The General American Politics Thread

[Patticus]

So the New York Times has the wicked cool tracker that is too damn good for it to be available for free. Apparently Obama only needs 2-3 of the swing states to win while Romney needs 5.

Have you been keeping up with FiveThirtyEight?

http://fivethirtyeig...gs.nytimes.com/

I know I've gone on about it lately, but it's really good. While all the big polling organizations carry out and release their polls, with news sites making a big hullabaloo over each one as they come, I find it's best to go check that site each day to see the bigger picture, factoring all kinds of different stuff in to create an overall picture of the race with pretty colors. And while that picture shows an incredibly tight race, it also shows the Obama campaign in overall recovery every day since the 13th, still maintaining a slight but defined edge, and a Romney campaign in dire need of another Denver debate.

I don't think Romney's going to be able to seal the deal. I can't see it.

[Nepenthe]

I know it's become kind of a running gag at this point that the GOP becomes a complete train wreck when any of the representatives even begin to utter the word "rape," but someone has written a satirical fan letter to the GOP about why he will be voting for them in his self-interests as a rapist. It's a pretty thorough take-down about why their views on the issue of rape and abortion as has been stated throughout this race are ignorant and misogynistic. It's also a bit of a sickly read in general, but nonetheless very good at getting its point across. Give it a read if you have the time. Note: It also comes with a trigger warning.

[Patticus]

Looks like the Romneys are ridiculously involved in the voting process this election... and this article is ridiculously poorly structured:

Tagg Romney Invested in Ohio Electronic Voting Machines

Oct. 18, 2012 If the Romney’s can’t win legally, they’ll take over Ohio’s electronic voting machines through investments, a direct conflict of interest in a contentious state in this election.

The new owners of Ohio’s voting machines under the brand name HART Intercivic is none other than Tagg Romney, the son of one of the candidates: Mitt Romney. In recent weeks, Tagg has taken a more “active role in his father’s campaign management” but when you look further, he also has a major problem with that role.

By virtue of conflict of interest alone, this role should be investigated by the Department Of Justice, preferably involving the addition of the FBI, Homeland Security and the CIA to ensure this connection will not endanger the vote in Ohio and other states.

After all, isn't the security of an election both state and federal authorities responsibility to ensure the election is not stolen, tampered, or results altered?

Tagg Romney the heir to the Romney fortunes (through Vulture Capitalism) is a chip off the old block and his dad scored big destroying American jobs through leveraging profitable US companies. Unfortunately for the employees of these companies they lost their jobs to cheaper labor in China sweat factories.

In 2008, after Romney lost the 2008 bid for President, it was all clear for Mitt Romney’s son Tagg Romney to invest in a company called Solamere Capital which is a direct subsidiary of Allen Stanford’s Bank and investment companies.

Allen Stanford was sentenced to 110 years in jail for one of the biggest 8 billion dollar ponzi scheme. The funds were never recovered for investors, and the SEC has never said Tagg Romney was not under investigation for his investments thereafter.

Tagg Romney tapped into Mitt Romney’s Rolodex of wealthy associates, political donors, wealthy investors and in particular Mitt Romney’s campaign fundraiser: Spencer Zwick.

[-Robin-]

From what I heard, those machines of Tagg Romney's only amount to two in number, and is only being used in a single county in Ohio. Even if Romney were to attempt underhanded tactics to get votes, why only use a minuscule amount in a single county?

[Patticus]

Why would a company involved in voting machines only put two into use? That makes very little sense to me. Why bother at all?

[Linkabel]

There's an interview with Obama right now on MTV (west coast here).

It's weird hearing Obama saying, "Well you see Sway the thing is..."

