So, a leader who can't lead is going to use the fact that he can't lead as a battle cry? That's ALMOST worse than using raising taxes as a campaign platform.
Do you understand how American politics work?
The Republicans would have to table a jobs bill for him to support it and try to get it passed.
All they've done is defund planned parenthood, block anti-bullying legislation, insist that the Bush Tax cuts get extended and apologize to BP that the president got mad at them for killing all that gulf wildlife... can you think of anything else?
Very familiar. Are you?
In general Congress is held by the "opposing" party. This has been the case for most of the last 50+ years. It's actually a curious circumstance because it's not like the White House hasn't changed parties over that time. Yet, no President has enjoyed 4 full years of control. It's also one of the beauties of the US system over many other democracies where the ruling part of the legislature gets to pick the country's leader. It is a perfectly designed check and balance that doesn't necessarily have to play out the way it has. Yet, I'm sure if they were alive, the constructers would say that this was EXACTLY what they had in mind when they built the 3 separate but equal branches. Sure, power sways back and forth over the years and depending on the issue (Supreme Court seemed to have the most power just recently, for example).
So, the President generally doesn't get to have it all his way. He can't stamp his feet like a little child and point fingers to shame the legislature into doing things. He must be a leader and find ways to presuade. And, failing that, compromise (or maybe both!!! What a novel idea!!!!).
But, ultimately it is the Speaker's perogative to set the agenda for the House. Just like it's the Senate leader's perogative to set the Senate's. So, instead of pointing fingers, a true leader would find out what the issues are, and try to do his best to get the best possible outcome for the country (not himself - but the country) while still allowing folks to read the actual legislation being proposed. So, maybe he should go back to the drawing board and write up a proposal that the House would consider. Just because everyone doesn't use the media to be a whiny little bitch like Obama doesn't mean they haven't presented ideas in closed talks to reach a solution.
And, sure. Perhaps that ends in what some folks might think is an imperfect solution. But, that's what makes our system the best in the world. Democracy reigns every day instead of just on election day.
I also find it hilarious the talk of the rich Romneys or that his good looks is all he has, so on and so forth. Meanwhile, Michelle dresses in far more expensive garb at tax payer expense, mind you, the Obamas were and are plenty rich (even if not Romney rich b/c they never actually did anything in their lives) and Obama was pretty much elected based on skin deep issues and the fact that he's a good speaker. Hysterical.
Again - who has actually run a successful economic entity? Who has created jobs? Who before being elected President actually led a large governmental body? Who led a successful international enterprise (the Olympics or such)?
It's kind of funny that the deniers and apologists are ignoring the real credentials by using labels of left and right (or blaming Congress, or some other made up reason). Romney has the credentials. Obama does not. I am not the biggest Romney fan. I have other choices I'd prefer. But, between the 2, I don't even see how it's a competition (and that's knowing full well that Obama is getting re-elected because our electorate is too stupid to understand this - and yes, I realize I just insulted a lot of folks here. If this were a job interview, Obama wouldn't have even been invited in for an initial interview based on his resume (your top leadership activity was community organizer, and you want to be the so called leader of the free world? You're joking, right? We have an Executive Admin Assistant job available for you if you'd like an entry level job to get some of the experience you might need.) Yet somehow folks are rationalizing giving him 4 more years after failing for 4 years because they're afraid of some made up boogey man.).
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Is opposed (on record) to hiring more police officers, firefighters & teachers (or hiring them back, actually).
Is opposed to wind power industry jobs, but supports continuing corporate welfare for oil & gas industry (he calls this an "even playing field" or something like that).
Keeps money in overseas bank accounts.
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
Is opposed (on record) to hiring more police officers, firefighters & teachers (or hiring them back, actually).
Is opposed to wind power industry jobs, but supports continuing corporate welfare for oil & gas industry (he calls this an "even playing field" or something like that).
Keeps money in overseas bank accounts.
Talking points all of them.
First - yes, he put jobs over seas. But, he ALSO created jobs here. 10 years ago we were celebrating the World Economy. Now, we are supposed to be territorialists because folks don't want to compete with the World?
Second - He did say the Federal Gov't should stop bailing out local governments. Perhaps, that will teach local governments to be more fiscally responsible for themselves. If a locale does not think their local fire fighter is necessary, why should someone half way across the country pay for it?
Third - yes, he does support continuing certain business tax advantages. That keeps jobs local. Sure, it seems distasteful on the surfact to give big oil and the like tax breaks. But, if the alternative is they move those jobs if they don't, isn't the trade off worth it? (though the extent of which is certainly debatable. And, as a successful business man, I would think he would have the acumen to negotiate such things on my tax dollar's behalf more successfully).
So what if he keeps money over seas? Is there a law against that? Again, I thought we were a World Economy. And, I'm guessing he still has more money in US banks than you, me and everyone else on this board combined. When he starts threatening to close Guantanamo without knowing its purpose, let me know. Until that time, I'm fine with him being involved in the international community.
You should really go more than surface diving on the issues. Taking them from a skin deep level while fun and easy does not really reveal the true meaning of what folks are saying.
So, keep laughing. Quite frankly, I do better in Obama's wallowing economy. Prices and interest rates are kept down, so his unemployed can afford more. At least he's not Jimmy Carter..... That being said, I'd prefer everyone prosper. Hand outs via Robin Hood technique don't do that. It's as different as David Dinkins and Rudy Giuliani.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Second - He did say the Federal Gov't should stop bailing out local governments.
http://www.businessinsider.com/barack-obama-mitt-romney-firefighters-police-teachers
"He wants another stimulus, he wants to hire more government workers. He says we need more firemen, more policemen, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people.”
So, yes, 10 years ago we were trumpeting the world economy, with the US enjoying a booming service based economy. Well, guess what, it's become clear our service based economy has faltered. We are not going to prosper as a nation without making stuff. So how does it help when a couple billionaires buy your company, close your factories, and move all the jobs to China?
I have more than a skin deep knowledge on all these issues, thank you. Your assumptions are insulting.
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
Second - He did say the Federal Gov't should stop bailing out local governments.
http://www.businessinsider.com/barack-obama-mitt-romney-firefighters-police-teachers
"He wants another stimulus, he wants to hire more government workers. He says we need more firemen, more policemen, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people.”
So, yes, 10 years ago we were trumpeting the world economy, with the US enjoying a booming service based economy. Well, guess what, it's become clear our service based economy has faltered. We are not going to prosper as a nation without making stuff. So how does it help when a couple billionaires buy your company, close your factories, and move all the jobs to China?
I have more than a skin deep knowledge on all these issues, thank you. Your assumptions are insulting.
