Wednesday, August 15, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 47% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns the vote from 43%. Four percent (4%) prefer some other candidate, and seven percent (7%) are undecided. Romney’s lead is a bit larger when leaners are included.

Midnight_Ride said, "The daily Gallop tracking poll had Romney as of yesterday up by 2%."

The "Gallop" poll? You find that at the racetrack, Midnight_Ride? The more closely followed "Gallup" poll hasn't had Romney ahead of Obama since back in June. [ http://www.gallup.com/poll/154559/US-Pre... ]

Midnight_Ride said, "The pew leans heavy left."

I think you mean the Pew Research poll and not your church pew. The Pew Research poll which has Obama up 10 points over Romney agrees with the new FOX News poll which has Obama up 9 points over Romney. And we all know FOX News is "fair and balanced." [ http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/... ]

Uh oh, Oblamer. Now it's a "disease". Looks like we might be getting closer to you elaborating on how you'll control the population starting with liberals. Remember when you posted that piece of garbage? And you want to claim that I'm part of a disease?
Oh yes, and Walter Reuther was an American hero. Without Reuther cities like Janesville would never have enjoyed the prosperity that they did.
Here's a little excerpt from the Wikipedia entry that you may have missed:
"In 1946 he narrowly defeated R. J. Thomas for the UAW presidency, and soon after he purged the UAW of all Communist elements. He was active in the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) umbrella as well, taking the lead in expelling eleven communist-led unions from the CIO in 1949."
*
"Besides high hourly wage rates and paid vacations, Reuther negotiated these benefits for his union: employer-funded pensions (beginning in 1950 at Chrysler), medical insurance (beginning at GM in 1950), and supplementary unemployment benefits (beginning at Ford in 1955). Reuther tried to negotiate lower automobile prices for the consumer with each contract, with limited success."
*
"He strongly supported the Civil Rights movement; Reuther was an active supporter of African American civil rights and participated in both the March on Washington for Freedom and Jobs (August, 1963) and the Selma to Montgomery March (March, 1965). He stood beside Martin Luther King Jr. while he made the "I Have A Dream" speech, during the 1963 March on Washington."
*
Now, oblamer, tell me again how liberalism is so very terrible.

65% of Americans still what the ObamaTax repealed. Again, not good news for the President.

The pew leans heavy left.
Rasmussen was the most accuate poll in the 2008 election at every phase and twist and turn. It has Romney up by 5% as of last week.
The daily Gallop tracking poll had Romney as of yesterday up by 2%
Not good news for an incumbent who should be up by double digits this early in the race.

Seriously...is that all ya got?

I love the Pew poll. They fully explained their methodology. Obama's up by 10 points. To top it all off, it turns out that Republicans are getting harder and harder to find. What could be better than that?

I like the pew poll also. It makes you feel good. All liberals should feel good.

I haven't used the term "great admiration" in any comments on this article. Looks like I'm getting some unneeded assistance with my statements again.

Great admiration? I see you haven't changed your ways, still telling tales. Pointing out how 17 polls were over rating obama in the last election and then pointing out the nearly 2 to 1 oversample in the pew poll is the furthest thing from admiration if you could tell the truth ...

whz_bng, the crying sound you hear is coming from the right after learning of Romney's choice for vice president.

I'm not alone in my admiration for Pew polls. Another person had already agreed with my admiration for Pew by noting the great accuracy of Pew's polls in their recent comments. Ironically, that same person now criticizes Pew's methodology. Let me remind you what that person had to quote about the great accuracy of Pew polls, "while most polls (17) overestimated Obama strength. Pre-election projections for two organizations’ final polls—Rasmussen and Pew—were perfectly in agreement with the actual election result" [ http://www.fordham.edu/images/academics/... ]

Nearly 2 to 1 oversample and he is only up 10 points? I bet that scares people.

poooo.....bahhhhh, sounds like a baby is crying.

If anyone is genuinely interested in Pew Research methodologies for their most recent presidential poll that has Obama up by 10 points over Romney, here is a detailed explanation directly from them: [ http://www.people-press.org/2012/08/03/p... ]

The Pew explanation is an excellent primer for people who typically never bother going much further than the partisan rhetoric of extreme media to dig down into polling methodologies.

From the current pew poll.

Polled numbers:
Reublican 459
Democrat 813

Yep that makes this current result accurate....

http://www.people-press.org/files/2012/0...

Yes, the fact that Pew Research has done a good job with its polling in 2008 is what makes the new Pew Research poll so encouraging for Obama. The latest Pew Research poll shows Obama with a 10 point lead over Romney. FOX has Obama up 9 points, CNN has Obama up 7 points.

