Need Bees Removed?
International
Beekeeping Forums
September 23, 2014, 02:34:03 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: 24/7 Ventrilo Voice chat -click for instructions and free software here
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar bee removal Login Register Chat  

Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Interesting pragmatic overview of the presidential election  (Read 3331 times)
iddee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6061

Location: Randleman, NC


« on: September 12, 2012, 10:41:49 AM »



Las Vegas  "odds maker" opines on why Obama will get "killed" by Romney in November

Wayne Allyn Root

Most political predictions are made by biased pollsters, pundits, or prognosticators who are either rooting for Republicans or Democrats. I am neither. I am a former Libertarian Vice Presidential nominee, and a well-known Vegas odds-maker with one of the most accurate records of predicting political races.

But as an odds-maker with a pretty remarkable track record of picking political races, I play no favorites. I simply use common sense to call them as I see them. Back in late December I released my New Years Predictions. I predicted back then- before a single GOP primary had been held, with Romney trailing for months to almost every GOP competitor from Rick Perry to Herman Cain to Newt- that Romney would easily rout his competition to win the GOP nomination by a landslide. I also predicted that the Presidential race between Obama and Romney would be very close until election day. But that on election day Romney would win by a landslide similar to Reagan-Carter in 1980.

Understanding history, today I am even more convinced of a resounding Romney victory. 32 years ago at this moment in time, Reagan was losing by 9 points to Carter. Romney is right now running even in polls. So why do most pollsters give Obama the edge?

First, most pollsters are missing one ingredient- common sense. Here is my gut instinct. Not one American who voted for McCain 4 years ago will switch to Obama. Not one in all the land. But many millions of people who voted for an unknown Obama 4 years ago are angry, disillusioned, turned off, or scared about the future. Voters know Obama now- and that is a bad harbinger.

Now to an analysis of the voting blocks that matter in  U.S.  politics:
*Black voters. Obama has nowhere to go but down among this group. His endorsement of gay marriage has alienated many black church-going Christians. He may get 88% of their vote instead of the 96% he got in 2008. This is not good news for Obama.

*Hispanic voters. Obama has nowhere to go but down among this group. If Romney picks Rubio as his VP running-mate the GOP may pick up an extra 10% to 15% of Hispanic voters (plus lock down  Florida ). This is not good news for Obama.

*Jewish voters. Obama has been weak in his support of  Israel . Many Jewish voters and big donors are angry and disappointed. I predict Obama's Jewish support drops from 78% in 2008 to the low 60’s. This is not good news for Obama.

*Youth voters. Obama’s biggest and most enthusiastic believers from 4 years ago have graduated into a job market from hell. Young people are disillusioned, frightened, and broke- a bad combination. The enthusiasm is long gone. Turnout will be much lower among young voters, as will actual voting percentages. This not good news for Obama.

*Catholic voters. Obama won a majority of Catholics in 2008. That won’t happen again. Out of desperation to please women, Obama went to war with the Catholic Church over contraception. Now he is being sued by the Catholic Church. Majority lost. This is not good news for Obama.

*Small Business owners. Because I ran for Vice President last time around, and I'm a small businessman myself, I know literally thousands of small business owners. At least 40% of them in my circle of friends, fans and supporters voted for Obama 4 years ago to “give someone different a chance.” I warned them that he would pursue a war on capitalism and demonize anyone who owned a business...that he’d support unions over the private sector in a big way...that he'd overwhelm the economy with spending and debt. My friends didn’t listen. Four years later, I can't find one person in my circle of small business owner friends voting for Obama. Not one. This is not good news for Obama.

*Blue collar working class whites. Do I need to say a thing? White working class voters are about as happy with Obama as Boston Red Sox fans feel about the New York Yankees. This is not good news for Obama.

*Suburban moms. The issue isn’t contraception…it’s having a job to pay for contraception. Obama’s economy frightens these moms. They are worried about putting food on the table. They fear for their children’s future. This is not good news for Obama.

*Military Veterans. McCain won this group by 10 points. Romney is winning by 24 points. The more our military vets got to see of Obama, the more they disliked him. This is not good news for Obama.

Add it up. Is there one major group where Obama has gained since 2008? Will anyone in  America  wake up on election day saying “I didn’t vote for Obama 4 years ago. But he’s done such a fantastic job, I can’t wait to vote for him today.” Does anyone feel that a vote for Obama makes their job more secure?

Forget the polls. My gut instincts as a Vegas odds-maker and common sense small businessman tell me this will be a historic landslide and a world-class repudiation of Obama’s radical and risky socialist agenda. It's Reagan-Carter all over again.