I'm not making any assumptions, so if you're insulted, you only have your own writing to blame. I'm following the conclusions you are drawing. Again, you are taking a quote at it's most literal. He is indicating Gov't needs to get smaller. Bravo. Without the stop to the spending spree, you can tax everyone and it's not fixing anything. We should stop worrying about who's the better speaker and spend more time understanding what they mean. That quote was in response to Obama's desire to bail out certain local economies that were cutting things back due to budgetary concerns. It wasn't said in a vacuum. So, yes, he literally said - no more Firemen, policemen, etc. Well, guess what? Firemen are not Federal employees. So, why should the Federal Gov't be worrying about that? Basically, the insinuation you are making is that local governments would be smart to stop all local taxes and lay off all firemen, policemen, etc because Obama will just come in with Federal monies to fund it. Why should any local gov't fund anything when they can get someone on the other coast to pay for it via their Federal taxes?
Where does it stop?
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
I'm not making any assumptions, so if you're insulted, you only have your own writing to blame. I'm following the conclusions you are drawing. Again, you are taking a quote at it's most literal. He is indicating Gov't needs to get smaller. Bravo. Without the stop to the spending spree, you can tax everyone and it's not fixing anything. We should stop worrying about who's the better speaker and spend more time understanding what they mean. That quote was in response to Obama's desire to bail out certain local economies that were cutting things back due to budgetary concerns. It wasn't said in a vacuum. So, yes, he literally said - no more Firemen, policemen, etc. Well, guess what? Firemen are not Federal employees. So, why should the Federal Gov't be worrying about that? Basically, the insinuation you are making is that local governments would be smart to stop all local taxes and lay off all firemen, policemen, etc because Obama will just come in with Federal monies to fund it. Why should any local gov't fund anything when they can get someone on the other coast to pay for it via their Federal taxes?
Where does it stop?
Obama's quote was trying to say (obviously he did a poor job of communicating) that the primary driver of the poor economy currently is unemployment for public sector workers, many of whom also happen to be essential to the well being of communities.
Obviously Romney doesn't feel it's a good investment to provide assistance for states & localities to hire back teachers, cops & firefighters, and that it's better to expand military spending and reduce taxes (the tax rates are already scheduled to increase 1/1/13, so it would be a tax REDUCTION) on the top tier. Hardly a deficit reduction plan. So, where does it stop? Well, it doesn't stop with Romney, that's for sure.
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
Great 1st response to the thread...really taking it to the place the OP intended!!!
As far as why someone would vote for Romney...I'm don't think I am, but here are some reasons I see as plausible:
1) Not voting for incumbents
2) Tired of the rhetoric around fair share to justify tax increases instead of focusing on the hard work of spending decreases
3) The economy - if you believe the president has control
I'd say those are the top 3 anyhow.
I'm sure some will add abortion, because for some it's a 1 issue election. But I think this would be silly as it has been proven time and time again that the president doesn't do shit about it, either way.
If I vote for Romney, it'll be for #1 and #2. If I don't it's because I don't believe Romney will reduce spending and the size of the government, he will just shift it.
If I vote for Obama, and I'm 99% sure I won't, it would be for gay marriage and doing something with health care (specifically the provisions that remove being denied health care for pre-existing conditions) even if it is far from perfect. Those are 2 pretty good reasons to vote for Obama I think.
If I vote for Obama, and I'm 99% sure I won't, it would be for gay marriage and doing something with health care (specifically the provisions that remove being denied health care for pre-existing conditions) even if it is far from perfect. Those are 2 pretty good reasons to vote for Obama I think.
Who's being denied health care for pre-existing conditions? And everybody already is insured. It's called indigent care. It is a complete misnomer that folks are denied health care in this country. As a matter of fact, it's illegal.
You may not get the best money can buy. But, Canada's system (for example) doesn't assure that either.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Obama's quote was trying to say (obviously he did a poor job of communicating) that the primary driver of the poor economy currently is unemployment for public sector workers, many of whom also happen to be essential to the well being of communities.
Obviously Romney doesn't feel it's a good investment to provide assistance for states & localities to hire back teachers, cops & firefighters, and that it's better to expand military spending and reduce taxes (the tax rates are already scheduled to increase 1/1/13, so it would be a tax REDUCTION) on the top tier. Hardly a deficit reduction plan. So, where does it stop? Well, it doesn't stop with Romney, that's for sure.
Exactly - Obama is for the Gov't to be your mommy and daddy. Romney is for you earning your own way. Trust me, since half the folks that live on my block have their adult childern and THEIR kids living with them, I understand why the mommy and daddy option is so attractive to people.
The Government is not for providing jobs. Yes, there are naturally jobs in the Government so appropriate services get performed. But, that is not the Government's purpose. Again, if Des Moines, Iowa deems their police unnecessary, why should Long Island, NY pay for the Des Moines, Iowa police force? That makes no sense. And that is EXACTLY what Obama is proposing.
The military spending is a totally separate issue. I'm fine cutting that to a certain degree. What we do with local measures is separate. Why do you connect them? Spending Federal dollars where local municipalities feel no need to is wrong regardless of what we do with the military.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
If I vote for Obama, and I'm 99% sure I won't, it would be for gay marriage and doing something with health care (specifically the provisions that remove being denied health care for pre-existing conditions) even if it is far from perfect. Those are 2 pretty good reasons to vote for Obama I think.
Who's being denied health care for pre-existing conditions? And everybody already is insured. It's called indigent care. It is a complete misnomer that folks are denied health care in this country. As a matter of fact, it's illegal.
You may not get the best money can buy. But, Canada's system (for example) doesn't assure that either.
I meant health insurance. You are correct about care.
Mitt Romney has had a tough couple of weeks on the campaign trail -- and it shows in the latest Fox News poll. After a barrage of campaign ads, negative news coverage of his overseas trip and ongoing talk about his tax returns, Romney’s favorable rating and standing in the trial ballot have declined. As a result, President Obama has opened his biggest lead since Romney became the presumptive Republican nominee.
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. Last month, Obama had a four percentage-point edge of 45 percent to 41 percent. This marks the second time this year the president has had a lead outside the poll’s margin of sampling error.
Obama’s advantage comes largely from increased support among independents, who now pick him over Romney by 11 percentage points. Some 30 percent of independents are undecided. Last month, Obama had a four-point edge among independents, while Romney had the advantage from April through early June.
There was also an uptick in support for Obama among women, blacks and Democrats.
Four voters in 10 say they are “extremely” interested in the race. Among just those voters, the candidates are tied at 48 percent each.
