world

Obama maintains post-convention lead over Romney

60 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2012.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

60 Comments
Login to comment

Of the 1,419 likely voters polled online over the previous four days, 47% said they would vote for Obama and 43% for Romney if the Nov 6 U.S. election were held today.

47% is not that big of a margin. The debates a scheduled and it will be an entire different story, meaning, both men will face each other and debate the issues, the RNC and DNC both men had to define themselves and to re-introduce who they are and what they represent. Obama was a better orator then Mitt, there was no doubt about that, however, when it comes to the economy, Mitt still leads, so the debates should again, define as to how these men will address the issues, but make no mistake, the economy takes front and center stage. This is Romney's strongest point and Obama's weakest. Romney has a 52% lead in the economy area over Obama.

Obama, during the DNC was able to skate by and keep the focus for 2 days on abortion and immigration. Day number 3, no mention on handling the economy, but talking mostly about government jobs. 3 scheduled debate events and Obama can't run, he has to talk about the Stimulus, the Debt, the Private sector, the Affordable Healthcare act and a clear concise plan on how to bring down the over 8% unemployment. Other than that, nothing else matters and are side issues. Obama has NOT done well and the polls will change quite significantly during those debates. Biden and Ryan have 1 scheduled debate.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

With Romney flip flopping AGAIN on the Affordable Health Care Act a.k.a. "Obamacare" and stating "Well, I'm not getting rid of all of health care reform.." which is what he campaigned on for almost a year, and making outlandish implications that Obama wants to remove the word "God" from coins, he will hemorrhage voters' interests by the millions in the coming weeks.

He has NO stance, and this is very clear by the number of times he has flip flopped. He will lose his base, piss off his donors, and turn away the people who are on the fence.

Source: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/09/mitt-romney-vows-god-will-stay-in-gop-platform/

Source2:http://www.theblaze.com/stories/romney-im-not-getting-rid-of-all-of-health-care-reform/

1 ( +4 / -3 )

It's going to take decades to fix the financial mess left after Obama's second term.

-13 ( +2 / -15 )

Who here actually believes U.S. government debt will be less than it is now after Obama's second term?

-11 ( +2 / -13 )

This guy is literally all over the place. I can't even keep up with the number of times he changes his positions:

This morning on NBC, Mitt Romney said that “there are a number of things that I like” about Obamacare and suggested he would retain: 1. The gaurentee that insurance companies couldn’t discriminate against people with pre-exisiting conditions, and 2. The provision that allows young adults to stay on their parents plan.

Just hours later, his campaign quietly told a conservative website that he actually opposes those provisions of Obamacare:

In reference to how Romney would deal with those with preexisting conditions and young adults who want to remain on their parents’ plans, a Romney aide responded that there had been no change in Romney’s position and that “in a competitive environment, the marketplace will make available plans that include coverage for what there is demand for. He was not proposing a federal mandate to require insurance plans to offer those particular features.”

5 ( +7 / -2 )

It is important to read his words very closely but Romney made it more than clear on a number of occasions during the primaries that he intended to keep the more politically popular provisions of the law intact. Actually, the Congressional rules by which Obamacare was constructed are so convoluted I'm not even sure whether it procedurally allows Republicans to change anything but the tax and spending components of with only a bare Senate majority.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Bass - "...the RNC and DNC both men had to define themselves and to re-introduce who they are and what they represent."

Mitt introduced himself but didn't define himself.  Barack HUSSEIN Obama's campaign is doing a great job at that.

Bass - "Obama was a better orator then Mitt, there was no doubt about that, however, when it comes to the economy, Mitt still leads,"

Yes, to nowhere. 

Without a plan, what is Mitt going to lead? 

Bass - " but make no mistake, the economy takes front and center stage. This is Romney's strongest point"

Nonsense. Mitt's plan, as president Clinton made clear, is a return to past failures and a bonanza for Mitt's rich backers.

On the contrary, the economy and Mitt's ability to fix it, is Romney's weakest point.

Another of Mitt's many weak points is his lack of ideas.

Mitt had better get some key policy answers together before debate day. Otherwise he is going to get taken to the cleaners by the president.

I hope the moderator asks him exactly which tax loopholes he and Ryan will close. They were both asked exactly that yesterday and not surprisingly, both twisted and turned and evaded and dodged.

Do that at the debates and they should start looking for new jobs because they aren't going anywhere near the WH (not that they would have anyway.)

