60 Days Out Prez Poll

[mikegideon]

Doesn't matter. He was elected the first time, so he obviously had the support. McCain had barely a chance, and certainly had no chance when he chose Palin. Romney/Ryan is a much better prospect than last time, but I doubt it'll be enough.

That last jobs report hasn't sunk in yet. The numbers support firing Obama this time. Last time, they supported firing the Republicans. It's gonna be a barn burner because Obama owns the huge libtard states. Obama still has that one little nagging issue... he failed at reviving the economy. It won't get better in a second term. 60 days is an eternity.

[Guest bkelm18]

That last jobs report hasn't sunk in yet. The numbers support firing Obama this time. Last time, they supported firing the Republicans. It's gonna be a barn burner because Obama owns the huge libtard states. Obama still has that one little nagging issue... he failed at reviving the economy. It won't get better in a second term. 60 days is an eternity.

You put too much faith in the intelligence of the average voter. People were stupid enough to buy his game the first time. They'll buy it again. I've heard it from plenty of people, "He needs more than one term to fix everything the republicans broke."

[mikegideon]

You put too much faith in the intelligence of the average voter. People were stupid enough to buy his game the first time. They'll buy it again. I've heard it from plenty of people, "He needs more than one term to fix everything the republicans broke."

I hear that too. Count up the number of folks that are sick of the crappy economy, and then look at the polls on who will do a better job at that. The hard core libs are gonna spew whatever Obama says. For all of the crap you hear, Tennessee will go red again.

And BTW... I do put a lot of faith in folks' desire to feed their families. It's more important than your views on a vagina.

Edited September 9, 2012 by mikegideon

[Mike.357]

pretty sure my opinion is based on talking to other voters.

[mikegideon]

pretty sure my opinion is based on talking to other voters.

I believe you. 6 million folks in Tennesse. What are you up to yet?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

"And BTW... I do put a lot of faith in folks' desire to feed their families. It's more important than your views on a vagina."

Now that one's a keeper, Mike.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Doesn't matter. He was elected the first time, so he obviously had the support. McCain had barely a chance, and certainly had no chance when he chose Palin. Romney/Ryan is a much better prospect than last time, but I doubt it'll be enough.

The Hell it doesn't matter. How did the Tea Party come about? How much crap does one have to ingest before he starts to vomit? If you have no faith in people sometimes using their brain, I understand, but a huge audience woke up this time.

Those voters who sat it out weren't stupid, just acted stupidly, like something Obama said about a cop. Rather they appear outraged and should not do the same as before. The elections of 2010 were an indication of the mood in this country changing back away from the commies.

I guess some of you aren't old enough to, or haven't learned from your liberal history professors about the Carter/Reagan race.

Edited September 9, 2012 by 6.8 AR

[Guest ThePunisher]

In '68 Nixon won as a result from the Vietman war fatigue. In '80 Reagan won as a result of the economic blues under Carter. In '92 Clinton won because the republicans voted for him as a result of Bush breaking his pledge not to raise taxes. In '2008 Obummer the commie won as a result from the terrorist war fatigue, and the promise of "Hope and Change". In 2012 Romney will win because of the results from the commie's "Hope and Change" that has fundamentally transformed the country on a path toward communism, and nearly put America on the brink of total economic collapse.

[Lumber_Jack]

I guess some of you aren't old enough to, or haven't learned from your liberal history professors about the Carter/Reagan race.

I'm not old enough, but correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't Reagan behind by 15 or more points at this point in his race?

[mikegideon]

I'm not old enough, but correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't Reagan behind by 15 or more points at this point in his race?

60 days is a long time, especially with the huge wad of cash that has yet to be spent.

Edited September 9, 2012 by mikegideon

[Guest ThePunisher]

I'm not old enough, but correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't Reagan behind by 15 or more points at this point in his race?

I just read on Drudge Report that the Gallup poll had Cater +4 in Sept. and +8 in October of '80. The debates turned things around for Reagan when he coined the phrase "Are You Better Off Than You Were Four Years Ago". Romney will be using that quote in the next 60 a lot. And of course Obummer won't get to use his telepromter in the debates.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I'm not old enough, but correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't Reagan behind by 15 or more points at this point in his race?