The Obama campaign has spent heavily on advertising attacking Romney’s time at Bain Capital and his tax returns. And it appears to be working. Romney’s favorable rating dropped six percentage points since last month and now sits at 46 percent, down from 52 percent in mid-July. At the same time his unfavorable rating went up five points. Romney’s favorable rating has held steady among his party faithful, but it’s down eight percentage points among independents and seven points among Democrats.
Overall 54 percent of voters have a positive view of Obama, matching his highest favorable rating in more than a year. Last month, it was 52 percent. Obama’s current rating is nearly as high as four years ago, when 59 percent viewed him positively.
While Democrats typically hold a slight edge over Republicans nationally in party identification, this attitude shifts based on events and changing sentiment. These days, voters seem to be even more likely to consider themselves Democrats than Republicans. There has been a five percentage-point Democratic advantage, on average, in Fox News polls this year. In this poll, the Democratic edge is nine points. That may or may not be on the high side, although it is similar to other recent national polls conducted by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal, which puts Democrats up 11 percentage points and the Pew Research Center, with Democrats up by 13 percent.
“The events of the past two weeks appear to have energized Democratic voters a bit," says Republican pollster Daron Shaw, who conducts the Fox News poll with Democratic pollster Chris Anderson. “But perhaps more critically, Romney’s support among independents has declined. The Obama campaign has -- at least in the short-term -- succeeded in raising questions about Romney’s fitness to govern and in making this less of a referendum and more of a choice election."
Most Obama supporters (83 percent) and Romney supporters (87 percent) say they are “certain” to vote for their candidate. Nearly one in four independent voters says they could change their mind before voting (24 percent).
Setting aside how they plan to cast their ballot, the poll asks voters about their comfort level with each candidate being the country’s leader. Eight percent would be “extremely” comfortable with Romney as president. Two-and-a-half times as many -- 21 percent -- feel that way about a second Obama term.
Some 26 percent would be “extremely” or “very” comfortable with Romney as president, 33 percent “somewhat” comfortable and 38 percent “not at all.”
For Obama, 41 percent of voters would be at least very comfortable with him serving another four years, while 22 percent would be “somewhat” comfortable and 37 percent would not be comfortable with another term.
Independents are twice as likely to say they are comfortable with Obama (33 percent) than with Romney (16 percent) as president.
The top reasons voters give for being uncomfortable with Romney include his positions on the issues, that he’s “phony,” he’s “out of touch,” he’s a Republican and he’s “for the rich.” For Obama, the discomfort comes from his performance as president, unemployment/no economic recovery, his positions on the issues, “everything,” and his health care plan.
Fully 76 percent of Democrats think Obama’s positions on the issues are “about right.”
Likewise the GOP challenger has convinced most Republicans of his ideology. Some 73 percent of Republicans say he’s “about right” on the issues, up from 57 percent last year (September 2011).
Less than half of independents think either candidate is “about right” on the issues.
Meanwhile, Obama is trusted more than Romney on foreign policy (13 points), helping people achieve the American dream (+8 points), national security (+ 8 points), health care (+ 7 points) and stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons (+4 points).
More voters trust Romney to do a better job on reducing the deficit (+ 8 points) and improving the economy (+3 points) -- the most important issue to voters this election. Two months ago, Romney had a seven-percentage point edge on handling the economy (June 3-5).
A 56-percent majority says the economy will be “extremely important” to their vote for president. That’s far more than say the same of health care (45 percent), national security (44 percent), taxes (39 percent), foreign policy (30 percent) and immigration (25 percent).
If Obama were re-elected, 48 percent of voters say they would feel the “country’s improving” and they would “look forward” to another four years, while almost as many -- 42 percent -- say they would feel the country is “going down the drain” and would “dread” a second term.
That’s similar to the president’s overall job rating: 49 percent of voters approve and 46 percent disapprove. In July, 47 percent approved and 49 percent disapproved.
The president hasn’t hit 50 percent approval since May 2011, when after the raid that killed Usama bin Laden some 55 percent approved and 41 percent disapproved.
The Fox News poll is based on landline and cell phone interviews from August 5 to August 7 among 930 randomly-chosen registered voters nationwide. The poll is conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R). For the total sample, it has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.
yeah small sample size, but it shows a trend that romney's last 2 weeks have made him take a pretty big hit.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Mitt Romney has had a tough couple of weeks on the campaign trail -- and it shows in the latest Fox News poll. After a barrage of campaign ads, negative news coverage of his overseas trip and ongoing talk about his tax returns, Romney’s favorable rating and standing in the trial ballot have declined. As a result, President Obama has opened his biggest lead since Romney became the presumptive Republican nominee.
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. Last month, Obama had a four percentage-point edge of 45 percent to 41 percent. This marks the second time this year the president has had a lead outside the poll’s margin of sampling error.
Obama’s advantage comes largely from increased support among independents, who now pick him over Romney by 11 percentage points. Some 30 percent of independents are undecided. Last month, Obama had a four-point edge among independents, while Romney had the advantage from April through early June.
There was also an uptick in support for Obama among women, blacks and Democrats.
Four voters in 10 say they are “extremely” interested in the race. Among just those voters, the candidates are tied at 48 percent each.
The Obama campaign has spent heavily on advertising attacking Romney’s time at Bain Capital and his tax returns. And it appears to be working. Romney’s favorable rating dropped six percentage points since last month and now sits at 46 percent, down from 52 percent in mid-July. At the same time his unfavorable rating went up five points. Romney’s favorable rating has held steady among his party faithful, but it’s down eight percentage points among independents and seven points among Democrats.
Overall 54 percent of voters have a positive view of Obama, matching his highest favorable rating in more than a year. Last month, it was 52 percent. Obama’s current rating is nearly as high as four years ago, when 59 percent viewed him positively.
While Democrats typically hold a slight edge over Republicans nationally in party identification, this attitude shifts based on events and changing sentiment. These days, voters seem to be even more likely to consider themselves Democrats than Republicans. There has been a five percentage-point Democratic advantage, on average, in Fox News polls this year. In this poll, the Democratic edge is nine points. That may or may not be on the high side, although it is similar to other recent national polls conducted by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal, which puts Democrats up 11 percentage points and the Pew Research Center, with Democrats up by 13 percent.
“The events of the past two weeks appear to have energized Democratic voters a bit," says Republican pollster Daron Shaw, who conducts the Fox News poll with Democratic pollster Chris Anderson. “But perhaps more critically, Romney’s support among independents has declined. The Obama campaign has -- at least in the short-term -- succeeded in raising questions about Romney’s fitness to govern and in making this less of a referendum and more of a choice election."
