WorldTraveller

NO, but when you add being governor of blue state of Massachusetts, which gives him governmental executive position experience along with turning around the 2002 Olympics, in the words of Bill Clinton : "had a sterling business career crosses the qualification threshold."

If he only knew how you felt about the president

And it continues: http://washingtonexaminer.com/new-crossroads-ad-features-obamas-didnt-build-that-comments/article/2502988

This statement from Obama is gaining traction, it's been plastered in editorials across the nation and I don't see it stopping any time soon.

You are a parody of yourself.

I ask this because the sequester is becoming a bigger issue now, and Obama has failed to outline where the $109 Billion in cuts are suppose to come from.

Hey Dev, you live in virginia, is there any talk about these defense cuts hurting Virginia that you've been hearing about over there in the local media?

Reasonable person: Based on polling data, on general matchups and questions posed regarding the attack ads on mitt, there is evidence that there hasn't been much of a shift TBC: Na uh, it's working Reasonable Person: well, not according to the polling data that poses their views of Romney and how he would manage the economy TBC: Na uh, Nate Silver says differently Reasonable Person: I understand that you want to cite a self-described progressive who blogs for the NY times to back up your point, but please elaborate on the point rather than cite his conclusion. TBC: Oh you just hate progressives. Reasonable Person: So according to the polls, it's practically a dead even race. TBC: Na uh, Obama is winning by a point, that's not dead even. Plus Obama was winning by alot more 6 months ago. Reasonable Person: ummm, a point race is practically dead even. TBC: Be a man! say who you think is gonna win the race. Romney. Will. Lose. Haruuumphhhhhhh!!!!! Reasonable Person: relax little fella, no need to get worked up, the point is that the ads are ineffective. TBC: I hate you! and I don't need no polls, I have insight, and women adore Obama! Reasonable Person: This whole issue about defining Romney is not a problem for Romney as much as people like to make it out to be, because he's been on the trail for so long, been governor and has had a pretty public profile. TBC: Romney is a stuffy boob

Bwaaak Bwaaak "The Ryan plan will basically screw the middle class real hard, while driving dump truck loads of cash to the already super wealthy." Bwaaak Bwaaak

Bwaaak bwaaak "Cayman Islands", Bwaaaak bwaaak "screw everyone superwealthy" Also, by the way, According to the CBO, people on the individual market's premiums will rise under Obama's healthcare law, specially for the younger and healthier people, who will be subsidizing the cost of health care for the sick.

You'd have an argument if it was a targeted tax cut for the 1%, however, when you look at the policies being proposed, they are EQUAL % tax cuts across the board, and Romney also includes a complete elimination of capital gains taxes for those making under $250K , which is even more progressive than the system we have today.

Mitt Romney is going to seize on the look at national security leaks in his speech at the VFW convention in Reno later today, which will be part of how he frames his trip overseas, according to excerpts from his campaign: " This conduct is contemptible. It betrays our national interest. It compromises our men and women in the field. And it demands a full and prompt investigation, with explanation and consequence. Whoever provided classified information to the media, seeking political advantage for the administration, must be exposed, dismissed, and punished. The time for stonewalling is over. It is not enough to say the matter is being looked into, and leave it at that. When the issue is the political use of highly sensitive national security information, it is unacceptable to say, “We’ll report our findings after Election Day.” Exactly who in the White House betrayed these secrets? Did a superior authorize it? These are things that Americans are entitled to know – and they are entitled to know right now. If the President believes – as he said last week – that the buck stops with him, then he owes all Americans a full and prompt accounting of the facts. And let me be clear: These events make the decision we face in November all the more important. What kind of White House would reveal classified material for political gain? I’ll tell you right now: Mine won’t." There are other elements of the speech, but the issue of the leaks, which are still being looked into, goes to a message frame Boston has been using for the last few weeks - that Obama is no longer the post-partisan figure he was in 2008. http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/07/romney-to-rap-obama-on-security-leaks-in-vfw-speech-129912.html This should be a major issue from the media, I think most reasonable people can agree that this an important issue, now let's see how the mainstream media handles this. Ah, so it's ok then, right? Hypocrite DiN/DuckDodgers/Park is a perfect example

More importantly, Mitt doesn't.

All you that have criticized Mitt on his taxes, secrecy etc. Where are you on this? I'd like to see Matt's, B-Large, Park/DiN/DuckDodgers, Juror8's views on this. If we are going to obsess about Mitt's tax returns, then a matter such as this, which is infinitely more important and troubling that compromises national security, you guys surely must be outraged about this, right?

I personally, would like to see him tout himself more than he has. He has a great story to tell, and as you noted, he hasn't spoken about all the good work he has done at the Olympics, which I believe is a tremendous positive and all the good that Bain Capital has done, in regards to the net jobs created, new businesses that were kick started and all the positive returns it has created for Pension and endowment funds, not to mention the lowering of the unemployment rate in Massachusetts from 5.6% to 4.7%, balancing of the budget and the ability to work across the aisle in a heavily Democratic state. This is a perfect resume of a turn around artist, which is what people want. From what I've read, they plan on doing that beginning right before the Convention, I'm sure they'll do some of that, I think the question is how much? They certainly will have the money to get their message out, my guess is that they will.

