• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

After Burst of Media Attention, Ryan's Favorables see...... an 11 point climb....

Are the users in here who thought Ryan was a horrible pick, going to admit they were wrong?

Ryan is a good pick, he inspired the base, he is intelligent and he got Democrats to talk about the economy. Just like Romney wanted.

But they are not talking about the economy. They are talking about medicare just like Ryan wanted.
 
Are the users in here who thought Ryan was a horrible pick, going to admit they were wrong?

Ryan is a good pick, he inspired the base, he is intelligent and he got Democrats to talk about the economy. Just like Romney wanted.

Palin also "inspired the base" as well, as to "intelligence", that's debatable. Palin also got favourable reviews when she was first introduced to the national scene until she started doing interviews. Ryan won't have a problem with interviews the way Palin did, but he also has a lot more voting history to pick, not the least of which is his support for Bush's deficit spending.
 
At this stage an incumbent should be way ahead, but RR has a slight lead. Looks bad for obama with two months and 4 debates to go.

Not really, given Obama's record this is the GOPs election to lose and they should be waay ahead by now given Obama's record. That's proving the GOP picked a weak candidate.
 
We need to come up with a word for Polls that really mean nothing and tell us nothing.

Pollerwocky.

Green Eggs Poll.

Bird Fishing Poll.


But 36% now say they are more likely to vote for Romney with Ryan as his running mate. Twenty-nine percent (29%) say they are less likely to vote for the Republican, while just as many (30%) say the vice presidential selection has no impact on their vote.

Tic Tac Poll.
 
We need to come up with a word for Polls that really mean nothing and tell us nothing.

Pollerwocky.

Green Eggs Poll.

Bird Fishing Poll.




Tic Tac Poll.

Pollderaol.
 
Romney/Ryan is the best ticket that the GOP had this year. At this stage an incumbent should be way ahead, but RR has a slight lead. Looks bad for obama with two months and 4 debates to go.

on the topic of debates, you libs always yell about everything being fair. Do you think its fair the liberals will moderate all of the debates?
The debates are organized and run by a GOP/Dem bipartisan organization, the parties agree on all aspects. It isn't like this is run by the League of Women Voters any longer.
 
Given the lineup, I am guessing that the Dems agreed to the debates as long as nobody favorable to the GOP was allowed to moderate. The only concession to the GOP is that NBC was not included. :)

Here’s the full rundown of the four debates (the formats, dates and venues were announced two weeks ago):

Presidential debate No. 1 (domestic policy):
Jim Lehrer, Executive Editor of the PBS NewsHour
Wednesday, Oct. 3, University of Denver, Denver, Colo.

Vice presidential debate:

Martha Raddatz, Senior Foreign Affairs Correspondent, ABC News
Thursday, Oct. 11, Centre College, Danville, Ky.

Presidential debate No. 2 (town-meeting style):

Candy Crowley, Chief Political Correspondent, CNN and Anchor, CNN’s State of the Union
Tuesday, Oct. 16, Hofstra University, Hempstead, N.Y.

Presidential debate No. 3 (foreign policy):

Bob Schieffer, Chief Washington Correspondent, CBS News and Moderator, Face the Nation
Monday, Oct. 22, Lynn University, Boca Raton, Fla.
Debate moderators announced: Crowley is first woman presidential debate moderator in 20 years - The Washington Post
 
True and let us not forget Sarah Palin was über popular till people started to get to know her..to soon to tell.

Palin had high negatives after SNL took cheap shots at her.

Ryan will have high positives after Americans learn how he will balance the budget by cutting entitlement programs like Medicare.
 
Palin had high negatives after SNL took cheap shots at her.

Ryan will have high positives after Americans learn how he will balance the budget by cutting entitlement programs like Medicare.

Ha ha yea Romney Ryan will gut Medicare and hand out vouchers, end pell grants ,loans and education programs they will end the mortgage deduction,try to repeal healthcare..cut food stamps to the poor, and many other vital programs the poor and middle class count on . All this while they give the rich more tax cuts , raise taxes by 2000 a year for middle class oh but big oil will still get their subsidies but wind and clean energy loses funding ....yea just wait till the American people are paying attention we will see how they like the Romney Ryan plan.
 
yea just wait till the American people are paying attention we will see how they like the Romney Ryan plan.