[Patticus]

The Daily Show last night was really good, pointing out Mitt Romney's massive hypocrisy in criticizing Obama for his administration's investments in green energy companies (of which 8%, not 50%, went bankrupt) when, during his tenure at the head of Bain, a solid 22% of the companies he invested in (sometimes personally) went bankrupt. And the Romney/Ryan ticket's related insistence that the government shouldn't "pick winners and losers," even while they keep saying they'd go about doing the very same thing, because, you know, that one of the key roles of government. Or all the stuff regarding the GOP's horrendous positions on rape, abortion, the right to life and so on, some of which have been codified in their national platform. Oh and Nancy Pelosi was the guest, so that should piss Tornado off.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

What's the difference between Watergate and Fast and Furious?

The fact that the latter has nothing that relates to the discussion?

Edited October 27, 2012 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[SenEDDtor Missile]

What's the difference between Watergate and Fast and Furious?

Nobody died in Watergate.

Spiky, WTF are you talking about?

Edited October 27, 2012 by Malpercio

[Candescence]

Pretty much, there's a lot of confusion over the whole thing, and it's unlikely that Obama or any of the Democrats had anything to do with it, either. Spiky's just trying to grasp at anything that fits with his political myopia.

[Patticus]

I have a feeling that Hurricane Sandy's impact might extend beyond the realm of property damage, and into the field of election results, in the battleground states it'll be hitting. FEMA has already got its resources spreading out among the east coast states, and you can bet your ass Obama and Romney both will be hitting those states just as hard as Sandy as they tour storm damaged and flooded out neighborhoods with an eye to November 6th. And then one of them is going to accuse the other of politicizing the event, or any tragedies that result from it. It'll probably be Romney who hurls the first turd. He's already covered in the shit he makes up anyway...

[turbojet]

What's the difference between Watergate and Fast and Furious?

Nobody died in Watergate.

Watergate was a ridiculous suspicion of Nixon basically acting on his own paranoia that everyone in the Democratic party or everyone against him were out to get him.

Fast and Furious was a miscalculation by the Justice Department by the Obama Administration about a program that was originally the Bush Administration's in which the former gave a bunch of untraceable guns to a bunch of Mexican cartels when the latter did the same thing except they were remarkably fewer in number and were traceable.

The main difference between the two was that Nixon got in trouble for lying under oath and was intentionally trying to impede the investigation which was the main reason he was impeached and nearly convicted(the offense was nowhere near as bad and he overreacted). Nixon tried to enact executive privilege to protect his involvement. The Justice Department showed that it was more of an internal situation, the order did not come from above to send a bunch of unmarked guns to Mexico(or the evidence they showed investigation), and Obama used executive order because it had something to do with international security which is absolutely how you use executive privilege.

If you want a fair comparison to Fast & Furious, you should have went with Reagan supplying the rebels in Afghanistan to fight off Russia in which they pretty much became the Jihad versus our McWorld. Or anything Reagan did to stop the spread of Communism really in which the difference is that there was intentionally subversion of governments and the order absolutely came from the top.

[Patticus]

R-Money has been perpetually behind in the polls across Ohio up to now, thanks to his open opposition to the auto industry bailout. So, he has come up with a new strategy to mittigate (geddit?) the negative effects that continues to have on his polling numbers. Can you guess what it is yet? Why, it's the very same strategy he's pursued all along! Lie to the people to gain their support!

The Morning Plum: Romney’s false scare story in Ohio

By Greg Sargent

This created a stir last night on Twitter that has subsided. But it wouldn’t be surprising if the Obama campaign seizes on it in coming days to close out its argument in Ohio. From the Detroit News:

Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney told a rally in northern Ohio on Thursday night that Chrysler was considering moving production of its Jeep vehicles to China, apparently reacting to incorrect reports circulating online.

“I saw a story today that one of the great manufacturers in this state, Jeep — now owned by the Italians — is thinking of moving all production to China,” Romney said at a rally in Defiance, Ohio, home to a General Motors powertrain plant. “I will fight for every good job in America. I’m going to fight to make sure trade is fair, and if it’s fair America will win.”