"Currently, 51% say they support Obama or lean toward him, while 41% support or lean toward Romney. This is largely unchanged from earlier in July and consistent with polling over the course of this year. Across eight Pew Research Center surveys since January, Obama has led Romney by between four and 12 percentage points." Pew Research [ http://www.people-press.org/2012/08/02/r... ]

Ref 2008 election, "while most polls (17) overestimated Obama strength. Pre-election projections for two organizations’ final polls—Rasmussen and Pew—were perfectly in agreement with the actual election result"

http://www.fordham.edu/images/academics/...

"Friday, August 10, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 47% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns the vote from 43%."

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c...

"CNN Poll: Obama holds 7-point lead over Romney"

"Mitt Romney's unfavorable rating is up, most Americans think the Republican presidential challenger favors the rich, and it appears the number of people who believe that the economy will not get better if Romney is elected has edged up slightly, according to a new national poll." [ http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/201... ]

Oh no those pesky tax returns, yep that's the reason those on the left who had no plan not to support Obama claim they will not support Romney. What else should Mitt do that other candidates also did that surpassed current legal requirements to run for office? Let's see...

-Bill was accused of all kinds of weird stuff guess Mitt needs to do that to.

-Obama got a sweet deal on his house guess Mitt needs to do that.

-Obama hung out with a person that supported a group that bombed police stations guess Mitt needs to do that.

-Bill's wife made nifty future's investments guess Mitt's wife needs to do that.

-Bill and his wife had shady dealings guess Mitt and his wife need to do that.

-Edwards got someone pregnant while his wife was sick guess Mitt needs to do that.

-Gary Hart was out playing with women folk on boats guess Mitt needs to do that.

-Grover Cleveland had an illegitimate child guess Mitt needs to do that.

-The late Ted Kennedy was party to a girl's death guess Mitt needs to do that.

-John Kennedy and his brother messed with Marilyn Mitt can't do that, she is gone.

-Strom Thurmond ran for president once, he also had an illegitimate child should Mitt do that too?

Rmoney wants us to think it was all him that saved the 2002 olympics. What he doesn't tell you is the 600 million in GOVERNMENT EARMARKS that bailed him out. Mitt is all about flip flopping and lies. Lets see your taxes Mitt...

"The president would take 49 percent of the vote compared to Romney's 40 percent in a head-to-head matchup if the election were held today, the poll found." FOX News August 9, 2012 Presidential Poll [ http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/... ]

FOX News has Obama up 9 points over Romney.

Exactly poobah,
Romney wants to run on his Bain record. He doesn't seem to want to talk about his time as governor in Massachusetts. So by a truce he must mean he wants to talk about Bain, but he doesn't want President Obama to talk about Bain. He doesn't want a Truce. He just wants an unfair advantage. All Obama should do is disavow that crazy super PAC ad (that hasn't aired anywhere) and tell Romney to put his big boy pants on.

"Mitt Romney, battered by Democratic attacks over his Bain Capital record and taxes, is calling on President Obama to agree to a truce over his business career." [ http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/0... ]

Haha, sorry Willard Mitt, that's not how things work in the real world. If you released 12 years of tax returns like your father did, instead of the one year you have, perhaps there would be less questions about your business and personal finances. Or would there?

Not to mention invading the USSR without cold weather gear.

Dont disagree Will.

Another axis problem was trying to build too many different weapon systems. While we cranked out medium M-4s, the axis built various Mk4's, Panthers (designed to counter the T34), and Tiger (1's & 2's) as well as STUGS. Then wasted resources on supertanks like the Maus.

Heck, the Germans couldn't even decide, for the most part, on a single infantry rifle.

Even Rush is slamming the Rmoney camp. wow
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEgo4_Xob...

The jobs bill can't even get through the Democrat controlled Senate - fail

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/08/de...
The Republican obstructionism started in January of 2009 when we were in a deep economic downturn. And they say it`s all on Obama`s head now. Hypocrites!

@ BunBun: Regarding the Axis failure to defeat Allied forces in WW2: Germany was far from ready to conduct sustained multiple front campaigns against any standing armed forces of the day in late 1939.

The Kriegsmarine(Navy)had less than 60 operational U-Boats when hostilities commenced on Sep.1 1939...of that number fully 2/3rds were type II coastal subs suitable for the Baltic sea and training. Had Germany had a sufficient fleet of U-boats to begin the battle of the Atlantic with, the Lend-Lease supplies from the US to Britain and Soviet Russia would have been sunk in greater amounts of tonnage than they actually were.