Well then you are out of luck, most voters do not pay attention.
 
Palin had high negatives after SNL took cheap shots at her.

Ryan will have high positives after Americans learn how he will balance the budget by cutting entitlement programs like Medicare.

I think this is actually correct - the American people are at least going to respect someone willing to put forward ideas, and change them with critique.
 
Palin had high negatives after SNL took cheap shots at her.

There's nothing 'cheap' about great satire--they exposed her total incompetence.

The only 'cheap' shots were coming from Palin in 2008.
 
Palin had high negatives after SNL took cheap shots at her.

No, she did that all on her own. SNL just did what they always do and highlight her mistakes.

Ryan will have high positives after Americans learn how he will balance the budget by cutting entitlement programs like Medicare.

Oh yeah, Romney Ryan loses the youth vote, minority vote, elderly vote, women vote all at once leaving just the middle age white guy vote. That's victory I tell you! :lamo
 
Medicare is not a damn entitlement program. You and you're employer pay into it so that in a time of need it is there. Quit calling it a ****ing entitlement program, its an insurance program.
 
Among Likely Voters, mind you.




If anyone is wondering why we are seeing this burst of nonsense stories (Ryan sold some stocks! Ryan passed on some constituent advocacy linked to the stimulus! Ryan voted for the same bailouts that the President did!).... this is why :).

I thought it was time to check back in with this.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/08/24/rel8a.pdf

From the announcement, in this poll, Ryan went from 29 to 41 % favorable. A nice jump. Unfortunately for him, unfavorable went from 20 to 38 %, and even bigger jump. Since historically favorable to unfavorable for VP selections tends to go towards unfavorable the further from the announcement you get, that is really not good news.

Nate Silver also made an interesting comment today on the effect of selecting Ryan so far: Aug. 25: An Above-Average 'Likely Voter Gap' for Romney - NYTimes.com

Over all, with a set of reasonably favorable state polls on Thursday through Saturday after some poor ones earlier last week, Mr. Obama has rebounded a bit in our Electoral College forecast. The model now gives him a 69.3 percent chance of winning it, up from 66.7 percent on Wednesday. There’s also been a tiny shift back toward Mr. Obama in the national tracking polls, with Gallup now showing the race tied, and Rasmussen Reports putting Mr. Obama one point ahead as of Saturday.
It’s hard to tell whether there was a vice presidential ‘bounce’ for Mr. Romney that has since reversed itself — or whether this is all just a bunch of statistical noise. In this case, it may be something of a moot point, since the party conventions are likely to reset the momentum in one direction or another anyway.
 
The debates are organized and run by a GOP/Dem bipartisan organization, the parties agree on all aspects. It isn't like this is run by the League of Women Voters any longer.

agreed and it's one of the many complaints that conservatives have with the republican party staff that they do not push for a conservative moderator to balance the three liberal ones. Brett Bair did a great job during the Primaries, and would have been an excellent choice for this.
 
Medicare is not a damn entitlement program. You and you're employer pay into it so that in a time of need it is there. Quit calling it a ****ing entitlement program, its an insurance program.

on the contrary - like Social Security, you are paying for some other person to enjoy it. then when you get old you feel "entitled" to have someone else pay for you to enjoy it. That's why it is called both an "entitlement" and a "ponzi scheme".
 
Nate Silver also made an interesting comment today on the effect of selecting Ryan so far: Aug. 25: An Above-Average 'Likely Voter Gap' for Romney - NYTimes.com

I thought his link to this equally interesting:

Aug. 18: Obama Leads Big — Among Those Least Likely to Vote

...Perhaps a broader concern for Democrats is not the small number of adults who will seek to vote on Nov. 6 and will be turned away, but the much larger number who will make no effort to do so.

In 2008, Mr. Obama tapped more deeply into the universe of “unlikely voters” than almost all candidates that preceded him, garnering a significant number of votes from groups like young voters and minorities who have a low propensity to turn out.

But he may not repeat that success this year. In almost every swing state that tracks voter registration by party, the share of voters who are registered as Democrats is down from four years ago....

I've thought something like this for a while - 2012 will not produce the large scale engagement in the electoral process that 2008 did. Simplified, it's a Battle of the Bases, with only the Most Likely To Vote Independents (seniors) up for grabs.
 
