Romney CRUSHES Obama

[Feanor]

After the debate #2, some poll according to CNN still had 65% of people (voters?) preferring Romney for JOBS. This is astonishing considering the core of Republican policy. How come Obama is unable to nail Romney by pointing out these simple facts.

1. The same old Trickle Down economics that has been Republican policy for 30+ years that has resulted in decling median incomes & increasing poverty, and
2. Large spending cuts with no tax increases, i.e. big austerity, which is right now strinking European economies at an unprecedented rate.

[RGA]

Romney says - government doesn't create jobs then blames the current government for not creating enough jobs.

65% of people are stuuuuuupid. Republicans sell fear - they sell it very very well.

On the lighter side Mitt Romney Style (Gangnam Style Parody) - YouTube

[Smokey]

65% of people are stuuuuuupid.

No, most people are not stupid. It is just they are not getting the right information, or getting biased news. Foxnews is good example

[RGA]

No, most people are not stupid. It is just they are not getting the right information, or getting biased news. Foxnews is good example

I think we're being too PC in this day and age. I think anyone who watches 10 minutes of FOX News should be able to tell they're being fed complete and utter BS. The first time I saw Fox News was vacationing in Hong Kong in 2008 when the Palin/Biden debate was on. I watched the commentary afterwards and I first thought it was a Stephen Colbert skit it was so comically one sided and wink wink nudge nudge laughable. But it wasn't satire - these reporters and commentators were being completely serious.

Since Fox News has the highest ratings I can only assume that "most" viewers believe what the have to say.

The anti-Obama vote has nothing to do with jobs or finances but over religious based moral issues (and arguably that he's not the right colour).

Watching the second debate (I missed the first) it was pretty clear to me Romney is a sleazy used car dealer who will say anything without any evidence to get the win. Women who vote for him must want to be on par with cattle.

Obama spending binge never happened - Rex Nutting - MarketWatch

Mitt Romney's Bailout Bonanza | The Nation

[Feanor]

No, most people are not stupid. It is just they are not getting the right information, or getting biased news. Foxnews is good example

True, only 50% of the population is of below average intelligence.

But you have to take the ignorant and irrational people into account because the three groups aren't congruent.

[RGA]

The Hong Kong press the other day noted that Romney has a fairly big lead over Obama in the polls after the three debates - it seems we'll soon see a new president. Interestingly the U.S. polls seem to say Obama is in the lead but I suspect that is to lead to a false sense of security and to have Obama voters stay home. I will be surprised if Obama wins.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

The Hong Kong press the other day noted that Romney has a fairly big lead over Obama in the polls after the three debates - it seems we'll soon see a new president. Interestingly the U.S. polls seem to say Obama is in the lead but I suspect that is to lead to a false sense of security and to have Obama voters stay home. I will be surprised if Obama wins.

Romney has never of error - which makes them statistically tied. They have been statistically tied for weeks now, so the Hong Kong press is inaccurate.

[Feanor]

Romney has never had a big lead over Obama. He has never led by more than 2 percentage points which is within the margin over error - which makes them statistically tied. They have been statistically tied for weeks now, so the Hong Kong press is inaccurate.

Obama would be 'way out in front if people understood the economics of the Republican/Romney/Ryan position(s).

According to CNN a week or so ago fully 65% of people thing Romney would be better the economy: this is monstrous nonsense. Basically Republican policy consists of (1) lower taxes on the rich that will quickly "trickle down" to the rest of us, and (2) deep cuts to government spending (except military) that will "end waste" and "restore confidence" among investors. This crap could be dispelled by a few 30 second media bites:

First 30 second bite:

Republican policy advocated and enacted tax cut for the rich for over 30 years; during this interval median incomes ceased to grow and, under George W., declined. Yet this is still the policy of Romney and the Republicans.

Second 30 second bite:

Republicans promised "fiscal responsibility" for decades, almost entirely through cuts to government spending. This policy, if actually enacted, would be austerity which failed in American during the Great Depression and is presently crushing European economies. Further, Republicans have consistently increased deficits. Yet Republicans expect Americans to buy spending cuts as the solution for the economy.

Third 30 second bite:

Ronald Reagan's tax reductions are credited with resorting the US economy in the early '80s but it was actually the massive military spending, as deficit-funded stimulus, ("star wars" and the "600 ship navy"), that did it.
Similarly it wasn't the George W. Bush tax cuts that eased the economy in the mid '00s, it was the Afgan, Iraqi wars and "War on Terror" and military/security deficit-funded stimulus that did it. Romney opposes government stimulus but wants more military spending -- is this déjà vu all over again.