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Considering Obama's been running for re-election for the past 2-1/2 - three years, you'd think he'd be in a double-digit lead at this point in this election cycle. What's up with that?

RR

-9 ( +3 / -12 )

This guy is literally all over the place. I can't even keep up with the number of times he changes his positions:

Remember this part of his acceptance speech, in which Obama attacks the Ryan plan to apply free-market reform and cost controls to Medicare? "I will never turn Medicare into a "voucher" because “no American should ever have to spend their golden years at the mercy of insurance companies.”That promise didn't last long because the next day the Obama administration approved a program that would shift up to 2 million of the poorest and most-vulnerable seniors out of the federal Medicare program and into private health insurance plans overseen by the states. Ryan at least allows all seniors to choose, and didn’t force the poorest seniors to take the voucher option. Not only will Obama push just the poorest seniors into this plan, in some states they’d have to know to opt back in to traditional Medicare:

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Guess it will be 4 more years! Would love to help you Mr. President but I can not vote.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Romeo - "Considering Obama's been running for re-election for the past 2-1/2 - three years, you'd think he'd be in a double-digit lead at this point in this election cycle. What's up with that?"

Your pal Mitt's been running for president for 8 years and still barely anyone really likes him.

What's up with that?

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Well, Mitt can do nothing but support Obama in this -- after all, it's god's will that Obama is leading.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

If Americans really understood the workings of their government, they would not place so much importance on the head of the executive branch, who is mostly a figurehead except for constitutionally defined tasks like asking congress to declare war or when appointing Supreme Court justices. The greatest force for change comes from the quadrillions of dollars that corporations pour into lobbying efforts, ensuring that pharmaceuticals, petroleum, agribusiness, aerospace/armaments, etc. are protected from regulation or are allocated the lion's share of the national budget. Whoever is president gets to tiptoe around these issues and play the role of Dirty Harry when the occasion arises. Before FDR, most Americans paid scant attention to who was president. In "Washington Goes to War," journalist David Brinkley noted that before Pearl Harbor taxis and private cars were able to drive right up to the entrance of the White House without so much as a cursory glance by security guards.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Thanks for your comments on the insurance issue, Mirai-san. A hallmark of the recent right is dogmatism, probably due to an overlap in conceptual thinking with religion. Their dogma states that the private market is always, inevitably, and without exception superior to what society can provide through government.

Insurance is one area where this dogmatism runs afoul of reality.

Private companies exist to create profits; that is how things should be. The current health industry can be divided into two (three, really, but let's ignore the pharmaceutical industry for the moment): health care providers (hospitals, etc.) and payment facilitators (insurance companies). To maximize profits, an insurance company must determine the chance that a customer would actually utilize healthcare and then either price the policy in accordance or reject the individual altogether. The young and healthy are cheap; the older are more expensive; those with existing conditions are rejected, for no possibility exists that their premiums could in the slightest cover their costs.

No company in the private market would cover those with pre-existing conditions unless they were forced to by government mandate. The conflict here exists because Romney knows this; he knows that this point will arise during the campaign and that he must have some answer rather than, "Too bad for them!" His handlers, though, would like to placate the devoted and thus must stick to the free-market-or-nothing script.

Really, though, this is neither here nor there. The ACA is a very delicate balancing act. If the mandate is removed, it collapses like a house of cards. Romney may pretend that some of what have already become very, very popular aspects of the act may be preserved while scrapping others. This will not work; he knows it will not work - he is lying through his teeth when he says it can work. If he is not, he is not the businessman he represents himself as.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Mitt is facing a huge demographic problem in getting elected. According to a recent Wall Street Journal Poll 0% ( yes that is zero ) of black voters planned to vote for Romney, only 32% of Hispanics ( Bush had 44% in 2004 ) meaning that Mitt has to get 61% of the white vote from a white turnout of 74%. The GOP's shift to the right has alienated huge swathes of the American electorate and when the postmortem is conducted after this defeat, thinking Republicans must try to drag this party back to sanity. If I were a Republican, I'd be directing some of my bile at my own party which is making itself unelectable.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Romney is interviewed by NBC's David Gregory and is asked regarding Romney's plan to cover lowered tax rates with closed loopholes, “Governor, where are the specifics of how you get to this math?” Isn't that an issue?”

So: specifically asked to present specifics, Romney says:

Well, the specifics are these which is those principles I described are the heart of my policy.

Bring on the debates!