Most Obama supporters (83 percent) and Romney supporters (87 percent) say they are “certain” to vote for their candidate. Nearly one in four independent voters says they could change their mind before voting (24 percent).
Setting aside how they plan to cast their ballot, the poll asks voters about their comfort level with each candidate being the country’s leader. Eight percent would be “extremely” comfortable with Romney as president. Two-and-a-half times as many -- 21 percent -- feel that way about a second Obama term.
Some 26 percent would be “extremely” or “very” comfortable with Romney as president, 33 percent “somewhat” comfortable and 38 percent “not at all.”
For Obama, 41 percent of voters would be at least very comfortable with him serving another four years, while 22 percent would be “somewhat” comfortable and 37 percent would not be comfortable with another term.
Independents are twice as likely to say they are comfortable with Obama (33 percent) than with Romney (16 percent) as president.
The top reasons voters give for being uncomfortable with Romney include his positions on the issues, that he’s “phony,” he’s “out of touch,” he’s a Republican and he’s “for the rich.” For Obama, the discomfort comes from his performance as president, unemployment/no economic recovery, his positions on the issues, “everything,” and his health care plan.
Fully 76 percent of Democrats think Obama’s positions on the issues are “about right.”
Likewise the GOP challenger has convinced most Republicans of his ideology. Some 73 percent of Republicans say he’s “about right” on the issues, up from 57 percent last year (September 2011).
Less than half of independents think either candidate is “about right” on the issues.
Meanwhile, Obama is trusted more than Romney on foreign policy (13 points), helping people achieve the American dream (+8 points), national security (+ 8 points), health care (+ 7 points) and stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons (+4 points).
More voters trust Romney to do a better job on reducing the deficit (+ 8 points) and improving the economy (+3 points) -- the most important issue to voters this election. Two months ago, Romney had a seven-percentage point edge on handling the economy (June 3-5).
A 56-percent majority says the economy will be “extremely important” to their vote for president. That’s far more than say the same of health care (45 percent), national security (44 percent), taxes (39 percent), foreign policy (30 percent) and immigration (25 percent).
If Obama were re-elected, 48 percent of voters say they would feel the “country’s improving” and they would “look forward” to another four years, while almost as many -- 42 percent -- say they would feel the country is “going down the drain” and would “dread” a second term.
That’s similar to the president’s overall job rating: 49 percent of voters approve and 46 percent disapprove. In July, 47 percent approved and 49 percent disapproved.
The president hasn’t hit 50 percent approval since May 2011, when after the raid that killed Usama bin Laden some 55 percent approved and 41 percent disapproved.
The Fox News poll is based on landline and cell phone interviews from August 5 to August 7 among 930 randomly-chosen registered voters nationwide. The poll is conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R). For the total sample, it has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.
yeah small sample size, but it shows a trend that romney's last 2 weeks have made him take a pretty big hit.
I still find it disturbing that 40% of Americans would actually vote for a dangerous idiot like Mitt Romney.
Ry Cooder: 'Mitt Romney is a dangerous man, a cruel man'
The veteran guitarist on his new album of protest songs, Election Special, and how the Republican party is out to destroy America and Barack Obama's presidency
I don't know if you're familiar with the mayor of London, a character called Boris Johnson ...
Never heard of him.
He's a Conservative buffoon. He's so ridiculous that there's a point at which some people start to find him funny. Is there an element of that with the Sarah Palins of this world? Or are they too dangerous to ever find them funny?
They're too insanely dangerous. Look, what did Gore Vidal say recently? The interviewer asked him what he thought of the Republican party and he said it's not a party any more, it's a Hitler Youth mindset and they're out to destroy the country, and he was 110% right. So in case anybody thinks Michele Bachman or Sarah Palin are clowns because they misspeak or don't know their history or they say silly things: that's just an act, and it's a useful act. Everything is a distraction from the core truths which are, first of all, that corporations have taken over the country.
This right now is the time of decision in this country. There's no other way to look at it. This is it. This is the most critical time in the history of the country, for chrissakes.
Is Mitt Romney the least worst candidate to have emerged from the Republican ranks?
'I don't agree with that. Romney is as bad as anyone can be. He's a dangerous man. He's a cruel man. He's a perfect creation for what the Republican party is all about. And that is to say, a rapacious capitalist. Anyone who ran Bain Capital is not your friend. All they're going to do is rape and pillage the land. That's what he did at Bain Capital and that's what he's going to continue to do. Plus he can go around and in this guise of being a good buisnessman, which he's not .... and this face – with the big grin and everything – is jovial, but hollow. And it's outrageous if you analyse what he's saying, because he'll say one thing and do the opposite. And the media gives him a lot of attention. You know the story of the Olympics at Salt Lake City? Then he goes over to Great Britain and bad mouths the Olympics over there ... But he's carrying an entourage of donors and he's putting on a dog and pony show for them.It takes a bit of study. People are so desperate over here now. They don't have the time to research and go back over the history of this guy. And everybody knows that. So what I'm trying to do with these little songs I write is say: let's look at this a different way. I don't write books and give speeches but with a four-minute song you can use allegory and other means to suggest a different point of view.'
Mitt Romney has had a tough couple of weeks on the campaign trail -- and it shows in the latest Fox News poll. After a barrage of campaign ads, negative news coverage of his overseas trip and ongoing talk about his tax returns, Romney’s favorable rating and standing in the trial ballot have declined. As a result, President Obama has opened his biggest lead since Romney became the presumptive Republican nominee.
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. Last month, Obama had a four percentage-point edge of 45 percent to 41 percent. This marks the second time this year the president has had a lead outside the poll’s margin of sampling error.
Obama’s advantage comes largely from increased support among independents, who now pick him over Romney by 11 percentage points. Some 30 percent of independents are undecided. Last month, Obama had a four-point edge among independents, while Romney had the advantage from April through early June.
There was also an uptick in support for Obama among women, blacks and Democrats.
Four voters in 10 say they are “extremely” interested in the race. Among just those voters, the candidates are tied at 48 percent each.
The Obama campaign has spent heavily on advertising attacking Romney’s time at Bain Capital and his tax returns. And it appears to be working. Romney’s favorable rating dropped six percentage points since last month and now sits at 46 percent, down from 52 percent in mid-July. At the same time his unfavorable rating went up five points. Romney’s favorable rating has held steady among his party faithful, but it’s down eight percentage points among independents and seven points among Democrats.
Overall 54 percent of voters have a positive view of Obama, matching his highest favorable rating in more than a year. Last month, it was 52 percent. Obama’s current rating is nearly as high as four years ago, when 59 percent viewed him positively.