Sir Winston Churchill, Britains war time Prime Minister is on record as saying: "the only thing that truly frightened me was the U-boat peril" (or words to this effect).

Britain and Soviet Russia did battle alone for nearly 3 years before the US entered the war, but the industrial depth the American nation held is the one item the Axis could never hope to match. We built in excess of 50,000 M-4 Sherman tanks of all models/variants....

The Germans built roughly 24,000 total armored vehicles of all models/variants.

The Allies outproduced the Axis in war material. that was the mitigating factor in Germanys ultimate defeat in WW2.

Sorry to go off topic for all reading this.

Another keystone item: "reported that Koch Industries were poised to be "big winners" from the pipeline"
.
Surprise surprise.....no wonder they are buying the politicians.

Keystone pipeline is probably going to be constructed as soon as the alternate route is selected.

I'm glad someone brought up the keystone pipeline. If you look at the wiki site, there already is a keystone. The PROPOSED keystone extension would get the Canada oil to the gulf so it can be shipped to ASIA. So, the people of the US loses out of the oil AND has our drinking water threatened. Not only that, the repubs attached a bill to the keystone to renew Bushes tax breaks for the rich. The Keystone pipeline would have been GREAT for BIG OIL, bad for people. Read for your self...
.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pi...

Then again, Obama has a left mind which is all about government control and regulations, mandates and taxes.

California and the US government announced a plan to build underground tunnels to improve the states water supplies. The problem is, a $13 billion cost. I wonder if there is any stimulus money still unspent?

Let us not forget the billions of tax dollars given away to states union members instead of "shovel ready" keeping unemployment under 8%. Which by the way is 3% points higher then any of Bush's 8 years which the media went nuts over every night.
The Obama Jobs bill is based on his ideology of taking over all of the industries as he so loudly proclaimed yesterday.
Who in their right mind would punish Americans for their successes? Obama would and is.

Drilling ban, we exported oil/gas last year. Wisconsin mining, goodness gracious, I didn`t realize Obama came here and shut that down!
Keystone, the bottom part is ready for construction, and be careful what you ask for. At least half of those jobs are Canadian, and the premise behind the selling of the project was that US consumers would end up paying 10-20 cents more a gallon for gas
So, no coal is being mined, or burned now? News to me.
California water, don`t know anything about that one.
Jobs bill, read what I cited.

pharm, what jobs bill? His drilling ban, killing the keystone pipeline, shutting down the coal industry, regulating manufacturing, stopping the California farmers from getting water? The mining bill in Wisconsin? Did I leave anything out?

Walter, I have never held with the belief thar we won ww2 all by ourselves. My reply is to your assertation that it was a miracle others held on as long as they did. Obviously, the military might of the US was a standing joke in the 1930's-43. An army that wraps trucks in canvas with the word "tank" on it only inspires the fear of rupturing yourself while laughing. All the same, if you fall into the crowd that believes that the Red Army would have won by themselves without aid and without critical errors by thier enemies is also an oversimplification. You also must look at other events to see where they influenced decisions taken (or not). For example- the experience in the invasion of Crete killed any idea of German use of paratroopers in large scale operations. That made Sealion (invasion of Great Brittian) unlikely without total air superiority - which was denied by the Commenwealth pilots in the Battle of Brittian.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...
Maybe 1.9 million more jobs.

At the time, those few million jobs, no matter what they were, probably averted a depression.
We could have more jobs if not for Republican obstruction of Obama`s jobs bill.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...

BunBun,
Very interesting. I guess American military might was even less influential than I had previously thought. Again, we get too much credit. German mistakes and some U.S. machinery were all it took for the British and Russians to get by. Thanks for the info BunBun. Very enlightening. I guess this new Tom Brokaw documentary about the British standing firm against the Nazis while the Americans continued to hem & haw is a complete farce. I'll keep that in mind.

Selling insurance across state lines is in the ACA, if the states agree to follow the rules in the other state.
As long as elections are funded by donors seeking advantages for their beliefs/political positions, things such as a public option are unlikely to happen. Money creates policy, not enough civic minded individuals involved in politics to change that anymore. When Norquist says a president doesn`t have to think, just sign legislation from a Republican Congress, you could vote in Mitts horse and ink his hoof to pass laws.