But I’ll give Obama credit for one thing - he is living proof that familiarity breeds contempt.

 

Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

*Shel Silverstein*
BlueBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4217

Location: Mid Michigan


« Reply #1 on: September 13, 2012, 10:56:47 PM »

LOL, do y’all know how utterly ridiculous this “analysis” is?  cheesy cheesy cheesy

Beeks truly live in a land of delusion and fantasy!  cool

Can you give me even ONE poll where Romney is leading Obama ?

BTW… the analysis forgot one important voting block; the bee keepers!  99.9999% voted Republican last time and 99.9999% will vote Republican again this time.  Slap an “R” behind a liberal and you can fool the conservatives every time Smiley

Logged
buzzbee
Ken
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5445


Location: North Central PA


WWW
« Reply #2 on: September 15, 2012, 01:09:20 PM »

The slight lead Obama may have at this point does not bode well for an Incumbent. Most incumbents enjoyed the early substantial lead.
And you also have to look at the pool of likely voters,not the general public. I think his odds are smaller there.
And now he has the mess blowing up in the Middle east with the Embassies taking hits that he can not blame on George Bush!!
He actually has to take credit for this one.
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15152


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #3 on: September 15, 2012, 01:30:25 PM »

i think he's pretty accurate and his observations are out of date. 

obama was elected largely based on feelings.  people felt angry at war and GWB.  they felt is was time to prove we were not a racist country by electing a "clean" black man.  they felt the economy was in danger and we needed change.  they felt all kinds of things, but they did not base their vote on any concrete facts about the candidate.  in fact, most of the reasons they voted for him, had nothing to do with him.
he has no shining accomplishments to point to except obama care and the implementation of that has managed to alienate blocks that should have been safe for him.

there will be no enthusiast turn out of blacks or young people.  his greatest supporters are unions, and union membership continues to decline.



Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
buzzbee
Ken
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5445


Location: North Central PA


WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 15, 2012, 03:43:18 PM »

LOL, do y’all know how utterly ridiculous this “analysis” is?  cheesy cheesy cheesy

Can you give me even ONE poll where Romney is leading Obama ?





Funny you should ask:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Now if the MSM was not in the tank for Obama we would see a large gap between the the two.
Logged
Julysun
New Bee
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1

Location: Hopelessly Lost


« Reply #5 on: October 10, 2012, 01:52:42 PM »

Bush I got us into a war and expanded our debt.
Clinton kept us out of a war and reduced dramatically our debt.
Bush II, the idiot one, got us in two wars, ruined our economy and expanded our debt.
Obama got us out of one war and is getting us out of a second and avoided getting us into Libya. He has slowed the debt expansion and is repairing our economy. rolleyes





Logged
bluegrass
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 459

Location: CT


« Reply #6 on: October 10, 2012, 02:08:58 PM »

The key part he is missing is the common saying that "The hell we know is better than the hell we don't know"

People by nature hate uncertainty... We know what we have with Obama... It may not be great, but we know what we have... Now with Rmoney (pun intended) we have his record in MA, his record as a business person and we have what he says today that contradicts all of that. People hate uncertainty and Rmoney is nothing if not an uncertainty.

I don't give polls much cred and never have... they mis-predicted Gore winning the popular vote by about 5 points... and as that election indicated the only thing that matters is who wins what state...  

And then there is this: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html
when GHW Bush lost reelection his job approval was at 39%, When Carter lost his job approval was at 28%, Ford was at 37%... No Incumbent has ever lost an election when his approval was above 40% and Averaging all the polls together Obama is at 49.7
« Last Edit: October 10, 2012, 02:30:45 PM by bluegrass » Logged

Sugarbush Bees
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15152


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #7 on: October 10, 2012, 02:20:57 PM »

Quote
Bush I got us into a war and expanded our debt.
Clinton kept us out of a war and reduced dramatically our debt.
Bush II, the idiot one, got us in two wars, ruined our economy and expanded our debt.
Obama got us out of one war and is getting us out of a second and avoided getting us into Libya. He has slowed the debt expansion and is repairing our economy. rolleyes

for the sake of argument, i'll give you most of the 1st 3 except that clinton didn't reduce debt, he had a republican congress that forced him to control some of his spending...and a good economey that gave him plenty of revenue...right up to the recession at the end of his presidency.  which, by the way, no one blames him for...or for handing bush a bad economy.  it's only the left that whines about stuff like that.

also, bush 2, didn't get us into 2 wars.  that kind of statement just shows a lack of knowledge of history. + he had nothing to do with the collapse of the housing/banking market.  that can be laid flat in the lap of two democrat congresses who forced banks to loan to people who could not pay, and then guaranteed that the banks would have no risk because fannie and freddie would cover them.

