studies suggest that a majority of U.S. and global fresh water is now at risk because of increasing consumption, evaporation and pollution. What steps, if any, should the federal government take to secure clean, abundant fresh water for all Americans?

9. The Internet. The Internet plays a central role in both our economy and our society. What role, if any, should the federal government play in managing the Internet to ensure its robust social, scientific, and economic role?

10. Ocean Health. Scientists estimate that 75 percent of the world’s fisheries are in serious decline, habitats like coral reefs are threatened, and large areas of ocean and coastlines are polluted. What role should the federal government play domestically and through foreign policy to protect the environmental health and economic vitality of the oceans?

11. Science in Public Policy. We live in an era when science and technology affect every aspect of life and society, and so must be included in well-informed public policy decisions. How will you ensure that policy and regulatory decisions are fully informed by the best available scientific and technical information, and that the public is able to evaluate the basis of these policy decisions?

12. Space. The United States is currently in a major discussion over our national goals in space. What should America's space exploration and utilization goals be in the 21st century and what steps should the government take to help achieve them?

13. Critical Natural Resources. Supply shortages of natural resources affect economic growth, quality of life, and national security; for example China currently produces 97% of rare earth elements needed for advanced electronics. What steps should the federal government take to ensure the quality and availability of critical natural resources?

14. Vaccination and public health. Vaccination campaigns against preventable diseases such as measles, polio and whooping cough depend on widespread participation to be effective, but in some communities vaccination rates have fallen off sharply. What actions would you support to enforce vaccinations in the interest of public health, and in what circumstances should exemptions be allowed?

[-TSS-]

Usually elections are won by those who can conquer the centre but not this time, at least not so much. This time it is all about being able to lure your core-voters to the polls. That's why I think Romney will win. Choosing someone like Ryan would backfire in normal circumstances as he has some very extreme views which would alienate the moderates but which are fully endorsed by the core-republicans. Moreover, many people who voted for Obama four years ago are disillusioned.

The greatest asset Obama has is that he is undisputably a more likeable guy of the two. Romney wil have to convince the electorate that being a nice guy is one thing and being a good President is another.

[Guest Derek L]

Unleash the Super-Pac(S) on this gem:

[waldo]

Unleash the Super-Pac(S) on this gem:

buddy... did the DNC convention give you the answer you were looking for?

perhaps we should have some of your described 'Super-Pac(S)' have a go at the following from Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell ... particularly since you beaked off over a pending U.S. Labor jobs report, hey?

Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell commenting after the 47 Republican Senators voted, en masse, to block and deny the required 60 vote level to take up legislation for Obama's "American Jobs Act":

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky promised with a sly smile from the floor that Republicans will “continue to look for opportunities to give the president the vote he asked for.”

but really, Derek L... nothing out of the norm for your favoured Republican Party of NO, right?

[-TSS-]

I believe that Ryan will be the Republicans' candidate in 2016 if Romney loses now. It is possible that Ryan could be their candidate in 2016 even if Romney wins now. I just can't see Romney being a very successful president and seeking a second term if he gets elected this time around.

[waldo]

on my! Ann Romney is now taking "Stand By Your Man" to another level... she of the screaming, "I LOVE YOU WOMEN", that she belted out at the Republican convention, now in an interview yesterday, refuses to answer questions on birth control and lesbian marriage.

[westguy]

Mitt Romney is boring, and kind of a nerd. But he's competent at fixing problems, which he's done over the course of his life. In business, for the olympics, and as governor. Something the current president isn't. That's how he needs to run his campaign.

Lets look at the facts;

1. he was governor of a state that was 47 out of 50 for job creation.

2. He closed companies and ignored how many jobs went offshore

3. He has numerous bank accts. to avoid paying US taxes

4. His party has Mitch McConnell whose stated goal was simply to obstruct Obama no matter what he tried. ( so much for bipartianship.)

5. He has ignored the fact that the first stimulus was by George W. and blamed Obama.

6. The recession started under George W. and Obama has faced many unnecessary obstructions.

He is neither ethical nor competent which his record proves.