Yes, he was, and it turned on a dime after the convention. I won't compare the two, especially where they are in

the process, but the main thing that got Reagan elected after the convention was his never giving up and staying

completely on subject, which was Carter's failed policies. He was relentless. the media was just as liberal then, as

they are now.

Romney would be wise to act like Reagan and be focused and aggressive, instead of only claiming to be conservative.

[quietguy]

In '68 Nixon won as a result from the Vietman war fatigue. In '80 Reagan won as a result of the economic blues under Carter. In '92 Clinton won because the republicans voted for him as a result of Bush breaking his pledge not to raise taxes. In '2008 Obummer the commie won as a result from the terrorist war fatigue, and the promise of "Hope and Change". In 2012 Romney will win because of the results from the commie's "Hope and Change" that has fundamentally transformed the country on a path toward communism, and nearly put America on the brink of total economic collapse.

It wasn't that Republicans voted for Clinton, it was the ones that voted for Ross Perot that cost Bush Sr, the '92 election.

[gregintenn]

The only way I see Obama losing is if Romney's tour bus goes off a cliff, and Ryan isn't on it so he is still here to continue the campaign.

I've heard Rush Limbaugh say the Elmer Fudd could beat Obama this election. I believe that. It is a shame the Republicans couldn't choose a candidate as electable as Mr. Fudd.

Edited September 9, 2012 by gregintenn

[kieefer]

I don't need any convincing that BHO needs to go but this video was apparently going to be shown on Hannity but due to WH pressure the story and this video was pulled.

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tCAffMSWSzY#t=28

[kieefer]

It wasn't that Republicans voted for Clinton, it was the ones that voted for Ross Perot that cost Bush Sr, the '92 election.

hey, I was one of those

.

Edited September 11, 2012 by kieefer

[Guest 6.8 AR]

That video and the story should have aired. Hell, I haven't seen some of that. Of course the WH used an argument

that it was all taken out of context. This current president is totally out of context.

[kieefer]

It may be get pulled from youtube before it's all over with.

Fwd to any drones that you know of while it's still alive.

[G27]

I've never seen a president so ripe for being booted, but the repubs chose such a 'meh' candidate I'm pretty sure Obama will win again.

[mikegideon]

I've never seen a president so ripe for being booted, but the repubs chose such a 'meh' candidate I'm pretty sure Obama will win again.

Mitt is definately a cracker.

[Wingshooter]

Here's why I think Romney wins.

1) Obama really energized a lot of people in 2008. A lot of people voted for him because it was "making history" and he was a young, entergetic choice promising the moon to everyone. A lot of people turned out to vote that normally don't because they were electing the first black president. Well, history has been made, and 2012 is not as glamorous. Will he get the voter turnout? I don't think so. On the other hand, a lot of people are motivated to vote obama out this time around. Will Romney get a good turn out from those that want obama to loose? I DO think so.

2) Obama is good with the teleprompter. He made McCain look pretty sad in the debates. Obama has a record now, and I think Romney will hammer him on that during the debates (at least I hope so).

3) Fuel prices are trending upward again and unemployment is still high.

I think it will be a nail-bitter down to the last state, but I look for Romney to pull it off.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

"He made McCain look pretty sad in the debates."

Don't give Obama too much credit on this. McCain ain't much of a debater, and, besides, he is too PC to debate a

black man. He was scared to death to say anything in those debates that might be construed as offensive to Obama

or any Democrat. Never was a maverick, like he claimed.

Otherwise, I agree about your reasons.

There is a story on American Thinker mentioning about how his cap and trade policy against coal may be turning

states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and the Virginias against the Democrats, since the majority of their electricity production is starting to "necessarily skyrocket". That kind of thing can hurt the "working man Democrat's" attitude toward the messiah.

Add that one to your list and I think we may have a winner in November.

Edited September 11, 2012 by 6.8 AR

[Guest ThePunisher]

Yep, definitely the cap and trade policy will be resurrected as a priority in his second term. He's determined to destroy our traditional methods of energy, and create higher energy costs. But of course there are many that like higher bills and blackouts. We might as well go back to the cave man ways, and reinvent the wheel and become amazed at fire.

[mikegideon]

Thanks to our Libertarian friends...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/10/spoiler-alert-poll-finds-small-following-for-libertarian-candidate/

[G27]

Thanks to our Libertarian friends...

http://politicaltick...rian-candidate/

LOL