Romney was apparently responding to reports Thursday on right-leaning blogs that misinterpreted a recent Bloomberg News story earlier this week that said Chrysler, owned by Italian automaker Fiat SpA, is thinking of building Jeeps in China for sale in the Chinese market.

Romney told Ohioans that a major manufacturer is on the verge of moving all its jobs to China — but it isn’t true. Chrysler is looking to build Jeeps in China for the Chinese market, not to move American jobs there. In fairness to Romney, the news story that gave rise to this tale seems to have been sloppily written. But all the relevant facts were in the original article. And in any case, there are no indications the Romney campaign bothered to check out its preferred story before working it into his stump speech.

In political terms, this goes directly to the heart of the argument Obama has been making about Romney to Ohioans about trust: That Romney can’t be trusted in a very fundamental way to level with them or genuinely look out for their interests, that he’ll tell them anything to win the election. The auto bailout has been central to that case. Obama has argued that not only did Romney fail to support the auto rescue at a time when Ohioans needed it; he doesn’t even have the integrity to admit it. He’ll claim he favored rescuing the auto industry in the manner Obama ultimately did in order to get elected, even though it’s false. This is more of the same.

Beyond the politics, this story should be a big deal. Romney may very well be the next president. That’s a position of some responsibility. Yet he and his campaign rushed to tell voters a story designed to stoke their fears for their livelihoods without bothering to vet it for basic accuracy. This is not a small thing. It reveals the depth of Romney’s blithe lack of concern for the truth — and the subservience of it to his own political ambitions.

UPDATE: I noted in the above post that Bloomberg’s original story seemed to have been “sloppily written.” But the story was in fact perfectly clear on the situation. It says that Chrysler may end up making “all of its models” in China, for the Chinese market, but it clearly says that Chrysler will be “adding Jeep production sites rather than shifting output from North America to China.”

● Obama ahead in Nevada, tied in Colorado: New NBC/WSJ polls find that Obama’s lead in Nevada is holding: He’s ahead 50-47 among likely voters. Key finding: No movement in the state since before the debates. In Colorado, the two are tied at 48-48, a shift from Obama’s previous 50-45 lead.

With Romney gaining in Colorado among independents and Denver suburbanites, Obama is holding Romney to a tie thanks to his overwhelming advantage among Latinos. They are also fueling his lead in Nevada. It’s a reminder of how pivotal Latino turnout could prove to Obama’s reelection chances.

● Again: Why so little discussion of Virginia? A new Fox poll finds Romney ahead of Obama by only two points among likely voters in Virginia, 47-45. I’m not aware of any quality poll finding Romney only two points behind Obama in Ohio. It remains inexplicable that Virginia is widely assumed to be in Romney’s pocket. In reality, the polling averages show the race is tighter in Virginia than in Ohio.

● Early voting up from 2008: ABC News has a useful overview of the early voting that’s underway right now. More Democrats have cast early votes in Iowa and Nevada, while Republicans have the edge in Florida and Colorado. Ohio has boasted by far more early votes than any other state — 808,051 — but the state doesn’t register voters by party, so there’s no breakdown. However, polls show Obama winning in early Ohio voting by huge margins.

● Can Obama’s turnout machine pull it off? Don’t miss Jim Rutenberg’s detailed look at the massive turnout machinery the Obama campaign has spent years building, and at the quiet confidence the Obama team has in its intense microtargeting to eke out a slim victory, even as the commentators remain distracted by talk of Romney’s supposed “surge.”

● More good economic news (sort of): Reuters:

Economic growth picked up in the third quarter as a late burst in consumer spending offset the first cutbacks in investment in more than a year by cautious businesses. The stronger pace of expansion, however, fell short of what is needed to make much of a dent in unemployment, and offers little cheer for the White House ahead of the closely contested November 6 presidential election.

What matters politically is perceptions of the direction of the economy.