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Your pal Mitt's been running for president for 8 years and still barely anyone really likes him.

Luckily for us, if Mittens loses this election, he'll never have the opportunity to run again (unless the GOP are really stupid enough to put him forward again) In 2016, we'll need to deal with Huckabee, Cristie, Jeb Bush, or the other 2012 primaries left overs like Pawlenty, Santorum, or Perry. I predict that Santorum will get the gop candidate spot next.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I can't say on an individual basis, since I don't know the hearts of men, but I reckon overall that at least 1/3 of American voters won't vote for Obama because he is black. At least know why you are voting or not voting for someone in an informed sense.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@bruinfan

that at least 1/3 of American voters won't vote for Obama because he is black

I think the number is higher than that. The US is still a very racist society, and the majority of the people who aren't voting for Obama are racist, but just won't admit it. Obama really has to rely on the African -American, Hispanic, LGBT and women voters to carry him through. That's why it makes no sense for him to work with republicans anymore because most of their policies are racist, sexist, or anti-middle class. He needs to be more progressive on people issues.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Mirai - you reckon Santorum?

Bring itt on!!

If there's one thing the GOP needs to learn from their soon-to-come electoral beatdown in November is to not put up Christian extremists.

The American electorate has evolvee quickly, even in the last 4 years.

Who'd have guessed the president would endorse gay marriage even 3 years ago?

The GOP - sadly for them - is still evolving at the rate of a stalactite.

They need to realise - extremist candidates will result in electoral drubbing.

McCain will likely become known as the last sane candidate the GOP ever nominated for president, but even that's questionable. :-)

Amazing - every single GOP candidate this cycle bar Jon Huntsman had me thinking "Is the GOP purposely trying to lose?"

And with Mitt and his flips, lose they will.

Again.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@you reckon Santorum?

Yes. Santorum was second place and he had a quite a few popular votes. The only reason why it didn't work out for him is because he didn't have money on his side. Romney had cornered the corporate sponsor market pretty early in the primaries. Bauchmann, Cain, and Perry are too stupid and extreme (even for their base) to run again. Gingrich will be too old, and always will be too much of an ass, and I think Huckabee is enjoying the money at Fox News too much (although he'd be the sure favorite) to run in 2016. Pawlenty is too boring and doesn't have the name recognition. As much as I (kind of) like Ron Paul, he's a big time racist and won't play the corporate game like the other candidates will in order to rally up the funds he needs to be a real contender. Jeb Bush...reason for failure is self explanatory -which is kind of a shame because he's nothing like W. He actually has got some brains.

That leaves Rick Santorum. He, in his own right is very sexist, racist, homophobic, and a down right hater, but he has the extremist people on his side, more so than Romney has. All he needs to do is rally up the corporations and promise them deep tax cuts and deregulation like Romney did and he'll have enough money and enough of the people to be in the top spot.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

that at least 1/3 of American voters won't vote for Obama because he is black

I think the number is higher than that. The US is still a very racist society, and the majority of the people who aren't voting for Obama are racist, but just won't admit it. Obama really has to rely on the African -American, Hispanic, LGBT and women voters to carry him through.

Both comments are off the mark. Blacks only make 13% of the total US population, and Hispanics are about the same or slightly more (depending if you count all including legal and illegal). Obama secured the minority vote in 2008, but that alone wasn't enough to get him the win over McCain. He still needed the non-minority, White vote to get him over McCain.

I am Black, and I didn't vote for him because I don't like his policies. And I am sure that many of the white voters that voted for him in 2008, and who will vote for him in 2012 will do so because they like what he stands for, and not just because of the color of his skin. Will there be some whites (as well as other races of people) who will not vote for him because he is Black, the answer is yes. But overall, the US is a far fairer nation for someone that may be a minority to get elected than most places.

I don't see too many heads of state in Europe that are non-white, and there are plenty of non-whites living there.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

AlphaApe: "And I am sure that many of the white voters that voted for him in 2008, and who will vote for him in 2012 will do so because they like what he stands for, and not just because of the color of his skin."

For a change, I'm with you.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Of the 1,419 likely voters polled online

Ah, yes. Internet polling results. Heh, the gold standard of accuarcy.