Obama got us out of the wrong conflict, is happy to let Afghanisan go on even though we have no national interst there, and has made a royal mess of everything to do with the "arab spring" including Libya.  in case you have been napping, today there are hearings on the attack in Libya.  the info coming out is pretty appalling, including, but not limited to, the advance of AQ in Libya....a country that before our "help" had not had measurable terrorist activity since Reagan.
near as i can tell, obama has made a mess of everything he's touched, from domestic stimulus to various pet and failing companies, to the international situation which has gone straight into the toilet since he took office. 

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15152


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #8 on: October 10, 2012, 02:23:12 PM »

Quote
"The hell we know is better than the hell we don't know"

not sure how well that holds up for the prez.  americans don't seem to mind changing horses.  just off the top of my head, it seems that the one term president is more common than  the two.  when i have time i'll go back and pull the numbers unless someone else has them handy?
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
bluegrass
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 459

Location: CT


« Reply #9 on: October 10, 2012, 02:34:40 PM »

Quote
"The hell we know is better than the hell we don't know"

not sure how well that holds up for the prez.  americans don't seem to mind changing horses.  just off the top of my head, it seems that the one term president is more common than  the two.

Only if you count resignations, assassination and the previously common practice of not seeking re-election (think Coolidge)  Of the last 6 Presidents it is a 50/50 split...  

In our history only 9 incumbents have lost re-election. Adams, Q Adams, Cleveland, Harrison, Taft, Hoover, Ford, Carter, Bush 1.   
Logged

Sugarbush Bees
kingbee
Queen Bee
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1083


Location: Big bend of the Tennessee River


« Reply #10 on: October 10, 2012, 05:45:45 PM »

... Of the last 6 Presidents it is a 50/50 split...  

In our history only 9 incumbents have lost re-election. Adams, Q Adams, Cleveland, Harrison, Taft, Hoover, Ford, Carter, Bush 1.   

I think you should lick your calf over concerning President Cleveland.  He did win reelection.  Only 4 years after he lost his first reelection.
Logged
bluegrass
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 459

Location: CT


« Reply #11 on: October 10, 2012, 06:49:16 PM »

If that is the way you want to look at it... it makes the odds longer for Romney... Only 8 out of 44 have lost...
Logged

Sugarbush Bees
buzzbee
Ken
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5445


Location: North Central PA


WWW
« Reply #12 on: October 10, 2012, 07:27:24 PM »

Debt 1 -1 -09
10,627,961,295,930
Debt 10-12-2012
16,167,932,295,919

Government figures, not mine
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway

Thats really slowing it down aint it angry

12-31-93
4,535,687,054,406

12-31-2008
10,699,804,864,612

Obama raised the debt more in four years than what was added in 15 prior years.
And 40 cents of every dollar spent is borrowed. I wish people were not so at ease with the government spending the futures of their children and grandchildren and they have yet to say how their money is being spent. We have to get over letting government rule our lives womb to tomb. People stand up and be responsible for your selves. Government is not the answer. Republican or Democrat!!!!
Logged
AllenF
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8136

Location: Hiram, Georgia


« Reply #13 on: October 10, 2012, 07:34:00 PM »

Cool web site.
Logged
kingbee
Queen Bee
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1083


Location: Big bend of the Tennessee River


« Reply #14 on: October 11, 2012, 01:36:01 AM »

...
Las Vegas  "odds maker" opines on why Obama will get "killed" by Romney in November...

Come on, whether you love or hate Obama, there is good news and bad news in this post.

The good news is that the pollsters use the voter population dynamic from the past election to chose the respondents for their polls during this election.  Elections (especially one as close as this one) are about voter turnout.  Therefore the group of people that the pollsters pole is likely over represented by Obama's supporters and under represented with Romney's voters.  Oodles and oodles of potential Juan McCain voters sat on their hands the last election just to keep their middle finger under control every time Juan McCain came on the tube and said, "I'm Juan McCain and I approve this message."  They like Romney much better than than they liked Juan McCain.

The bad news is that sports or political books don't gamble.  They try to cover all bets but most of all they want to keep as much money laid off one way as they have exposere the other way.  By doing this they pay off the winners with the losers money while collecting 10% Vigorish from the losers for themselves.  Bookies who fail to play it safe by laying off excess action will sooner or later go scuba diving in the trunk of a Coupe Devil.  