I enjoy discussing politics more so than discussing bills football. Also, your assertion that there isn't as much progressivity at the top is not backed up by what I linked. I would say re read it again. Increasing capital gains taxes is a bad idea in so many ways, I wouldn't know where to begin, even though I've discussed it at length on this site a couple times and I'm not enthusiastic about relitigating the issue once again. Let's just say this, the main reason why some top income earners pay a lower tax % than some other top income earners is because of the capital gains structure, the idea of raising capital gains taxes in the name of "fairness" at the expense of the economy is not only illogical and ideologically over zealous but tremendously short-sighted. Bill Clinton understood the importance of capital formation, Obama doesn't. Also. Mitt Romney has a plan to keep capital gains taxes the same for folks making over 250k and for those making less than 250k, to eliminate them. His tax plan is more progressive than the status quo. Regarding your interest in my interests or there lack of, you are now the third person who has had enough of an interest to look at my profile and come up with the same question. The funny thing is that the three people who asked the same question were all liberals, and one left wing loon even suggested that I should be banned because of it. How liberal of him

Democrats usually have a relatively easy time holding Michigan, and considering obama "saved the car industry" you would think he would have a substantial advantage, yet the rcp shows the race within a point. Weird.

Here are more findings from the same poll: Despite concerted Democratic attacks on his business record, Republican challenger Mitt Romney scores a significant advantage over President Obama when it comes to managing the economy, reducing the federal budget deficit and creating jobs, a national USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds. Mitt Romney is preferred over President Obama on the economy, despite attacks on his record at Bain Capital, according to a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll. By Charles Dharapak, AP Mitt Romney is preferred over President Obama on the economy, despite attacks on his record at Bain Capital, according to a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll. Enlarge By Charles Dharapak, AP Mitt Romney is preferred over President Obama on the economy, despite attacks on his record at Bain Capital, according to a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll. Sponsored Links By more than 2-1, 63%-29%, those surveyed say Romney's background in business, including his tenure at the private equity firm Bain Capital, would cause him to make good decisions, not bad ones, in dealing with the nation's economic problems over the next four years. The findings raise questions about Obama's strategy of targeting Bain's record in outsourcing jobs and hammering Romney for refusing to commit to releasing more than two years of his tax returns. Instead, Americans seem focused on the economy, where disappointment with the fragile recovery and the 8.2% unemployment rate are costing the president. Notice the last part, I've been saying this for close to a week now, while the beltway folks would of had you believe otherwise. I had this discussion with B-Large, he seemed to believe that tax returns was a significant issue, I told them that it was waaaay down the totem poll of things that voters cared about, and that it was all about the economy. Here are a few other nuggets in the polling: Romney has the edge when it comes to being able to "get things done," and the broad landscape seems tilted in his favor: •Republicans and Republican-leaning independents are much more enthusiastic about the election, an important factor in persuading supporters to vote. By 18 points, 51%-33%, they report being more enthusiastic than usual about voting. In contrast, Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents by 4 points say they are less enthusiastic than usual, 43%-39%. •A record number of Americans express skepticism about the activist role of government Obama espouses; 61% say the government is trying to do too many things that should be left to individuals and businesses. That's the highest number since Gallup began asking the question in 1992. Enthusiasm is definitely on the conservatives side, hispanics and voters under age 30 (which weren't reflected in this poll, but others) are at near historic lows when it comes to their enthusiasm for voting this election cycle, which are important segments of the Democratic coalition. However, voter enthusiasm for those over age 60 (which are important for conservatives) are near all time highs. My belief is that the polling data is off by a couple points, simply because when they poll people in RV polls, it doesn't reflect the enthusiasm or lack of, and in order for you to vote, you don't just receive a phone call and are asked who you want to vote for, you have to either request an absentee ballot or drive to the polls and cast it. So far, Romney has got to be very pleased with the way things are going. Voters are for the most part rejecting Obama's handling of the economy and they are in no mood for small ball personal attacks being lobbed from the Obama attack machine.

He says that because he has an emotional connection and insight with the way they think.

Relax, no need to get so worked up hun. Another emotional response.

Fact: You are an emotional wreck

Well, I know that this train of thought is popular in some liberal and conservative quarters, but political campaigns going back ever since, I don't know, ever, think differently. Obama has spent over $15M in polling this election cycle, why would they do that if it was "retarded"? Well, they do it because it's not retarded. They do it because it offers a glimpse of what the race looks like at this particular time. They do it because they want to see if their messaging is working. They do it to see if a possible new message could work. There are many ways to characterize polling, in regards to the benefits of polling to each campaign, "retarded" wouldn't be one of the ways to characterize it, however, you could characterize discussions revolved around polling as retarded. Chill, no need to PMS all over the screen. We get it, you have nothing to back up your claim other than then spouting the name Nate Silver and making emotional statements.

No no no no, considering that Obama has been leading in most of the polls going back over the past six months, it is equally important to factor in polling data from six months ago to provide a snap shot of today's race

Evidence? I said it's practically a dead even race, and that the point of the thread is that Obamas attacks have been largely ineffective. Then you came in with "Obama will win because nate silver says so and ummm, yeah, and yeah, he'll win, because that's what I believe" So you came in with an emotional non related response. We're having a discussion based on facts, polling data and in your case emotions, so I can see why you began with the personal attacks. I mean understand, there is a tendency in people to lob ad hominems once they get frustrated, in what started off as a civil conversation. So let me repeat this again for you, the point of the thread was that the attacks have been largely ineffective according to polling data, not who will win the election.