Symmetry required it: 2012 american general election thread #2

i'd forgotten about it, and tried just now to watch, but the server is choking

...on the predictable banter

schtick goes on, schtick goes off

SPIEGEL: Sometimes at appearances, people call you a "mass murderer" or a "war criminal." Do such things bother you?
Cheney: When you're the Vice President of the United States, you can count on being laughed at so many times a week. But you still do your job.

so Romney got a huge bump from that tedious, completely forgettable debate. People are so weird.

media demanded it

dont worry obama will do better next debate

*cracks knuckles*

he got a 2-3 pt bump i think? maybe slightly above historical average for challengers

and no nominee who has not led coming out of debates has ever won iirc?

538:

But here’s the bad news for Mr. Romney: no candidate who trailed by as much he did heading into the first debate went on to win the election. In the two cases where the lead reversed after the debate, 1980 and 2000, the trailing candidate was down only one or two points in the polls. The FiveThirtyEight “now-cast,” conversely, pegs Mr. Romney’s deficit at about 5 points instead. (Other methods put it at between three and four points.)

More bad news for Mr. Romney: although there has been a tendency for the challenging candidate to gain ground immediately after the first debate, there has not been any tendency for the challenger to gain over the remaining weeks of the election. On average during these years, the challenging candidate trailed by 1.5 percentage points in polls conducted just after the first debate — and the challenger eventually lost the election, on average, by 1.4 percentage points, a nearly identical margin.

it could be that the gains have been much more dramatic than i've seen (i admit i haven't been following every poll obsessively) but i kinda feel like there are underlining truths about this race that have not been upturned by the debates.

People outside the Beltway start discussing how Romney "won" and this perpetuates the cycle.

he got a 2-3 pt bump i think? maybe slightly above historical average for challengers

― Mordy, Sunday, October 7, 2012 1:22 AM (10 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

in the short term it was more than 3 pts, we'll see how it is next week

it does scare me that romney can just lie to the entire country and then do better in the polls.

even a historically average bump

Bump calculator:

3 point bump: 20% tax cut, coverage for pre-existing conditions
4 point bump: 25% tax cut, cheetos and hand jobs for all
5 point bump: 50% tax cut, the poor will earn health coverage by mowing your lawn/shoveling your driveway
6 point bump: 100% funded by corporate sponsorship, free amazon prime for a year

I think you have to remember that these kinda bumps are more 'disillusioned w/ romney republican becomes less disillusioned w/ romney' rather than 'some neutral undecided voter hears both sides and picks option b'

they're probably some of both but if i had a candidate who lied like that i would be more turned off to voting for them, not more excited!

"man, i really love how this lying asshole really sticks it to his political opponents" < not something i've ever thought

they don't think he's lying and/or have some level of cognitive dissonance and/or are just very cynical people. but I think people overrate how much of it is #3

they think he's lying now and wasn't lying during the primaries. they don't think he's really pro-regulation.

nate silver - Still, as I wrote yesterday, my guess is that the forecast model is still being somewhat too conservative about accounting for the change in the environment. In a good number of the polls, Mr. Romney has not only improved his own standing but also taken voters away from Mr. Obama’s column, suggesting that he has peeled off some of Mr. Obama’s softer support in addition to gaining ground among undecided voters.

gallup is at a 3 point bump but gallup is a rolling 7 day average, still mostly pre-debate polls

question is do friday jobs numbers help significantly, beat back romney bounce, or is it too late in cycle for it to matter? bush I had very good job reports down the stretch but it didn't help him any; of course bush I never led after conventions (anytime someone tells you clinton won cuz of perot remind them clinton had a bigger lead over bush before perot reentered the race), whereas obama has had solid lead for months. a while back (whenever newt was the frontrunner) some friends and i were talking and one asked me who i thought was gonna win and i said if unemployment was above 9% it would be romney easy, below 8% it would be obama easy, in between it was a race. unemployment's below 8% but i'm still uneasy. should be noted though: i was uneasy in 08 until ohio was called.

anytime someone tells you clinton won cuz of perot remind them clinton had a bigger lead over bush before perot reentered the race)

dunno how many times over the years I've sent articles to skeptical relatives

I don't think the friday jobs numbers help much but I also don't think the debate bounce is as bad as some people. most peoples' minds are made up, romney's 'victory' was more of a 'very good media day' than something that he can actually build on (obama didn't say something stupid). it was sorta the rnc bounce that didn't happen.

i kinda feel like there are underlining truths about this race that have not been upturned by the debates.

= translucent liar usually beats transparent liar

Stein and Johnson 'debated' on All Things Considered today, hope u all caught that prime slot.

good touring poster

http://www.weknowthesecretsofthefederalreserve.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/illusion-of-choice.jpg

No. The illusion is that Obama is somehow a liberal or left-wing choice. As usual, it is a choice between the moderately centrist right and the extreme right. That is still a choice.

indef detention and omnipotent extrajudicial execution, doesn't come more moderately centrist than that.

yall know right and left are relative terms right

that's the beautiful con

tf could you even be talking about

MAGIC

Mitt is going to detain u for eternity and kill yr whole family?

a. no hes not
b. thats completely unrelated to what were talking about

k, once again i had no idea u were talking about something

some sad shit tbh

so what you were just posting random quips from the dr morbius removes the scales from yr eyes collection

indef detention and omnipotent extrajudicial execution, doesn't come more moderately centrist than that.

Morbs, I think you'd find that a whole lotta US voters are cool with that stuff, so, in terms of US politics, that shit has been embraced by the center-right. It is still immoral and ungodly shit, but it's sadly rather popular shit in one hell of a lot of the country. Look at the storm O faced when he tried to move Guantanamo detainees into regular prisons and try them in US courts back in 2009/10. Temper of the times.

Morbs thinks most americans would love to see Kiarostami movies if only we'd let them

Actually I think Mitt enjoyed a bump just prior to the first debate

yeah polls were narrowing beforehand

He sure acted like he had just enjoyed a bump before the debate.

Maybe Obama should have enjoyed one too.

they're probably some of both but if i had a candidate who lied like that i would be more turned off to voting for them, not more excited!

― Mordy, Saturday, 6 October 2012

obama told a bunch of lies tho. he said he'd repeal nafta. he said he'd hike and index the minimum wage. he said his team would use every avenue to block AIG bonuses. he said he wouldn't unilaterally authorize a military attack without imminent threat. he said health care negotiations would be transparent. & if we include his administration over the last four years they told a bunch of lies.

saying youll do something and then not accomplishing it isnt necessarily a lie, its a lie if you never planned to do it in the first place, otherwise its just a failure or changing yr mind

romney lied because he claimed to have never said things that he said

He sure acted like he had just enjoyed a bump before the debate.

― pplains, Sunday, October 7, 2012 1:12 AM (7 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

lol

i dont think obama ever said hed repeal nafta

there's good evidence these were lies. repealing nafta - his aide went to canada to ensure them it was pure posturing with no intention beyond it. plus anti-nafta feeling was high, nothing happened.

on AIG, christopher dodd told cnn obama officials sought to keep AIG's bonuses. plus he filled his admin with bankers.

on healthcare, he made no discernable effort at transparency that i know of

unilateral attack with no imminent threat, he "changed his mind" i guess

minimum wage, he changed his mind having promised something with 70% public support.