RR

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Good job Clint Eastwood ain't a Democrat, eh

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Alphaape

I still stand by my comment that I feel that the US is still a very racist society. Do you honestly believe that if Obama was white, people would relentlessly ask to see his birth certificate, to see his grades in college, make outright racist statements about him and his family, or congress republicans unanimously agreeing to make Obama's failure the highest priority? All of this is unprecedented and has never happened under any other presidential leadership until now. They don't do this because they dispute his policies, they do it because he's black. I say this because nothing about Obama's platform is really that progressive or unprecedented other than health care and "personally" recognizing gay marriage (big deal) . Most of his proposed legislation were based on republican proposed and approved initiatives, that is until Obama backed it. Affordable Health Care Act was pretty much Romney. The budget was pretty much Ryan. But when Obama adopted them, all of a sudden, they are socialists or extremist ideas.

Secondly, I also stand by my second statement. You left out two major groups: women and the LGBT community, of which, many are white. No gay or lesbian in their right mind are going to vote for such a homophobic party who's hell bent on taking their basic human rights. And women make up roughly 50% of the US population. Of course, not all women are going to vote for Obama, but the ones who REALLY know what Romney is all about will, and I'd like to believe there aren't enough ignorant women, who don't care about their own rights in the US to carry Romney through.

Lastly Alphaape -you're African-American and you're considering voting for Romney? Really?!? I wouldn't go as far as saying that all African Americans should vote for Obama, but I would say that NO African-American's should vote for Romney because the Republican party is a part of HATE, and they have no interest in helping the African-American community succeed, or any other minority community for that matter. They want to take away basic voting rights through ridiculous voter ID laws, which are suppose prevent so called "voter fraud." The fact of the matter is, there have been more people killed by hippos in Africa then there has been voter fraud, in other words. extremely rare. The law was design to suppress the minority vote, hence nullifying the voice of the African-American community.

I am half African American, and I totally could not imagine voting for Romney. I mentioned once that I used to be a republican and voted for H.W. But back then, the republican party wasn't nuts, nor were they openly racists as they are now. I don't agree with Obama on a lot of issues. As a matter of fact, on a scale of 1 to 10 of how satisfied I am with Obama's first term, I am at about a 6. But there is no way in hell Romney is getting my vote...I don't vote for people who openly hate me.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"I still stand by my comment that I feel that the US is still a very racist society. "

I still can't get my head around alphape's capitalizing of Blacks and not whites. Are whites inferior to you alpha?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

>Do you honestly believe that if Obama was white, people would relentlessly ask to see his birth certificate

Obama is as white as he is black. It's amazing that the so-called 'melting pot' society still insists on categorising people according to the perceived colour of their skin.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Do you honestly believe that if Obama was white, people would relentlessly ask to see his birth certificate, to see his grades in college, make outright racist statements about him and his family, or congress republicans unanimously agreeing to make Obama's failure the highest priority? All of this is unprecedented and has never happened under any other presidential leadership until now.

Unprecedented hardly????? Exactly where were you during the Bush presidency? Talk about some of the most vile statements about that man by the left.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

It's amazing that the so-called 'melting pot' society still insists on categorising people according to the perceived colour of their skin.

That's why I say that the US is still a racist society. I totally identify with Obama when it comes to people judging him based on just the skin color.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Madverts - "I still can't get my head around alphape's capitalizing of Blacks and not whites. Are whites inferior to you alpha?"

I often include additional capitilzation when I spell 'bUsH'.

Does this make GWB superior to other presidents? :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That's why I say that the US is still a racist society.

I'm going to state the obvious.

If the U.S was still a racist society President Obama would have never been elected in the first place. And he was elected by a comfortable majority of the entire country.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's amazing that the so-called 'melting pot' society still insists on categorising people according to the perceived colour of their skin

He identifies as black. In other words, he catagorizes himself.

NPR explains why.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17958438

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Politics is a dirty business and the more extreme idiots will find anything, including race, to attack. From the birthers and those believing Obama is a closet Muslim on the right to those nutcases on the left who believe George W Bush had prior knowledge of 9/11. I wouldn't for a second dispute that racism is a problem in the States, but these attacks seem more like finding a way to attack in a language that idiots understand.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If the U.S was still a racist society President Obama would have never been elected in the first place. And he was elected by a comfortable majority of the entire country.

Not necessarily. A lot of people just didn't buy into McCain and especially Palin 2008. For example, there was one person quoted during an exit poll in 2008 as saying something to the affect of (and I am paraphrasing) I didn't there would ever be a day when I would be voting for a n!gg3r.