Walter: The HCA was passed with all Democratic votes (Republicans unable to obstruct that). Yet it does not include the public option nor the right to shop across state lines for insurance to drive competition. An opportunity sadly missed during those 1st 2 years you speak of. Also, Congress passes the laws but I always thought it was part of the President and Vice-President's job to influence, twist arms, etc. behind the scenes. LBJ was great at doing that. President Obama promised change and bipartisanship and a new Washington but instead leads the partisanship battle or stands and points the finger at Congress. Sadly disappointed that he has not done more behind the scenes .... What about the Simpson/Boyles proposal or the gang of 6 or the group of 12? He and Boehner were close to a deal until both got too much static from their parties for compromising too much. Whenever there has been a chance of some compromise, it is not listened to because both sides including our President seem to weigh everything in terms of election votes instead of in terms of what is good for the country. I hate to "waste" my vote in November for "none of the above" but not sure I will find a middle ground politician on the ballot at any level to vote for. IMHO

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/20...
Hard to make progress with no help.

"It was a miracle that the Russians and the British were able to keep the Nazis at bay as long as they did"

No it wasn't. Hitler had delusions of a German/Anglo crusade against the Bolsheveks so he hesitated in finishing off GB. (plus the fact that he believed Herman G that the Luftwaffe could bomb GB into submission). The Soviets did what they always have done - trade space for time then hit back with reserves after the enemy was stretched too far. Either way, the Sovs would not have survived without tons of lend lease equipment we sent that gave them the time to move production east of the Urals. Not to mention the failure of German intelligence to notice things like the T34 which came as a nasty surprise.

http://factcheck.org/2008/02/no-wmds-in-...
Old news, 2008.

No wmd's? only if you don't count Sarin and Mustard gas

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/librar...

for those who think there were no WMD's in Iraq. Yes this is the 2004 report but I don't care to dig up newer info that Obamaphiles will ignore anyway.

Maynard,
For 2 years he was attempting to heal this country from the previous administration. By the time 2010 rolled around corporations equalled people and money equalled speech, so the GOP bought the first in what's sure to be a long line of electoral auctions. The Repubs spent enough money to convince the American people that 2 years was more than enough time for President Obama to have returned us to prosperity and that he had failed. The great Republican flood into Washington and state houses across the country followed. Ever since, any further legislative plans the President had have been blocked. Any further policy success leads to political success, and that is unacceptable to the GOP. Never mind that their actions might be hurting the American people. They believe that anything they can do to hurt Obama will help Mitt Romney. Most of the time Mitt Romney won't go into detail about his actual policy plans. When he does, he's just pushing retreads of W Bush era policies. So, basically, the GOP has been obstructing since 2010 in order to take us back to the policy mind set that got us into the Great Recession in the first place. I wouldn't attribute the continued problems to Obama inheriting his own mess. The Republicans won't let him clean up their mess. They just want to watch it sit there, festering and molding. People like Boehner and Cantor have stood in front of the press and all but said that there's no point in voting for Obama because the Congress is split evenly enough that they're not going to let him get anything done, so we might as well vote for their guy.
Obama tried hard to work with the GOP. Fair pay legislation, student loan reform, health care reform based on Republican model. These are things the country needed. The GOP was willing to recognize that much, but when it came time to actually get things done they dug in their heels and refused to work with the President. The filibusters fell like rain and Washington fell into such a state of disrepair that Congress continues to have the lowest approval rating in history. A big reason why President Obama continues to enjoy a lead in the polls is because the American people blame Congress for this mess more than Obama. And rightfully so!

The economy is not turning around. Unemployment just went up again and all Obama can do is smear Romney. In 2008 Obama said about McCain when that happens, they are out of ideas and nothing to defend.
He was right about that.

Dont like either candidate or either party. Hard left or hard right .. no middle ground. That said, recently saw a cartoon with a despondent looking President Obama saying "Man, if I get re-elected, I'm really going to inherit a mess". How many years or terms does he get to slide on blaming everything on the previous administration? If elected, this time the previous administration will be his. Enough said.

bowlgal,
A hair's breadth from depression to recovery is turning around the economy. Hundreds of thousand of jobs lost per month to job growth is turning around the economy. Is it slow? Yes. Has it turned around? Yes.

Ezoner,
Longing for another world war, are ya? What you call shunning of allies and coddling of enemies is known as diplomacy to most people. Have we learned nothing by the lives and resources lost to the boondoggles in Iraq & Afghanistan? And let's get things straight on WWII. The U.S. dragged its feet for years considering whether or not to enter into that conflict, which was the absolute right thing to do. You don't involve yourself in a situation that will cost that many lives until you're 100% certain that the ends justify the means. It was a miracle that the Russians and the British were able to keep the Nazis at bay as long as they did. It wasn't until we were attacked by the Japanese that we entered the war. It wasn't to step in to save the day for Europe. Once it was clear that we had a common enemy, then and only then did we become allies. Plus, there's no way we would've defeated the Germans without the Russians. They held that front with relatively little help from the Americans.