While Democrats typically hold a slight edge over Republicans nationally in party identification, this attitude shifts based on events and changing sentiment. These days, voters seem to be even more likely to consider themselves Democrats than Republicans. There has been a five percentage-point Democratic advantage, on average, in Fox News polls this year. In this poll, the Democratic edge is nine points. That may or may not be on the high side, although it is similar to other recent national polls conducted by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal, which puts Democrats up 11 percentage points and the Pew Research Center, with Democrats up by 13 percent.
“The events of the past two weeks appear to have energized Democratic voters a bit," says Republican pollster Daron Shaw, who conducts the Fox News poll with Democratic pollster Chris Anderson. “But perhaps more critically, Romney’s support among independents has declined. The Obama campaign has -- at least in the short-term -- succeeded in raising questions about Romney’s fitness to govern and in making this less of a referendum and more of a choice election."
Most Obama supporters (83 percent) and Romney supporters (87 percent) say they are “certain” to vote for their candidate. Nearly one in four independent voters says they could change their mind before voting (24 percent).
Setting aside how they plan to cast their ballot, the poll asks voters about their comfort level with each candidate being the country’s leader. Eight percent would be “extremely” comfortable with Romney as president. Two-and-a-half times as many -- 21 percent -- feel that way about a second Obama term.
Some 26 percent would be “extremely” or “very” comfortable with Romney as president, 33 percent “somewhat” comfortable and 38 percent “not at all.”
For Obama, 41 percent of voters would be at least very comfortable with him serving another four years, while 22 percent would be “somewhat” comfortable and 37 percent would not be comfortable with another term.
Independents are twice as likely to say they are comfortable with Obama (33 percent) than with Romney (16 percent) as president.
The top reasons voters give for being uncomfortable with Romney include his positions on the issues, that he’s “phony,” he’s “out of touch,” he’s a Republican and he’s “for the rich.” For Obama, the discomfort comes from his performance as president, unemployment/no economic recovery, his positions on the issues, “everything,” and his health care plan.
Fully 76 percent of Democrats think Obama’s positions on the issues are “about right.”
Likewise the GOP challenger has convinced most Republicans of his ideology. Some 73 percent of Republicans say he’s “about right” on the issues, up from 57 percent last year (September 2011).
Less than half of independents think either candidate is “about right” on the issues.
Meanwhile, Obama is trusted more than Romney on foreign policy (13 points), helping people achieve the American dream (+8 points), national security (+ 8 points), health care (+ 7 points) and stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons (+4 points).
More voters trust Romney to do a better job on reducing the deficit (+ 8 points) and improving the economy (+3 points) -- the most important issue to voters this election. Two months ago, Romney had a seven-percentage point edge on handling the economy (June 3-5).
A 56-percent majority says the economy will be “extremely important” to their vote for president. That’s far more than say the same of health care (45 percent), national security (44 percent), taxes (39 percent), foreign policy (30 percent) and immigration (25 percent).
If Obama were re-elected, 48 percent of voters say they would feel the “country’s improving” and they would “look forward” to another four years, while almost as many -- 42 percent -- say they would feel the country is “going down the drain” and would “dread” a second term.
That’s similar to the president’s overall job rating: 49 percent of voters approve and 46 percent disapprove. In July, 47 percent approved and 49 percent disapproved.
The president hasn’t hit 50 percent approval since May 2011, when after the raid that killed Usama bin Laden some 55 percent approved and 41 percent disapproved.
The Fox News poll is based on landline and cell phone interviews from August 5 to August 7 among 930 randomly-chosen registered voters nationwide. The poll is conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R). For the total sample, it has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.
yeah small sample size, but it shows a trend that romney's last 2 weeks have made him take a pretty big hit.
I still find it disturbing that 40% of Americans would actually vote for a dangerous idiot like Mitt Romney.
I find it disturbing that people still read/watch anything fox news related (and I lean to the right)
I still find it disturbing that 40% of Americans would actually vote for a dangerous idiot like Mitt Romney.
you forget that we elected and re-elected george w bush. i would not be shocked or disturbed by anything the people of this country collectively votes for....
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
That poll is among registered voters. Take a couple points off that lead to make it "Likely Voters." Also, national polls are kind of a waste of time - the election is decided on a state level. But, Romney thus far has performed better in national polls than in swing state polls, so these latest polls are not good news for him.
I love polls - kind of a junkie.
Fox News obviously is horrible (how about that Gabby Douglas shit they were pulling this week?) but their poll methodology is fairly sound, as compared to, say, a PPP (D-leaning) or Rasmussen (R-leaning).
Actually, there's a national Rasmussen poll that has Romney with a 4-point lead, just out this morning. Yesterday, Fox News - Obama +9, CNN - Obama +7, Gallup - Obama +2.
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
That poll is among registered voters. Take a couple points off that lead to make it "Likely Voters." Also, national polls are kind of a waste of time - the election is decided on a state level. But, Romney thus far has performed better in national polls than in swing state polls, so these latest polls are not good news for him.
I love polls - kind of a junkie.
Fox News obviously is horrible (how about that Gabby Douglas shit they were pulling this week?) but their poll methodology is fairly sound, as compared to, say, a PPP (D-leaning) or Rasmussen (R-leaning).
Actually, there's a national Rasmussen poll that has Romney with a 4-point lead, just out this morning. Yesterday, Fox News - Obama +9, CNN - Obama +7, Gallup - Obama +2.
Polls mean nothing. If I were you, I would stop studying junk polling which is primarily used to manipulate the public and start thinking without referring to what the news tells you to think.
That poll is among registered voters. Take a couple points off that lead to make it "Likely Voters." Also, national polls are kind of a waste of time - the election is decided on a state level. But, Romney thus far has performed better in national polls than in swing state polls, so these latest polls are not good news for him.
I love polls - kind of a junkie.
Fox News obviously is horrible (how about that Gabby Douglas shit they were pulling this week?) but their poll methodology is fairly sound, as compared to, say, a PPP (D-leaning) or Rasmussen (R-leaning).
Actually, there's a national Rasmussen poll that has Romney with a 4-point lead, just out this morning. Yesterday, Fox News - Obama +9, CNN - Obama +7, Gallup - Obama +2.
Polls mean nothing. If I were you, I would stop studying junk polling which is primarily used to manipulate the public and start thinking without referring to what the news tells you to think.
I have a statistical background so the idea of using polls to predict something is interesting to me. I'm allowed to have personal interests, right?
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
That poll is among registered voters. Take a couple points off that lead to make it "Likely Voters." Also, national polls are kind of a waste of time - the election is decided on a state level. But, Romney thus far has performed better in national polls than in swing state polls, so these latest polls are not good news for him.
