CBS / NYT Poll ... Obama at 41%

**NCRAVEN** · 03-14-2012, 03:01 PM

Galen - Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't PEW research also have the Democrats winning the house in 2010?

**AirFlacco** · 03-14-2012, 03:54 PM

Futhermore, Galen is in total denial. The Times is the DEMs own poll.
So is the Wash Post which has the same devastating results.

There is other polling data along with news. A bunch of people are starting to look at the employment numbers (and/or unemployment numbers) that the regime is releasing and comparing it to the economic growth numbers, and some people are scratching their heads and saying, "Now, wait a minute. Okay, if we're producing and creating all of these new jobs, where's the growth? Where's the economic growth? There isn't any economic growth!" So everybody's trying to figure this.

**NCRAVEN** · 03-14-2012, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by AirFlacco

Futhermore, Galen is in total denial. The Times is the DEMs own poll.
So is the Wash Post which has the same devastating results.

There is other polling data along with news. A bunch of people are starting to look at the employment numbers (and/or unemployment numbers) that the regime is releasing and comparing it to the economic growth numbers, and some people are scratching their heads and saying, "Now, wait a minute. Okay, if we're producing and creating all of these new jobs, where's the growth? Where's the economic growth? There isn't any economic growth!" So everybody's trying to figure this.

One thing to point out about the PEW research poll, is the question was not who would you vote for, but "what do you think will happen". Not sure how much difference that made but it's like any pollster will tell you, you can get any poll to say what you want based on how you ask the question.

**Galen Sevinne** · 03-14-2012, 04:30 PM

Originally Posted by AirFlacco

Futhermore, Galen is in total denial. The Times is the DEMs own poll.
So is the Wash Post which has the same devastating results.

There is other polling data along with news. A bunch of people are starting to look at the employment numbers (and/or unemployment numbers) that the regime is releasing and comparing it to the economic growth numbers, and some people are scratching their heads and saying, "Now, wait a minute. Okay, if we're producing and creating all of these new jobs, where's the growth? Where's the economic growth? There isn't any economic growth!" So everybody's trying to figure this.

Actually you guys are in total denial. You know, as well as every conservative pundit who's job is to get conservatives elected, that the employment numbers are looking up. You can try to distract from the numbers by throwing in other numbers such as Gallup but the BLS is the standard that has always been used and that is the standard by which employment is measured. The processes involved in gathering those numbers is the same and has always been the same with Obama, Bush, Clinton etc. Those are the standard numbers and those are the numbers people see. Throw out all the other numbers but in the end the BLS numbers are the gold standard.

Those numbers are improving and employment is the place of significance where Obama is/was vulnerable. The DOW is surging because 4/5 ecomonic indicators have been positive of late. Of course there will be set-backs along the way but more and more economists (of which Morris is not) are seeing the recovery trend and the stock market and the polling agree.

Pew Research is a very well-respected poll. Obama leading Romney 54-42 certainly seems like an upper end to me but does show the potential. Obama at 50% approval has been pretty standard in the polls for the last month or so. When people are asked who will win if it is Obama vs. Romney the numbers jump to Obama 59 - Romney 32 just shows the enthusiasm gap. If Romney is the best the GOP puts up most agree Obama wins...even Trannie Coulter.

Healthcare is at 47 approve - 45 disapprove which only shows that ACA is really no longer an issue especially if you put the architect Romney in the race. CBO numbers look good for ACA and the recent numbers on Medicare also look good moving down the road towards election.

Gas and Iran are your only hopes. Obama has been brilliant in foreign affairs and I trust he handles Iran fine. Gas is out of his control so he needs to make that point, but by November gas could be 2.50 a gallon or 5.50 a gallon. It really doesn't matter so much right now.

**NCRAVEN** · 03-14-2012, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by Galen Sevinne

Actually you guys are in total denial

Yeah!?!? Well I am rubber and you're glue, take that!

Seriously Galen, when you believe the phony job numbers you make yourself look silly.

Look at the U6 numbers and take out the seasonal adjustment to get closer to real numbers.

And if you believe for one second that Obamacare is gaining popularity, you lose any credibility you might have had.

**HoustonRaven** · 03-14-2012, 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by AirFlacco

However, Santorum forced Romney to spend and campaign in those
states even though he wanted to ignore them.