The KKK even endorsed Obama in 2008.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Readers, no more discussion of racism please. It is not relevant to this discussion.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nessie, I think that radio spot underlines what I said.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Bass - "...the RNC and DNC both men had to define themselves and to re-introduce who they are and what they represent."

Mitt introduced himself but didn't define himself.  Barack HUSSEIN Obama's campaign is doing a great job at that.

Why is it that you always have to spin things around, you don't even try, it just comes out! Mitt has more than enough times defined himself as a person and as a man with the credentials of a strong businessman that is most capable of handling the country, since Obama was the one that didn't define or elaborate at the DNC as to how he will fix the economy, NOTHING.

Yes, to nowhere. 

You weren't paying attention then.

Without a plan, what is Mitt going to lead? 

Again, another lie and another spin. Romney does have a plan!

Nonsense. Mitt's plan, as president Clinton made clear, is a return to past failures and a bonanza for Mitt's rich backers.

http://www.glennhubbard.net/papers/407-the-romney-program-for-economic-recovery-growth-and-jobs.html

Another of Mitt's many weak points is his lack of ideas.

Toy's "R" Us, Burlington Coat Factory, Burger King, Amc, Dominoes, Guitar, Dunkin' Donuts, The Sports Authority, Staples, Warner Music Group, 2002 Winter Olympics. Proven Ideas, proven credentials.

Obama-Debt, debt and more debt

Mitt had better get some key policy answers together before debate day. Otherwise he is going to get taken to the >cleaners by the president.

I hope the Mods ask Obama how he will tackle the 8% unemployment rate, how to increase jobs in the private sector and how we are we going to pay for Obamacare.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@Cleo

Obama is as white as he is black. It's amazing that the so-called 'melting pot' society still insists on categorising people according to the perceived colour of their skin.

Obama said, himself that he feels more closer to his African American roots, than his White roots. Some people do, it doesn't mean, that he excludes his white side, but to most people in the states he looks more Black and is seen more as a Black man. I know many, many people like that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Lastly Alphaape -you're African-American and you're considering voting for Romney? Really?!? I wouldn't go as far as saying that all African Americans should vote for Obama, but I would say that NO African-American's should vote for Romney because the Republican party is a part of HATE, and they have no interest in helping the African-American community succeed, or any other minority community for that matter.

@ Mirai Hayashi: You need to go back and take a look at a history book. It was the GOP that granted freed slaves the rights that are guarenteed under the Constitution. By the way, 80% of no votes in Senate for 1964 Civil RIghts act came from Dems (from Senators like Gore's father and the late Sen Byrd). Rep votes were essential in winning final passage of the Bill. So I don't think that the GOP is out to deny people their civil rights.

Of all the things that are needed the most in African American communities, the most important thing is jobs, not more access to Food Stamps or section 8 housing. In my home town in the south, jobs that were at local manufacturing plants went overseas. Those minority neighborhoods that I grew up in had people going to work and making a living. They were good blue collar jobs that helped get their kids through colleges and the rest of the American dream. Now that jobs are outsourced (both GOP and Dem) or shut down by the Dems because they are not "green" (a light bulb manufacturing plant was closed because it was not green enough) and they you have people depending on the government for a hand out, and that breeds generations who think that's their "entitlement."

More jobs, means more people working, and having money to spend. If they aren't working at some plant, they are working at some of the resturants and other stores that had to close when the main employer moved away. If Romney, or Obama just stood up and said, "I will do this only for Black people" then I wouldn't vote for either. Because if he does just one thing for one particular race, then who's to say what he does for another race will put my race at a disadvantage. We have seen this with Obama's support of the "Dream Act." Now undocumenteds who aren't supposed to be able to work legally in the US, now see that they have a path to legalization. Ok if that is the case for the majority Latio poplulation, then what does that do for the native Black population. Since the jobs that they are skilled for and that are scarce are the ones normally taken by Blacks. And then, what will Obama/Romney promise to the Asian or White voters? You see when you start trying to promise specific programs to specific groups you get to the point where nothing is going to benefit all.

I will not vote for Obama due to his race, but becuase of his stance on the issues. That's what's important to me.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Readers, no further discussion of race please.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Romney is now moving to the middle after seeing he cannot win with the tea party scorched earth and legitimate rape policies. He is evening blaming Ryan now for screwing up the economy with his votes in Congress.

When this is over and if Obama wins another landslide victory several mistakes by Romney will be discussed. First his tax dodging, then his healthcare flip-flop-flip and last his sucking up to the billionaires for funding to run despicable ads against his opponents.