I love polls - kind of a junkie.
Fox News obviously is horrible (how about that Gabby Douglas shit they were pulling this week?) but their poll methodology is fairly sound, as compared to, say, a PPP (D-leaning) or Rasmussen (R-leaning).
Actually, there's a national Rasmussen poll that has Romney with a 4-point lead, just out this morning. Yesterday, Fox News - Obama +9, CNN - Obama +7, Gallup - Obama +2.
rasmussen polls ALWAYS show the republican leading. so this is not surprising.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
That poll is among registered voters. Take a couple points off that lead to make it "Likely Voters." Also, national polls are kind of a waste of time - the election is decided on a state level. But, Romney thus far has performed better in national polls than in swing state polls, so these latest polls are not good news for him.
I love polls - kind of a junkie.
Fox News obviously is horrible (how about that Gabby Douglas shit they were pulling this week?) but their poll methodology is fairly sound, as compared to, say, a PPP (D-leaning) or Rasmussen (R-leaning).
Actually, there's a national Rasmussen poll that has Romney with a 4-point lead, just out this morning. Yesterday, Fox News - Obama +9, CNN - Obama +7, Gallup - Obama +2.
Polls mean nothing. If I were you, I would stop studying junk polling which is primarily used to manipulate the public and start thinking without referring to what the news tells you to think.
I have a statistical background so the idea of using polls to predict something is interesting to me. I'm allowed to have personal interests, right?
no you must think for yourself [/s]
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
That poll is among registered voters. Take a couple points off that lead to make it "Likely Voters." Also, national polls are kind of a waste of time - the election is decided on a state level. But, Romney thus far has performed better in national polls than in swing state polls, so these latest polls are not good news for him.
I love polls - kind of a junkie.
Fox News obviously is horrible (how about that Gabby Douglas shit they were pulling this week?) but their poll methodology is fairly sound, as compared to, say, a PPP (D-leaning) or Rasmussen (R-leaning).
Actually, there's a national Rasmussen poll that has Romney with a 4-point lead, just out this morning. Yesterday, Fox News - Obama +9, CNN - Obama +7, Gallup - Obama +2.
Polls mean nothing. If I were you, I would stop studying junk polling which is primarily used to manipulate the public and start thinking without referring to what the news tells you to think.
I have a statistical background so the idea of using polls to predict something is interesting to me. I'm allowed to have personal interests, right?
Absolutely. I can understand the statistical fascination, but these political polls are based on psychology and how they can be used to manipulate the public. Nothing else.
Comments
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Very familiar. Are you?
In general Congress is held by the "opposing" party. This has been the case for most of the last 50+ years. It's actually a curious circumstance because it's not like the White House hasn't changed parties over that time. Yet, no President has enjoyed 4 full years of control. It's also one of the beauties of the US system over many other democracies where the ruling part of the legislature gets to pick the country's leader. It is a perfectly designed check and balance that doesn't necessarily have to play out the way it has. Yet, I'm sure if they were alive, the constructers would say that this was EXACTLY what they had in mind when they built the 3 separate but equal branches. Sure, power sways back and forth over the years and depending on the issue (Supreme Court seemed to have the most power just recently, for example).
So, the President generally doesn't get to have it all his way. He can't stamp his feet like a little child and point fingers to shame the legislature into doing things. He must be a leader and find ways to presuade. And, failing that, compromise (or maybe both!!! What a novel idea!!!!).
But, ultimately it is the Speaker's perogative to set the agenda for the House. Just like it's the Senate leader's perogative to set the Senate's. So, instead of pointing fingers, a true leader would find out what the issues are, and try to do his best to get the best possible outcome for the country (not himself - but the country) while still allowing folks to read the actual legislation being proposed. So, maybe he should go back to the drawing board and write up a proposal that the House would consider. Just because everyone doesn't use the media to be a whiny little bitch like Obama doesn't mean they haven't presented ideas in closed talks to reach a solution.
And, sure. Perhaps that ends in what some folks might think is an imperfect solution. But, that's what makes our system the best in the world. Democracy reigns every day instead of just on election day.
I also find it hilarious the talk of the rich Romneys or that his good looks is all he has, so on and so forth. Meanwhile, Michelle dresses in far more expensive garb at tax payer expense, mind you, the Obamas were and are plenty rich (even if not Romney rich b/c they never actually did anything in their lives) and Obama was pretty much elected based on skin deep issues and the fact that he's a good speaker. Hysterical.
Again - who has actually run a successful economic entity? Who has created jobs? Who before being elected President actually led a large governmental body? Who led a successful international enterprise (the Olympics or such)?
It's kind of funny that the deniers and apologists are ignoring the real credentials by using labels of left and right (or blaming Congress, or some other made up reason). Romney has the credentials. Obama does not. I am not the biggest Romney fan. I have other choices I'd prefer. But, between the 2, I don't even see how it's a competition (and that's knowing full well that Obama is getting re-elected because our electorate is too stupid to understand this - and yes, I realize I just insulted a lot of folks here. If this were a job interview, Obama wouldn't have even been invited in for an initial interview based on his resume (your top leadership activity was community organizer, and you want to be the so called leader of the free world? You're joking, right? We have an Executive Admin Assistant job available for you if you'd like an entry level job to get some of the experience you might need.) Yet somehow folks are rationalizing giving him 4 more years after failing for 4 years because they're afraid of some made up boogey man.).
In what country?
Is opposed (on record) to hiring more police officers, firefighters & teachers (or hiring them back, actually).
Is opposed to wind power industry jobs, but supports continuing corporate welfare for oil & gas industry (he calls this an "even playing field" or something like that).
Keeps money in overseas bank accounts.
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
First - yes, he put jobs over seas. But, he ALSO created jobs here. 10 years ago we were celebrating the World Economy. Now, we are supposed to be territorialists because folks don't want to compete with the World?
Second - He did say the Federal Gov't should stop bailing out local governments. Perhaps, that will teach local governments to be more fiscally responsible for themselves. If a locale does not think their local fire fighter is necessary, why should someone half way across the country pay for it?
Third - yes, he does support continuing certain business tax advantages. That keeps jobs local. Sure, it seems distasteful on the surfact to give big oil and the like tax breaks. But, if the alternative is they move those jobs if they don't, isn't the trade off worth it? (though the extent of which is certainly debatable. And, as a successful business man, I would think he would have the acumen to negotiate such things on my tax dollar's behalf more successfully).