For instance the boxer Floyd Mayweather supposedly had 3 million bet against the University of Alabama covering (exceeding) the point spread in the Michigan game.  The Crimson Tide won by something just short of Obama's budget deficit.  The bookie would collect 3.3 million dollars from Mayweather and pay out 3 million dollars to the folks who bet on Alabama.  I doubt that there are many Romney supporters that have a relationship with the neighborhood bookie down at the liquor store and therefore this "book" is trying to gin up some action going the other way.  
« Last Edit: October 11, 2012, 11:10:47 AM by kingbee » Logged
BlueBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4217

Location: Mid Michigan


« Reply #15 on: October 11, 2012, 02:45:49 AM »

Mayweather supposedly had 3 million bet against the University of Alabama covering (exceeding) the point spread in the Michigan game.  The Crimson Tide won by something just short of Obama's budget deficit.  
Y'all can criticize Obama, GM, Logical thinking, the Dems, deflation, voter ID, and the Fed, but this is hitting below the belt  Sad  

Long live the Wolverines; the Champions of the West!
Logged
kingbee
Queen Bee
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1083


Location: Big bend of the Tennessee River


« Reply #16 on: October 11, 2012, 03:24:16 AM »

... the Crimson Tide won by something just short of Obama's budget deficit...
Y'all can criticize Obama, and the Fed, but this is hitting below the belt...

The Mormon High School football Cheer: 

Rah, Rah Ree, kick him in the knee

Rah, Rah Rass, kick him in the ...other knee. angel
Logged
kingbee
Queen Bee
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1083


Location: Big bend of the Tennessee River


« Reply #17 on: October 11, 2012, 03:34:45 AM »

... 

Can you give me even ONE poll where Romney is leading Obama ?



http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html
Logged
bluegrass
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 459

Location: CT


« Reply #18 on: October 11, 2012, 08:16:03 AM »

Buzz

Did you read the report from last years audit of the Federal Reserve? The one that found that the FED printed and distributed 16 trillion without congressional approval?

Don't get hung up on the amount of the debt... It is like a barrel of Oil on the stock exchange... It matters to the people investing in it, but it really has no real value.

Other than printing our way out of debt, or taxing our way out we are also backed by 650 million acres of Federal Land and all the resources in on or under.

Our individual liability is about 60K each... Not really a lot of money... Some of us already pay that in Income tax on a yearly bases.
   
Logged

Sugarbush Bees
kingbee
Queen Bee
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1083


Location: Big bend of the Tennessee River


« Reply #19 on: October 11, 2012, 04:17:04 PM »

...

Don't get hung up on the amount of the debt... 

Other than printing our way out of debt, or taxing our way out we are also backed by 650 million

acres of Federal Land and all the resources in on or under.


Are you speaking about U S Government bonds or J P Morgan’s Chinese Rail Road Bonds sold 100 years ago to an unsuspecting public.  These bonds are called “Chinese Rail Road Bonds” mostly because there is a picture of a locomotive on the front of some bonds and steam ships on others.  I suspect that many people though that they were investing in railroad rights of ways, track, and rolling stock, when in fact the bonds clearly state that the purpose of these bonds was to “Reorganize” (refinance) 5% of China’s foreign debt by infusing American, British, French, and German gold into the successor government of the Qing dynsity during an ongoing civil war no less.

Today these bonds still have value.  Value to decoupage empty wine jugs, improve ugly coffee tables, and to cover the floor of your bird cage.  United States of America promissory notes will soon be in the same class as these 100 year old bonds issued by a long defunct government..   

So bluegrass, are you advocating that China, Japan, Germany, Saud Arabia and England send gun boats to Long Island, San Francisco Bay, Lake Michigan, and the Mississippi Sound to “collect” on our outstanding debt similar to what Brittan, France, Germany, Japan, The U S A and other nations did in China? Because that was what happened with China over their 450,000,000 silver tael debt owed to foreign nations in the wake of the Boxer Rebellion.  Chinese “Rail Road” bonds were (IMHO) designed to get the ball rolling on paying DOWN China’s bad debts by giving the foreign banking community the impression that China was  a going concern and not a basket case.  We soon will be in the same condition China was 100 years ago. 

Now I must say that your post begs this question. Would you rather your home was sacked and daughters violated by Saudi, English Gurkhas , Japanese, Manchu, or  Geheimstaatgrenzpolizeigruppeneun type German troops?  That in a nut shell will be the only options left open to you and I with a national debt that can never be serviced nor retired.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Beemaster's Beekeeping Ring
Previous | Home | Join | Random | Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.416 seconds with 22 queries.

Google visited last this page September 15, 2014, 01:09:54 AM