Obama bows and apologizes for America to other nations. It shows a great disrespect to the people of this country he is suppose to be charge of. However, it's his economic policies that have been far more harmful. In his own words, "if I can't turn the economy around in four years, I should be a one term President."
We will soon honor your statement.

Quote from article: "One particular case shows that the (Bush)administration knowingly disregarded scientific analysis of intelligence data that contradicted its case.
.
LIES

Oblamer: So it's off limits to bring up what Bush did, but you have no problem bringing up the state of IL money problems and blaming that on Obama...yet how long ago was that?? Caution buddy, your hypocrisy is showing.

This is the reason we went into Iraq? Lies about the tubes...read for your self...
.
http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integri...

Absolutely not. But then I'm not the one here advocating we spend millions/billions more that we don't have dealing 'harshly' with a country who threatens a different country, without even asking questions.

Silly to me that it's never a problem spending billions to impose our beliefs around the world, but if someone wants to provide all Americans with adequate health care, well heavens to betsys he must be a socialist. Sad really.

The dems approved the war because they were being lied to. Remember the famous aluminum tubes that the scientists said WERE NOT WMD's but the bush gang said they were? We had war with Iraq over some fence posts? good grief... and now Rmoney is your answer?
.

Are we better off now after the Bush/Cheney failure? Why were we in Iraq anyways? Just because his daddy failed in Iraq? There were no WMD's, so why? It was just a big money maker for Halliburton I thinks....

'This is working within our resources and living within our means'

Walter you know that's not how those on the right expect our gov't to act.

woody...it's time to stop harping on the last administration. This is Obamas ball game and has been for almost 4 years. Are you better off than 4 years ago? I don't think America is.

Rmoney? Justlook at this guy. He must be one of the biggest flip floppers ever. It seems he can't open his mouth without ticking off other countries. Is Rmoney who we want to keep us OUT OF WAR???
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQwrB1vu7...

Walter -- with Iran -- that might be a good start. It seems that nations in the EU and the world have forgotten the sacrafice that ALL in the US made in WWII. That many -- if not all EU nations would be Germans, and maybe the US would now be a part of Germany -- if we hadnt taken on the challenege to protect our allies. When you consider the thousands that gave their lives so that the Europeans could be free of tyranny.

I have had this discussion with younger Europeans that have obviously nit read or have read re-written history. It was amazing and eye opening in the discussion and we both came away wiser. In the end they better understood the American stance and position on issues. But todays approach has got to be confusing. Shunning your allies and coddling your enemies, strategy is not the right approach.

I think Obama has done a good job cleaning up the Bush/Cheney WOT mess. They never did find any WMD's, did they? Lies, lies, and more lies. Halliburton made good money on the deal though. It seems the repubs look at war as a good money making venture. And, the repubs answer is Rmoney? All he did was tick everyone off when he went abroad. Fail !!!
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOyyfrqGx...

donnaw -- I have been saying the same thing. The first time around, the contrast in personality to McCain was obvious. But looking at Obama's experience -- I couldnt see voting for someone with no leadership and management experience and when combined with his associations, never.

Today -- this guy is totally screwing the middle class and especially the unions. He talks about taxing the wealthy -- but every action he takes hurts the middle class more and more.

It looks like people are still mesmorizsed by his personaility --

Gerson seems to think that anytime there is a military conflict in the world that the U.S. should get involved. Interestingly he never once proposed how the U.S. would go about paying for such things. We could always follow the Bush example and cut taxes while increasing spending. Obama's new foreign policy as it pertains to international conflict has been to engage in smaller, less expensive operations that leave a much smaller footprint when they are over. This approach has been developed and endorsed by the Secretary of Defense and our armed forces. This is not kicking the can. This is working within our resources and living within our means.
Dealing with those nations that we disagree with "harshly", as some would suggest, perpetuates not only our economic problems but our perpetually tarnished global image. When a country like Iran states that another country that we are strategically alligned with like Israel should be "erased form the earth", how "harshly" should we deal with that rhetoric? Shall we answer Iran's words against Israel by literally erasing Iran from the earth? Is that the kind of foreign policy that would make us proud of President Obama. Good God, he's already been signing off on the secret murders of dozens of civilians in Pakistan with drone attacks. Isn't that enough to satisfy the blood thirsty?

After reading this column and Krauthammer's column I wonder why anyone would vote for Obama. Unless you just want to live off the govt dole.