So what if he keeps money over seas? Is there a law against that? Again, I thought we were a World Economy. And, I'm guessing he still has more money in US banks than you, me and everyone else on this board combined. When he starts threatening to close Guantanamo without knowing its purpose, let me know. Until that time, I'm fine with him being involved in the international community.
You should really go more than surface diving on the issues. Taking them from a skin deep level while fun and easy does not really reveal the true meaning of what folks are saying.
So, keep laughing. Quite frankly, I do better in Obama's wallowing economy. Prices and interest rates are kept down, so his unemployed can afford more. At least he's not Jimmy Carter..... That being said, I'd prefer everyone prosper. Hand outs via Robin Hood technique don't do that. It's as different as David Dinkins and Rudy Giuliani.
http://www.businessinsider.com/barack-obama-mitt-romney-firefighters-police-teachers
"He wants another stimulus, he wants to hire more government workers. He says we need more firemen, more policemen, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people.”
So, yes, 10 years ago we were trumpeting the world economy, with the US enjoying a booming service based economy. Well, guess what, it's become clear our service based economy has faltered. We are not going to prosper as a nation without making stuff. So how does it help when a couple billionaires buy your company, close your factories, and move all the jobs to China?
I have more than a skin deep knowledge on all these issues, thank you. Your assumptions are insulting.
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
I'm not making any assumptions, so if you're insulted, you only have your own writing to blame. I'm following the conclusions you are drawing. Again, you are taking a quote at it's most literal. He is indicating Gov't needs to get smaller. Bravo. Without the stop to the spending spree, you can tax everyone and it's not fixing anything. We should stop worrying about who's the better speaker and spend more time understanding what they mean. That quote was in response to Obama's desire to bail out certain local economies that were cutting things back due to budgetary concerns. It wasn't said in a vacuum. So, yes, he literally said - no more Firemen, policemen, etc. Well, guess what? Firemen are not Federal employees. So, why should the Federal Gov't be worrying about that? Basically, the insinuation you are making is that local governments would be smart to stop all local taxes and lay off all firemen, policemen, etc because Obama will just come in with Federal monies to fund it. Why should any local gov't fund anything when they can get someone on the other coast to pay for it via their Federal taxes?
Where does it stop?
Obama's quote was trying to say (obviously he did a poor job of communicating) that the primary driver of the poor economy currently is unemployment for public sector workers, many of whom also happen to be essential to the well being of communities.
Obviously Romney doesn't feel it's a good investment to provide assistance for states & localities to hire back teachers, cops & firefighters, and that it's better to expand military spending and reduce taxes (the tax rates are already scheduled to increase 1/1/13, so it would be a tax REDUCTION) on the top tier. Hardly a deficit reduction plan. So, where does it stop? Well, it doesn't stop with Romney, that's for sure.
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
OHHHHH, cool picture!
Great 1st response to the thread...really taking it to the place the OP intended!!!
As far as why someone would vote for Romney...I'm don't think I am, but here are some reasons I see as plausible:
1) Not voting for incumbents
2) Tired of the rhetoric around fair share to justify tax increases instead of focusing on the hard work of spending decreases
3) The economy - if you believe the president has control
I'd say those are the top 3 anyhow.
I'm sure some will add abortion, because for some it's a 1 issue election. But I think this would be silly as it has been proven time and time again that the president doesn't do shit about it, either way.
If I vote for Romney, it'll be for #1 and #2. If I don't it's because I don't believe Romney will reduce spending and the size of the government, he will just shift it.
If I vote for Obama, and I'm 99% sure I won't, it would be for gay marriage and doing something with health care (specifically the provisions that remove being denied health care for pre-existing conditions) even if it is far from perfect. Those are 2 pretty good reasons to vote for Obama I think.
Who's being denied health care for pre-existing conditions? And everybody already is insured. It's called indigent care. It is a complete misnomer that folks are denied health care in this country. As a matter of fact, it's illegal.
You may not get the best money can buy. But, Canada's system (for example) doesn't assure that either.
Exactly - Obama is for the Gov't to be your mommy and daddy. Romney is for you earning your own way. Trust me, since half the folks that live on my block have their adult childern and THEIR kids living with them, I understand why the mommy and daddy option is so attractive to people.
The Government is not for providing jobs. Yes, there are naturally jobs in the Government so appropriate services get performed. But, that is not the Government's purpose. Again, if Des Moines, Iowa deems their police unnecessary, why should Long Island, NY pay for the Des Moines, Iowa police force? That makes no sense. And that is EXACTLY what Obama is proposing.
The military spending is a totally separate issue. I'm fine cutting that to a certain degree. What we do with local measures is separate. Why do you connect them? Spending Federal dollars where local municipalities feel no need to is wrong regardless of what we do with the military.
I meant health insurance. You are correct about care.
Fox News poll: Obama's lead grows as Romney's support slips
By Dana Blanton
Published August 09, 2012
FoxNews.com
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08 ... z235yhmOTU
Mitt Romney has had a tough couple of weeks on the campaign trail -- and it shows in the latest Fox News poll. After a barrage of campaign ads, negative news coverage of his overseas trip and ongoing talk about his tax returns, Romney’s favorable rating and standing in the trial ballot have declined. As a result, President Obama has opened his biggest lead since Romney became the presumptive Republican nominee.
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. Last month, Obama had a four percentage-point edge of 45 percent to 41 percent. This marks the second time this year the president has had a lead outside the poll’s margin of sampling error.
Obama’s advantage comes largely from increased support among independents, who now pick him over Romney by 11 percentage points. Some 30 percent of independents are undecided. Last month, Obama had a four-point edge among independents, while Romney had the advantage from April through early June.
There was also an uptick in support for Obama among women, blacks and Democrats.
Four voters in 10 say they are “extremely” interested in the race. Among just those voters, the candidates are tied at 48 percent each.
The Obama campaign has spent heavily on advertising attacking Romney’s time at Bain Capital and his tax returns. And it appears to be working. Romney’s favorable rating dropped six percentage points since last month and now sits at 46 percent, down from 52 percent in mid-July. At the same time his unfavorable rating went up five points. Romney’s favorable rating has held steady among his party faithful, but it’s down eight percentage points among independents and seven points among Democrats.
Overall 54 percent of voters have a positive view of Obama, matching his highest favorable rating in more than a year. Last month, it was 52 percent. Obama’s current rating is nearly as high as four years ago, when 59 percent viewed him positively.
While Democrats typically hold a slight edge over Republicans nationally in party identification, this attitude shifts based on events and changing sentiment. These days, voters seem to be even more likely to consider themselves Democrats than Republicans. There has been a five percentage-point Democratic advantage, on average, in Fox News polls this year. In this poll, the Democratic edge is nine points. That may or may not be on the high side, although it is similar to other recent national polls conducted by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal, which puts Democrats up 11 percentage points and the Pew Research Center, with Democrats up by 13 percent.