He didn't have a campaign office in either state and, IIRC, he didn't even step foot in MS. So no, he didn't spend money there. He never once stood a chance in either of those two states and his campaign knew it.

And no, there won't be a brokered convention. When the pundits say it's in the math, they mean the upcoming states. Romney is going to win TX, CA and FL and he'll keep picking up delegates in the proportional states.

**HoustonRaven** · 03-14-2012, 05:32 PM

Galen is all of a sudden jocking Rasmussen .....

Ok, so lets see what they have to say after his beloved Friday Jobs reports .....

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._index_history

oops ... 52% disapprove, 47% approve

Keep towing that MSNBC line though. You're doing a bang up job, skippy!

**AirFlacco** · 03-14-2012, 07:01 PM

LOL - Skippy? Good one HR.

I just beg to differ with you. Yea, he didn't have much of a chance but He still did OK getting 1/3 of those proportioned delegates. Maybe it was all those
grits he ate-lol.

He's still way ahead but don't forget, 1/3 of those delegates are un-committed votes and can go to Sant or Newt at the convention. As Coulter says, they're bringing Mitt down and she's a big Mitt fan.

**Galen Sevinne** · 03-14-2012, 07:11 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Galen is all of a sudden jocking Rasmussen .....

Ok, so lets see what they have to say after his beloved Friday Jobs reports .....

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._index_history

oops ... 52% disapprove, 47% approve

Keep towing that MSNBC line though. You're doing a bang up job, skippy!

Actually it was PEW not Rasmussen. You might want to slow down a bit before "jocking" your bluster. Seriously though who says "jocking" anymore? And while we are at it, who says "uber" these days? You need to upgrade your verbiage.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

**AirFlacco** · 03-14-2012, 11:16 PM

Come again Galen. Who's in denial. It ain't the Prez. Oby's guy himself says
if the election were tomorrow between OBY and Mitt, Mitt would win.

And he uses the Wash Post poll I just mentioned above which is the same as the Times poll at the top of this thread as proof in the pudding. Yup,
Galen is in denial. Not even the Prez is.

Must have something to do with those rising gas prices and his
brilliant foreign policy skills. Me thinks Israel kicked in on this one.

_______________________________________
"Friend," Obama campaign manager Jim Messina wrote today, "If the general election were held today, President Obama would lose to Mitt Romney -- according to the latest poll from Washington Post-ABC News. Now, many other polls put the President on top, but all point to the same reality: We're looking at a race that will be tighter than you think," Messina warned.
________________________________________

http://campaign2012.washingtonexamin...uld-win/426896

:ww:

**Galen Sevinne** · 03-15-2012, 08:15 AM

Originally Posted by AirFlacco

Come again Galen. Who's in denial. It ain't the Prez. Oby's guy himself says
if the election were tomorrow between OBY and Mitt, Mitt would win.

And he uses the Wash Post poll I just mentioned above which is the same as the Times poll at the top of this thread as proof in the pudding. Yup,
Galen is in denial. Not even the Prez is.

Must have something to do with those rising gas prices and his
brilliant foreign policy skills. Me thinks Israel kicked in on this one.

_______________________________________
"Friend," Obama campaign manager Jim Messina wrote today, "If the general election were held today, President Obama would lose to Mitt Romney -- according to the latest poll from Washington Post-ABC News. Now, many other polls put the President on top, but all point to the same reality: We're looking at a race that will be tighter than you think," Messina warned.
________________________________________

http://campaign2012.washingtonexamin...uld-win/426896

:ww:

He's fundraising Trap.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

**AirFlacco** · 03-15-2012, 09:00 AM

LOL - Galen's still in denial and still getting his ass kicked and owned.

Here is the OBAMATUERISM OF THE WEEK:

Last week he said his new CAFE standards would save the average family
$8,200 pr year in gas savings. Well, only if your name is Mario Andretti
or Jeff Gordon. OBY must have slept during Math class at Harvard because
this has happened before.

This gaffe was even picked up by his own website site POLITICO.COM. So
now we have his own polls saying he's gonna lose and now his own web
sites are picking up these outragious gaffes and his own campaign manager
saying he's gonna lose.

Except it’s not true.

The new White House CAFE standards would save owners about $8,200 over the life of the car in 2010 dollars, with the per-year savings in the high hundreds – nothing to sneeze at, but not quite eight large a year. In fact, all but the most voracious gas consumers spend a fraction of $8k a year on gas