● Yup, Romney’s jobs plan is a sham: Paul Krugman says what must never be said: Only one of the presidential candidates has an actual jobs plan, and it ain’t Mitt Romney. To reiterate, Glenn Kessler asked the Romney campaign to provide back up for the claim that his plan will create 12 million jobs. The campaign was unable to do it. The plan is a sham. By contrast, whether you like it or not, Obama’s plan has been evaluated by economists.

It is simply amazing that there has been so little effort on the part of major news organizations to compare the two candidates’ central proposals on the most pressing problem facing the country.

● Obama campaign again ties Romney to Mourdock: The Obama campaign has created a web page with a clock counting the amount of time that has lapsed since Richard Mourdock made his rape comments, without Romney pulling his support. Dems have had success in stretching out the story, and there are still no indications that Romney intends to further clarify his support for Mourdock.

● Hitting Romney’s remarks about “the poor”: The Obama-allied American Bridge and the Jewish Council for Education and Research are out with a

that “the poor are taken care of” because “they have a safety net.” As many have noted, doing something about poverty (as opposed to whether we should preserve the safety net) is a topic that’s been oddly missing from the campaign. Exhibit A: This Romney comment had been all but forgotten.

● And Romney’s campaign chair suggests Powell motivated by race: Yep, John Sununu really did explain Powell’s endorsement of Obama this way:

Well, I think that when you have somebody of your own race that you’re proud of being President of the United States — I applaud Colin for standing with him.

Sununu has since clarified that he believes Powell’s endorsement was only motivated by preference for the president’s policies. But he said what he said, and as Steve Benen notes, a top Romney campaign official adopted an argument that’s straight out of the Rush Limbaugh playbook; in fact, Rush himself employed it in 2008.

What else?

http://www.washingto...7c314_blog.html

Sigh.

Some of the people I've spoken to say that Obama lied to them, and since that's such a heinous thing for a POTUS to do, they'll vote Romney... even though I'd bet good money on his being the most singularly lie-packed presidential campaign waged in American history. The man is a pathological liar. Why aren't more people up in arms that he thinks it's okay to deceive the American people so openly? This race shouldn't ever have come this close to a Romney win.

[Johnny Boy]

What's the difference between Watergate and Fast and Furious?

Nobody died in Watergate.

Uh, what?

[turbojet]

Oh. Obama is coming to my campus Monday so there is that.

[Patticus]

You'll be posting pictures, I presume?

[turbojet]

You'll be posting pics, I presume?

If anyone wants them, sure. I'm no fanboy of the president, but I think it is pretty cool that he is coming to campus and speaking to students.

[Patticus]

If anyone wants them, sure. I'm no fanboy of the president, but I think it is pretty cool that he is coming to campus and speaking to students.

You don't have to be a fanboy to want to take your own photos of one of the world's most famous and most influential men when he comes to visit your neck of the woods.

[turbojet]

You don't have to be a fanboy to want to take your own photos of one of the world's most famous and most influential men when he comes to visit your neck of the woods.

I've met George W. Bush, Jesse Jackson, and Clinton. So I have met influential people quite frequently.

EDIT: George W is actually a pretty cool guy for a moron with cultural imperialistic tendencies.Jesse Jackson was an asshole and Clinton only shook my hand before he turned his attention to some lady.

Edited October 27, 2012 by turbojet

[Patticus]

You might not think it much to see someone like that, but for mere common folk like, er... like me, it'd be something to tell the grand-kids about incessantly until they put me in a home.

You don't need to put pics up, I just think it's cool you'll be seeing him in the flesh is all.

Edit Like a Bawss: Oh hey look!

GOP Voter Fraud Accusations Suddenly Blowing Up In Their Faces

Republican officials, who have used hysteria about alleged voter fraud as an excuse to support measures that disproportionately block Democratic voters, are furiously trying to distance themselves from a growing number of GOP voter registration drives that either submitted false applications or threw away authentic ones.