[BC_chick]

on my! Ann Romney is now taking "Stand By Your Man" to another level... she of the screaming, "I LOVE YOU WOMEN", that she belted out at the Republican convention, now in an interview yesterday, refuses to answer questions on birth control and lesbian marriage.

Wow her opinions on these social issues aren't very different than her husband's ideas on economic stimulation.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Wow her opinions on these social issues aren't very different than her husband's ideas on economic stimulation.

Lesbians shouldn't be parents. What an awful idea. Two women. Anyone knows that one bossy emotional prissy dumb control freak woman is enough for any household an any two people raising a kid. Can you imagine the poor kid who has to grow up under two women? ugh.

Oh wait. One woman is "less" emotionally disturbed than the other. Yay. Two volatile emotional wing nuts without the steadying hand of a male role model.

That kid is going to be a disaster. Pray it's a girl. Because at least she's already destined to be the same. If it's a boy? God help him. Yoga class and Sunday "talking".

Puke.

Edited September 14, 2012 by JerrySeinfeld

[dre]

Lesbians shouldn't be parents. What an awful idea. Two women. Anyone knows that one bossy emotional prissy dumb control freak woman is enough for any household. Can you imagine the poor kid who has to grow up under two women? ugh.

That kid is going to be a disaster.

So.... you're about 9 years old I gather?

[JerrySeinfeld]

So.... you're about 9 years old I gather?

Why would you say that? Just because "everyone's ok" with something doesn't make it correct.

No one knows how this little experiment is going to end and I'm entitled to my opinion. For all we know I am right.

"Everyone" was OK with biofuel and the movie "Waterworld" too, and we all know how that worked, out.

Edited September 14, 2012 by JerrySeinfeld

[dre]

Why would you say that?

I read a few of your posts.

[JerrySeinfeld]

I read a few of your posts.

Maybe if you were to grow past the mental age of 9 you'd see that not everyone sees the world the spoon fed way you do.

[-TSS-]

PaUL Ryan is against abortion even in case of rape or incest. I don't think that will go down too well even with those who are in principle against abortion but agree to allow it in such extreme cases or if the mother's life is in danger.

[JerrySeinfeld]

PaUL Ryan is against abortion even in case of rape or incest. I don't think that will go down too well even with those who are in principle against abortion but agree to allow it in such extreme cases or if the mother's life is in danger.

1. Paul Ryan is not running for President.

2. Presidents do not make abortion policy.

3. The nations is running off a fiscal cliff, is your sex life really the most pressing issue in this election? I mean, I get it. Obama's constituency doesn't work. So sex life is probably their big voting concern. But for the rest of us, you know, working people, there are far more important maters at hand.

[Shady]

1. Paul Ryan is not running for President.

2. Presidents do not make abortion policy.

3. The nations is running off a fiscal cliff, is your sex life really the most pressing issue in this election? I mean, I get it. Obama's constituency doesn't work. So sex life is probably their big voting concern. But for the rest of us, you know, working people, there are far more important maters at hand.

Exactly. Besides, Obama is the one that's out of the mainstream on abortion. The guy voted several times for legislation that would make medical treatment to babies that survive an abortion, and are outside of the womb, against the law. How f'ed up is that?

[BC_chick]

Lesbians shouldn't be parents. What an awful idea. Two women. Anyone knows that one bossy emotional prissy dumb control freak woman is enough for any household an any two people raising a kid. Can you imagine the poor kid who has to grow up under two women? ugh.

Oh wait. One woman is "less" emotionally disturbed than the other. Yay. Two volatile emotional wing nuts without the steadying hand of a male role model.

That kid is going to be a disaster. Pray it's a girl. Because at least she's already destined to be the same. If it's a boy? God help him. Yoga class and Sunday "talking".

Puke.

Wait, aren't you the one who wrote a while back how you stroll around your kits neighbourhood and the 'happiest' women are the stay at home moms as opposed to career women? As in a woman's destiny is to rear children? Now because the women are gay they're bossy 'emotional prissy and dumb'?

How much your opinion of motherhood changes when your ugly homophobic side comes out.

God I wish I could unread that misogynist homophobic tripe. Gross.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Wait, aren't you the one who wrote a while back how you stroll around your kits neighbourhood and the 'happiest' women are the stay at home moms as opposed to career women? As in a woman's destiny is to rear children? Now because the women are gay they're bossy 'emotional prissy and dumb'?

How much your opinion of motherhood changes when your ugly homophobic side comes out.

God I wish I could unread that misogynist homophobic tripe. Gross.

No, that's wasn't me. But it's not gayness that makes women emotional and irrational it's hormones.

By the way, making a comment about someone doesn't make me afraid of them. I just happen to know that two women as parents is a bad situation for any young boy.

Additionally, "misogynist" refers to hatred. I don't hate women. Just because I accurately describe how most women are irrational due to emotions isn't hatred. It's just fact.

Edited September 15, 2012 by JerrySeinfeld

[Shady]

Lets look at the facts;

Your so-called facts are pretty dubious.

1. he was governor of a state that was 47 out of 50 for job creation.

As governor, Massachussets' unemployment rate went down to 4.7%. When you get close to full employment, it's alot more difficult to get rates lower than if your state has high unemployment.

2. He closed companies and ignored how many jobs went offshore

Jobs go so-called offshore for various reasons. Companies are closed for various reasons as well. But more companies were successful than were closed. What's your point?

3. He has numerous bank accts. to avoid paying US taxes

It doesn't matter how many bank accounts somebody has. It's whether they're disclosed to the IRS. His are, so they provide no relief from taxes. You don't know what you're talking about. You're just mouthing talking points you've probably read from blogs.

4. His party has Mitch McConnell whose stated goal was simply to obstruct Obama no matter what he tried. ( so much for bipartianship.)

Good, they should be working against Obama's policies. His policies are disasterous for the economy and the country.

5. He has ignored the fact that the first stimulus was by George W. and blamed Obama.

He's criticized Obama over Obama's stimulus, you know, the one that's bigger than any stimulus in the history of the country. The one that turned out to be a big crap sandwich.

6. The recession started under George W. and Obama has faced many unnecessary obstructions.

What's an unnecessary obstruction? Do you know that there are three equal branches of government? He's not a king, he's a president, and not the first one to be obstructed by congress. Not to mention he had huge majorities in congress for his first two years, so Republicans had no power to obstruct anyways, unless they got Democrats to join them.

He is neither ethical nor competent which his record proves.

Complete nonsense.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Your so-called facts are pretty dubious.

As governor, Massachussets' unemployment rate went down to 4.7%. When you get close to full employment, it's alot more difficult to get rates lower than if your state has high unemployment.

Jobs go so-called offshore for various reasons. Companies are closed for various reasons as well. But more companies were successful than were closed. What's your point?

It doesn't matter how many bank accounts somebody has. It's whether they're disclosed to the IRS. His are, so they provide no relief from taxes. You don't know what you're talking about. You're just mouthing talking points you've probably read from blogs.

Good, they should be working against Obama's policies. His policies are disasterous for the economy and the country.

He's criticized Obama over Obama's stimulus, you know, the one that's bigger than any stimulus in the history of the country. The one that turned out to be a big crap sandwich.

What's an unnecessary obstruction? Do you know that there are three equal branches of government? He's not a king, he's a president, and not the first one to be obstructed by congress. Not to mention he had huge majorities in congress for his first two years, so Republicans had no power to obstruct anyways, unless they got Democrats to join them.

Complete nonsense.

Why should a failing company stay open?

I'm sick of this "he closed companies" argument. So what?

Let's talk about this. Obama criticizes Romney for closing failing companies. So Obama favours failure?

Only someone who doesn't understand economics would make such an argument.

But then again, that's the socialist mantra: it's business's job to give me a job.

Edited September 15, 2012 by JerrySeinfeld

[cybercoma]

Why would you say that? Just because "everyone's ok" with something doesn't make it correct.

And just because you say it's not right that makes it so?