“The events of the past two weeks appear to have energized Democratic voters a bit," says Republican pollster Daron Shaw, who conducts the Fox News poll with Democratic pollster Chris Anderson. “But perhaps more critically, Romney’s support among independents has declined. The Obama campaign has -- at least in the short-term -- succeeded in raising questions about Romney’s fitness to govern and in making this less of a referendum and more of a choice election."
Most Obama supporters (83 percent) and Romney supporters (87 percent) say they are “certain” to vote for their candidate. Nearly one in four independent voters says they could change their mind before voting (24 percent).
Setting aside how they plan to cast their ballot, the poll asks voters about their comfort level with each candidate being the country’s leader. Eight percent would be “extremely” comfortable with Romney as president. Two-and-a-half times as many -- 21 percent -- feel that way about a second Obama term.
Some 26 percent would be “extremely” or “very” comfortable with Romney as president, 33 percent “somewhat” comfortable and 38 percent “not at all.”
For Obama, 41 percent of voters would be at least very comfortable with him serving another four years, while 22 percent would be “somewhat” comfortable and 37 percent would not be comfortable with another term.
Independents are twice as likely to say they are comfortable with Obama (33 percent) than with Romney (16 percent) as president.
The top reasons voters give for being uncomfortable with Romney include his positions on the issues, that he’s “phony,” he’s “out of touch,” he’s a Republican and he’s “for the rich.” For Obama, the discomfort comes from his performance as president, unemployment/no economic recovery, his positions on the issues, “everything,” and his health care plan.
Fully 76 percent of Democrats think Obama’s positions on the issues are “about right.”
Likewise the GOP challenger has convinced most Republicans of his ideology. Some 73 percent of Republicans say he’s “about right” on the issues, up from 57 percent last year (September 2011).
Less than half of independents think either candidate is “about right” on the issues.
Meanwhile, Obama is trusted more than Romney on foreign policy (13 points), helping people achieve the American dream (+8 points), national security (+ 8 points), health care (+ 7 points) and stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons (+4 points).
More voters trust Romney to do a better job on reducing the deficit (+ 8 points) and improving the economy (+3 points) -- the most important issue to voters this election. Two months ago, Romney had a seven-percentage point edge on handling the economy (June 3-5).
A 56-percent majority says the economy will be “extremely important” to their vote for president. That’s far more than say the same of health care (45 percent), national security (44 percent), taxes (39 percent), foreign policy (30 percent) and immigration (25 percent).
If Obama were re-elected, 48 percent of voters say they would feel the “country’s improving” and they would “look forward” to another four years, while almost as many -- 42 percent -- say they would feel the country is “going down the drain” and would “dread” a second term.
That’s similar to the president’s overall job rating: 49 percent of voters approve and 46 percent disapprove. In July, 47 percent approved and 49 percent disapproved.
The president hasn’t hit 50 percent approval since May 2011, when after the raid that killed Usama bin Laden some 55 percent approved and 41 percent disapproved.
The Fox News poll is based on landline and cell phone interviews from August 5 to August 7 among 930 randomly-chosen registered voters nationwide. The poll is conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R). For the total sample, it has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.
yeah small sample size, but it shows a trend that romney's last 2 weeks have made him take a pretty big hit.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
I still find it disturbing that 40% of Americans would actually vote for a dangerous idiot like Mitt Romney.
Ry Cooder: 'Mitt Romney is a dangerous man, a cruel man'
The veteran guitarist on his new album of protest songs, Election Special, and how the Republican party is out to destroy America and Barack Obama's presidency
I don't know if you're familiar with the mayor of London, a character called Boris Johnson ...
Never heard of him.
He's a Conservative buffoon. He's so ridiculous that there's a point at which some people start to find him funny. Is there an element of that with the Sarah Palins of this world? Or are they too dangerous to ever find them funny?
They're too insanely dangerous. Look, what did Gore Vidal say recently? The interviewer asked him what he thought of the Republican party and he said it's not a party any more, it's a Hitler Youth mindset and they're out to destroy the country, and he was 110% right. So in case anybody thinks Michele Bachman or Sarah Palin are clowns because they misspeak or don't know their history or they say silly things: that's just an act, and it's a useful act. Everything is a distraction from the core truths which are, first of all, that corporations have taken over the country.
This right now is the time of decision in this country. There's no other way to look at it. This is it. This is the most critical time in the history of the country, for chrissakes.
Is Mitt Romney the least worst candidate to have emerged from the Republican ranks?
'I don't agree with that. Romney is as bad as anyone can be. He's a dangerous man. He's a cruel man. He's a perfect creation for what the Republican party is all about. And that is to say, a rapacious capitalist. Anyone who ran Bain Capital is not your friend. All they're going to do is rape and pillage the land. That's what he did at Bain Capital and that's what he's going to continue to do. Plus he can go around and in this guise of being a good buisnessman, which he's not .... and this face – with the big grin and everything – is jovial, but hollow. And it's outrageous if you analyse what he's saying, because he'll say one thing and do the opposite. And the media gives him a lot of attention. You know the story of the Olympics at Salt Lake City? Then he goes over to Great Britain and bad mouths the Olympics over there ... But he's carrying an entourage of donors and he's putting on a dog and pony show for them.It takes a bit of study. People are so desperate over here now. They don't have the time to research and go back over the history of this guy. And everybody knows that. So what I'm trying to do with these little songs I write is say: let's look at this a different way. I don't write books and give speeches but with a four-minute song you can use allegory and other means to suggest a different point of view.'
I find it disturbing that people still read/watch anything fox news related (and I lean to the right)
Ain't that the truth!! :thumbup:
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
I love polls - kind of a junkie.
Fox News obviously is horrible (how about that Gabby Douglas shit they were pulling this week?) but their poll methodology is fairly sound, as compared to, say, a PPP (D-leaning) or Rasmussen (R-leaning).
Actually, there's a national Rasmussen poll that has Romney with a 4-point lead, just out this morning. Yesterday, Fox News - Obama +9, CNN - Obama +7, Gallup - Obama +2.
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
Polls mean nothing. If I were you, I would stop studying junk polling which is primarily used to manipulate the public and start thinking without referring to what the news tells you to think.
I have a statistical background so the idea of using polls to predict something is interesting to me. I'm allowed to have personal interests, right?
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
no you must think for yourself [/s]
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Absolutely. I can understand the statistical fascination, but these political polls are based on psychology and how they can be used to manipulate the public. Nothing else.