Santorum was right, the Romboid is a horribly flawed candidate. He would be an even worse President but that is seeming to be less likely now. The wheels are coming off his campaign right now and no amount of money can fix his campaign.

Now the question is will the Obama voters turn the House back to the sane Democratic party from those just say no loons running the show now there.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Personally I prefer Ryan's tax loophole secret plan.

They are going to move on it they say, only they won't give any plans to voters.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/09/analysis-where-is-romneys-bold/

I agree, bring on the debates.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

When Obama took office U.S. government debt was around $11 trillion, it's now around $16 trillion, at this rate it'll be $20 trillion or so after Obama's second term.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Well of course Obama has a lead, heck, the Democrats just had their convention with Bubba's great speech, this is his "bounce." The question here is why doesn't he have a double-digit lead, if Romney is as bad as some posters here make him out to be?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

"When Obama took office U.S. government debt was around $11 trillion, it's now around $16 trillion, at this rate it'll be $20 trillion or so after Obama's second term."

I keep seeing the radical conservatives braying this like it meant something.

You do realize that the US is still racking up debt for the wars your man Bush started? What is, over 6.7 billion a month just for Afghanistan?

What further proof do you need that Republicans defy arithmetic?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"over 6.7 billion a month just for Afghanistan"

Three and a half years after Obama took office - incredible, isn't it!

I see Madverts doesn't deny that U.S. gov't debt will continue to increase under Obama.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

"wars that Bush started"

Yes, Bush invaded Kuwait, and attacked the WTC and the Pentagon!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I won't vote for either the Left-wing candidate nor the Right-wing candidate of the Statist Party. Evil or Evil, just say no.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

we will see, I guess.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Serrano Obama is often attacked for blaming it all on Bush. The right would be well advised to steer clear of the car crash that was George W Bush. Romney/Ryan know better than to dwell on it, you should follow their lead.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

A second term for Obama..

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Santorum was right, the Romboid is a horribly flawed candidate.

@ zurcronium: If Santorum was really right, he would be the nominee. Look I thought everyone kept saying that they want someone who will be willing to work across the aisle and compromise. So Romney says he likes some parts of Obamacare, and would be willing to keep them. I don't have a problem with that. Insurance companies dropping people after they have paid into it for years is something that gives the industry a bad name. Look at what happened after Katrina (I know different type of isurance but same principle).

Romney at least showing that he is willing to compromise is fine. You want someone out there saying it's their way or the highway, we will get more of the same.

As long as Romney sticks to his core beliefs, cutting taxes, stimulating the economy through less intervention repealing the onorous parts of Obamacare then tha's fne. What has Obama said that he likes about any of the GOP proposals other than that they are supposedly going to bring up back to some time in the past when "things weren't so good" as he puts it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What choice is there for Americans? A choice between a Mormon and a man whom nobody really knows... God Help America.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

"Serrano Obama is often attacked for blaming it all on Bush. The right would be well advised to steer clear of the car crash that was George W Bush."

Pretty damned hard to do that when you were a cheerleader for his 8 years in office, right?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

"@ zurcronium: If Santorum was really right, he would be the nominee"

"Rich" you mean, not "right".

Romney bought the nomination. Heh, cheaply (in his terms) I imagine in light of the candidates the GOP wheeled out this election.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

" We really don't have two political parties anymore. We have one big government party, with a democratic wing that likes war and taxes and individual welfare and staying in power, and a republican wing that likes war and deficits and corporate welfare and staying in power. There is very little difference between them. I mean, Ron Paul and Gary Johnson are so different from the mainstream Republicans and the mainstream Democrats; they really present the only alternative. It's basically a choice between Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Mad

You do realize that the US is still racking up debt for the wars your man Bush started? What is, over 6.7 billion >a month just for Afghanistan?

What further proof do you need that Republicans defy arithmetic?

Ah, yes, the war that Obama says, the real war where we need to concentrate our forces at. The that is now HIS war, so adding the cost of Afghanistan and the raise in unemployment, the deficit, Obamacare, $16T and climbing of debt. The Republicans are NOT the ones that can't do arithmetic, not even basic Math 101.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

"Romney bought the nomination"

But Obama didn't, right?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"weak employment numbers"

The U.S. is still the world's biggest economy, right? What happens to the world economy if the U.S. economy collapses, which is a very real possibility if things keep going the way they are?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites