dsgrue3 said:
Quite true. However, every single candidate that was over 50% in late October in the Gallup poll has gone on to win the election. That person is Mitt Romney. |

Who won the last debate? | |||
| President Barack Obama | 259 | 61.96% | |
| Governor MItt Romney | 115 | 27.51% | |
| Nobody/tie | 38 | 9.09% | |
| Total: | 412 | ||
dsgrue3 said:
Quite true. However, every single candidate that was over 50% in late October in the Gallup poll has gone on to win the election. That person is Mitt Romney. |

Kasz216 said:
Corporate news hype train is a bit much. Though I do agree that national polls are somewhat useless. At least in the current era, when the electoral college benefits democrats, because the red states are REALLY red... meaning they waste a lot of votes on guranteed electoral votes. Even so, Rasmussen has been the best two elections in a row now by quite a bit. That much is undisputable. Even with a slight popular vote lead. Romney is far behind Obama in electoral votes and has to sweep the big three swing states AND when a couple others. Honestly, the only thing i'd find funnier then an Obama win via electoral vote, but loss via electoral college would be the extremely rare but possible 269-269 split. Seeing people react to that dumbfoundedly would be priceless. I wonder what your reaction was in 2000... |
actually according to the RCP, as it stands, if Romney wins Ohio, he wins the election. He's pulled ahead in all the swing states that he needs to with the exception of either OH or WI, either one will do
I wish they would let me moderate one of the debates all this dodging and not answering questions has to stop. Especially, on the Romney/ Ryan side.
| chriscox1121 said:
|
No kidding... didn't realize that. Last article I read on it suggested it was better then that, though maybe it was just old. (or they were just being the New Yorker, since it was the New Yorker.)

| chocoloco said: Here is one for the conservatives.
|
Quite the misleading map. Especially since the Caspian Sea doesn't exactly lead anywhere. And if Iran wanted to attack somewhere to make the most impact, like say a modern civilized country (most likely somewhere in EU), they would have to travel all the way around Africa to get there by boat. Now if they could cut through Syria and make it to the Mediterranean, why EU isn't that far away. Or hell, they could just cut through Syria and bomb Israel straight out. Of course, if we have some sort of sway in Syria, we may just be able to prevent either of those. But I guess Mitt's just dumb to suggest such a thing.
@ OP
I think if you just judged this one on a first viewing it would pretty much come out a draw. However, after all the fact checking comes out, Obama lost this one. He did want a SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement) to keep a number of troops in Iraq, but couldn't get it done. Marines still use plenty of bayonets, and are Military uses horses in Afghanistan. Romney did support federal guarantees of post-bankruptcy financing for GM, as well as guarantees for purchasers' warranties. What's going to shock many on the left is when they see the polls don't shift much, or if any at all, even though they believe Obama won the last 2 debates.
Kasz216 said:
|
then again everything can change tomorrow because it's that close, but one thing is for sure Romney and Obama both need OH.
Obama kill it with, "We don't have as many bayonets and horses either. And we have air craft carriers, and planes land of them. And ships that go underwater."
Then kept remind Romney his policy when it was different a few weeks ago.
Although when Romney was complaining about 5 years ago - I wanted Obama to remind him that he wasn't President then - it was a guy much like Romney.