Re: Romney Predicted to win November election
What you fail to recognize is that the Universary of Colorado Analysis has been right ever Presidential election for the last 32 years.
Like I said, not too hard to do. First you have to predict reagan's first term. Not too hard to do. Then you predict his second election. not too hard either. then you have the bush Sr. election. Another pretty much no brainer. Then there was bill clinton winning his first election which was another easy prediction, along with a second term for him. Bush Jr. vs. Gore was an easy pick too. John Kerry was a toss away for the dems. then you had obama. About the only one of those that was hard would have been Clinton beating the incumbent. However, given the people advertising for clinton and energizing the youth and minorities like they did it was not hard to figure out. I am not really impressed by something i could have predicted myself a couple of months from the election. yes, they have a long winning streak of no brainer predictions. Now had they predicted people in their state should have avoided the new Dark Knight movie that might have been something.
Now not sure what polls you are looking at but Gallup and Rasmussen has Romney ahead in the popular vote and all the swing states are within the margin of error with normally all undecideds going for the challenger especially this late in the game.
Sorry, but Romney is failing where it matters. They are not called the battleground states for no reason. but still, every state poll I have seen shows obama with a commanding electoral lead. perhaps you were unaware, the popular vote doesn't make you president? Then you are trying to say all the undecideds will go to Romney? Yes, i guess if you make such an absurd claim then maybe you have a point. However, like I said we have seen obama's dirty laundry, and we have two plus months for more surprises with mitt that are probably not going to go well for the guy who can barely get his own party enthusiastic about him. When you consider undecided voters are looking for a way to go and most polls show obama doing well in battleground states this becomes important. Plus their prediction relies on the sky falling in the christmas season and economic problems being really bad then. I just don't see the sky falling in two months economically, though the republicans are trying.
You really need to get out more and actually do some research to find out how bad things really are. Notice the lack of enthusiasm at college campuses? How about the high unemployment rate for college graduates? How about 23 million unemployed/under employed Americans, and trillion dollar deficits for four years in a row?
That would be great if Romney was capitalizing on those things. He has yet to come out with any plans to make things better aside from give money to rich people. It is one thing if romny was an alternative to obama, but he just isn't. he is also against relief for those students, and no one but the pure republibots actually thinks he is going to cut spending. At best he will spend the same amount of money on different things. Also, since the people who are in troubkle are the same ones he wants to toss under the bus for being poor it would involve the people in trouble voting for a person who wants to screw them. Let us say i am a college kid with lots of debt, or an unemployed person who needs government assistance. Who do i vote for/ Do I vote against Obama because of the bad economy despite the fact he offers me a safety net, or do i vote for romney who wants to eliminate the safety net and only do things for the well off? Your own logic defeats your point. if people are really doing bad and need a break, Romney has repeatedly said he will not give it to them.
I know this is hard for you to understand but the sources you read have been lying to you.
Oh thanks random guy on the internet. i am sure to trust your grabbing at straws over the many sources who are far more reputable than you are. really, you seem to be toting the faux news line. This is a news source that is banned from countries for lying. It is also a source who's owner is facing a huge legal problem in england due to his lack of honesty and bull****. not to mention Faux has been caught lying before, and even their pundits have gone after Romney rather rabidly in the recent past. When rush and coulter start going off the tracks and attacking your candidate you have some problems with the sources you are quoting.
What is it about Obama that causes people like you to ignore actual results and to continue to support this empty suit?
It is not Obama that makes me not trust the right wing news bull**** machine. it is the right wing news bull**** machine that makes me not trust them. blind faith works for your type, but I am not that religious.
Maybe had he spent more time learning the job rather than enjoying the perks of the jobs the results would be better. I don't think there is a snowball's chance in hell that this analysis is wrong this year and it won't be close. The economic numbers don't warrant a close election and people always vote their pocketbooks
if it is true that people vote with their pocketbooks then it is Obama for the win. One of the problems with destroying the affluent middle class of the US was that the republicans took away the money of a large voting block that might have supported them this election because they wanted more **** and better pay. Your claims against Obama is that people will vote for a conservative, despite the fact romney is not conservative at all, in order to straighten things our and bring them back up to their previous levels of affluence.That goes directly against voting for your pocket book. That is voting for paying the bills you got and tightening your belt. If people are going to vote for the person who is giving them stuff that would be obama since the rich are a minority.
The only reason some people will vote for their future wealth is the idea that someday they will be a part of the less than one percent of the rich and be able to treat everyone else like dirt. that is the republican promise. You are treated like crap as the 99 percent, but you might just become lucky enough to be the rich. If you get rid of the opportunity for wasteful wealth then you will never b e able to buy and sell others and piss money away while other people suffer. That is the whole idea of the modern republican party and modern conservatives. It is not about not being wasteful, it is just about being the one percent who can waste money. Under your own logic obama wins because he is giving back to the large majority of poor voters. A majority that has seen massive increases in the Bush presidency due to the bubbles they allowed to be created to strip the middle class of their money, investments, and land values.