PoliGAF 2012 Community Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
British ministers were pleased the G20 communique is specific on its commitments to try to find a mechanism to address unsustainable bonds costs.
It's terribly depressing that the solution to "unsustainable bonds costs" is staring them in the face. There are 17 countries in the G20 that do not--and cannot have--this problem of unsustainable bond costs. One of them being Japan, whose debt to GDP ratio is 200%.

As far as Germany's commitment to allow the Euro-zone’s bailout fund to buy government bonds, I think you mean that it is good news for Obama. It sure as hell isn't a solution to the Euro-zone's fatally flawed monetary union.
 
Here's a very nice summation of what Romney is up against to get 270:




http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs.../06/19/gJQAucj9nV_blog.html?wprss=rss_the-fix

tl;dr - (Assume that Romney wins NC and Florida) Must haves - Ohio, Iowa, NH / Needs 1: Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania

This opens up many more paths for Romney to get to 270.
Given that Iowans still back Obama in the major cities and the GOP contingent would rather have Ron Paul their votes instead of Romney I am going to go out on a ledge and say he is screwed.
 
I like how that article is going back to 2000 and 2004 to determine what Romney's chances of winning those states are. Ridiculous.
I think it's just to illustrate that these states going red are within the realm of possibility. As Bush is pretty close to Romney as a candidate (in policy and in business/governence background).
 
I think it's just to illustrate that these states going red are within the realm of possibility. As Bush is pretty close to Romney as a candidate (in policy and in business/governence background).
I don't think it's a particularly compelling argument. Bush also won Nevada and New Mexico, which seem firmly in Obama's hands. NH still looks blue to me, and polls continue to show Obama leading in Wisconsin. Anything can change of course, especially with Wisconsin's voter ID law and general tomfoolery.

It basically boils down to Romney needing Ohio. If the economy continues to crash, he'll take it. If things get better, he won't. I'm not sure Romney' wealth or likability matters too much there - white (male) working class voters don't trust Obama, or like him. That alone will keep Romney in the race.
 
Don't libs go ape-shit and accuse Fox News of this type of BS tape editing:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...rally-speech-portrays-candidate-as-out-touch/
"We went to Wawas and it was instructive to me, because I saw the difference between the private sector and the governmental sector. People who work in government are good people and I respect what they do, but you see, the challenge with government is that it doesn’t have competition,” Romney said in a portion edited out of the segment.
Neither does the private sector have competition in any meaningful sense of that word. And that optometrist must be an idiot. It's quite simple to register a change of address with the post office.

https://moversguide.usps.com/icoa/icoa-main-flow.do?execution=e1s1

But trying getting in touch with customer service in a manner providing any meaningful assistance at any large corporation... Now that's an ordeal.
 

demon

I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
From TA's article:
Of the three, Wisconsin seems like Romney’s best chance as Bush came within .4 percent of winning the Badger State in 2004 and the recall victory of Gov. Scott Walker last month has emboldened conservatives nationwide.
Didn't exit polling show the majority of voters supported Obama despite the fact that Walker won the election that day?
 
I don't really see what you mean. You have a problem with the use of conditional modifiers in a complicated projection scenario?

Okay.
There will be tons of these what-if articles outlining every possible electoral scenario, they are fun to read, but lacking in anything concrete, it's like the Wii U speculation thread of politics. The idea he could win those six states is outrageous, the article, which wants to paint a close race, after reading, gives me the opposite impression.
 
There will be tons of these what-if articles outlining every possible electoral scenario, they are fun to read, but lacking in anything concrete, it's like the Wii U speculation thread of politics.
I think it pretty clearly illustrates what has to happen for Romney to win. It also coincides with the order of importance of what his campaign thinks needs to happen (based on where the focus of their bus tour went). So that is very pertinent.

He has to win those three states mentioned, then pick up an even harder state which then makes it much easier to pick off a few Western states to secure the 270.

When more than half of the states are already decided (and representing such a huge amount of delegates), it doesn't really leave a lot of possibilities to discuss.
 
Pheonix said he'd do it, but apparently the Post Thread button takes an hour and a half to push.
Seriously...

This isn't a movie premiere or videogame countdown thread, it general politics discussion in the OT Community Forum, we don't need some stupendous OP that nobody will look at after the 2nd page is created...
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Poligaf 2012 - Where Family Values go to die
Poligaf 2012 - Tick Tock, Barack
Poligaf 2012 - Phoenixdark's wrong about something? You can't explain that!
Poligaf 2012 - Where abortions are not only free, but also MANDATORY
Poligaf 2012 - I never cared about Wisconsin anyway
Poligaf 2012 - Reagan would have cut spending
Poligaf 2012 - If you're so smart, then why am I yelling louder than you?
Poligaf 2012 - We're not THAT left wing. Kosmo posts here, afterall!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.