The incidents might have been overlooked if not for the GOP's clamorous campaignto restrict registration drives, purge voter rolls, roll back early voting, and pass voter ID laws that opponents point out have the effect of depressing the vote among minorities, the poor and other generally Democratic constituencies.

As one Southern California alt-weekly put it, it's turning into a story of "The Wolf Who Cried Wolf."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/25/gop-voter-fraud_n_1990104.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

The ironing is delicious!

[SenEDDtor Missile]

You might not think it much to see someone like that, but for mere common folk like, er... like me, it'd be something to tell the grand-kids about incessantly until they put me in a home.

You don't need to put pics up, I just think it's cool you'll be seeing him in the flesh is all.

Edit Like a Bawss: Oh hey look!

http://www.huffingto...ref=mostpopular

The ironing is delicious!

I think you mean irony.

Edited October 27, 2012 by Malpercio

[Patticus]

I think you mean irony.

Huh?

ISWIDT

Anyway, FiveThirtyEight didn't update its numbers tonight (maybe no polls are taken at weekends... but other weekends have them, so maybe Nate's just late), but there is another article up (which I can't view, but some of you might be able to if you've not used your 10 free articles up):

Oct. 26: State Poll Averages Usually Call Election Right

By NATE SILVER

The FiveThirtyEight forecast model has found the past several days of battleground state polling to be reasonably strong for Barack Obama, with his chances of winning the Electoral College increasing as a result. The intuition behind this ought to be very simple: Mr. Obama is maintaining leads in the polls in Ohio and other states that are sufficient for him to win 270 electoral votes.

Friday featured a large volume of swing state polling, including three polls of Ohio, each of which showed Mr. Obama ahead by margins ranging from two to four percentage points.

Between Ohio and the other battleground states, Mr. Obama held leads in 11 polls on Friday, against four leads for Mitt Romney’s and two ties. Mr. Romney’s leads came in North Carolina and Florida, two states where the FiveThirtyEight forecast already had him favored.

To the extent that there was a trend in the state polls, it was slightly favorable for Mr. Obama. Among the eight polls that had previously published numbers after the first presidential debate in Denver, Mr. Obama gained about one percentage point, on average.

Mr. Romney made gains in four of the five polls that had last surveyed the race before Denver. Nevertheless, his average gain in the polls – 2.4 percentage points – was less than the 4-point bounce he was seeing in the immediate aftermath of the Denver debate. This suggests that Mr. Romney’s bounce has receded some since his post-Denver peak.

The rest can be found here.

The resurgence of the Obama campaign is definitely visible in these and many of the other battleground state numbers released this past week or so. It's all hanging in the balance though; if voters perceive Romney's reaction to Sandy to be a lot better than Obama's, his recovery could be in jeopardy in several swing states. That's why both candidates will probably be touring the worst affected places after the storm passes through, likely on Wednesday and Thursday at least.

In other news, a major Iowa newspaper, the Des Moines Register, has endorsed Mitt Romney. It's the first time they've endorsed a Republican candidate since Richard Nixon in 1972. I don't know what impact this endorsement will have, if any, on the voting decisions of its readership between now and November 6th. It could turn the state from an Obama-leaner into a true tossup, or it could just, you know, not.

[Autosaver]

So I saw that Virgin Ad everyone was whining about.

I found it hilarious.

[Patticus]

Looks like the polling numbers for both candidates are, for the time being, reaching a plateau, if Nate Silver's FTE charts are anything to go by (and they are):

Obama: 295.5 (+0.1)

Romney: 242.5 (-0.1)

A very small increase and decrease respectively since Friday, when Obama's increase and Romney's decline over Thursday's numbers was by 1.3 points. I wonder if the polls are just going to sit at that point until people see exactly what happens in regards to Sandy?

Edit:

[Mega]

Joss Whedon's thoughts on Mitt Romney. Needless to say, it's truly beautiful.