I thought his link to this equally interesting:



I've thought something like this for a while - 2012 will not produce the large scale engagement in the electoral process that 2008 did. Simplified, it's a Battle of the Bases, with only the Most Likely To Vote Independents (seniors) up for grabs.

I saw that too. Nate Silver has great content. I would also point out from the article I linked earlier:

It’s all a bit of a mess, frankly. I suspect that part of the problem is that polling firms are applying likely voter methods that might have been designed 30 years ago to a modern polling universe of extremely low response rates (even the most thorough polling firms can only get about 10 percent of voters to return their calls), cellphone-only households, and an increasingly diverse and partisan electorate — and that is producing erratic and unpredictable results. There’s always some uncertainty about just who will turn out to vote, but there is more of it than usual this year.


Also note that your article is discussing a poll where they asked unlikely to vote and unregistered voters, two groups that get excluded from one or both polling methods. And of last note, he claims about a 1 % loss in votes for Obama in Penn due to the voter ID law. Gee, could that be why republicans all of a sudden felt the measure was necessary?
 
Not really, given Obama's record this is the GOPs election to lose and they should be waay ahead by now given Obama's record. That's proving the GOP picked a weak candidate.

I dont think its just the candidate, I think the entire far right attitude of the "NEW" republican party is holding romny back. Remember, every far right candidate was rejected in the GOP Primary but REPUBLICANS....each of the far right candidates was far in the lead poll wise and HAILED as the great conservative hope...From Bachman to Caine to Santorum to Gingrich and they all imploded....romny won by dodging every single question he could and never saying anyting.
Herman Caine being in the lead of anything shows just how screwed up the republican party has become
 
I saw that too. Nate Silver has great content. I would also point out from the article I linked earlier:

Also note that your article is discussing a poll where they asked unlikely to vote and unregistered voters, two groups that get excluded from one or both polling methods. And of last note, he claims about a 1 % loss in votes for Obama in Penn due to the voter ID law. Gee, could that be why republicans all of a sudden felt the measure was necessary?

I've wondered that as well (about the phones). My bet would be that at current there is heavy overlap between the populations that have only cellphones and the populations least likely to vote, and so it doesn't effect the model as much as you might think. Over time we'll see the discrepancy grow, and the ability of polls utilizing landlines to accurately predict elections will slide in tandem. Pollsters will have to alter their methods accordingly, but not yet.

As for the ID thing, Conservatives are not trying to depress Democrat voter turnout - they are trying to ensure that everyone who votes is supposed to, and they are suspicious of Democrats who seem to be willing to enable voter fraud; as felons and illegals (the groups who would be committing fraud if they voted) are most likely to vote Democrat. Both sides are fighting for a higher ideal here, and will accept the electoral advantage of their ideal as a happy secondary-effect.
 
a favorability bump after a VP pick is pretty normal. This isn't even news.

The real question is whether it lasts. Historically, they do not.
 
I've wondered that as well (about the phones). My bet would be that at current there is heavy overlap between the populations that have only cellphones and the populations least likely to vote, and so it doesn't effect the model as much as you might think. Over time we'll see the discrepancy grow, and the ability of polls utilizing landlines to accurately predict elections will slide in tandem. Pollsters will have to alter their methods accordingly, but not yet.

There is a fascinating article that I am not awake enough yet to dig for at 538 by Silver about some of the reasons rasmussen tends to have republicans higher than every one else, including other likely voter polls. It has to do with the polling methods.

As for the ID thing, Conservatives are not trying to depress Democrat voter turnout - they are trying to ensure that everyone who votes is supposed to, and they are suspicious of Democrats who seem to be willing to enable voter fraud; as felons and illegals (the groups who would be committing fraud if they voted) are most likely to vote Democrat. Both sides are fighting for a higher ideal here, and will accept the electoral advantage of their ideal as a happy secondary-effect.

So making it harder for people who can vote legally is a solution to an imagined problem that has not yet been shown to ever effect the outcome of an election. Oh, and the felon thing...in only 12 states do felons lose the right to vote permanently. In Penn, once a felon is out of prison they are legally allowed to vote.
 
Back
Top Bottom