Romney pulls into tie with Obama in Ohio, Florida: poll

Le Jimbo wrote:

<quoted text>Media Matters is not a good source, nor is Obama.
To get the real unemployment rate that the press is suppressing you google U6 unemployment numbers. You will find actual unemployment is 14.5%.
Anaemic jobs data hit Obama launch; Official campaign starts under shadow...Obama's campaign started January 21, 2009.
Labor Force Participation Lowest Since 1981...
567,000 of those jobs lost were women. Obama's real war on women is not over just which pill they take.

Judged:

1

1

Le Jimbo wrote:

<quoted text>Not when Obama counts only a fraction of the people out of work.

Judged:

1

1

Ross wrote:

At this atage in their campaigns, Reagan was down to Carter by over 20 points, Clinton was down to Bush 41 by 20 points.

Ross wrote:

...odummy is history without a miracle.

Judged:

1

1

Rich wrote:

<quoted text> Does that translate to no whinning about the Electoral College thwarting true democracy this election cycle? I guess the Electoral College is only an issue when progressives are on the short end of the stick huh? Theses a long way to go until election day. All todays poll numbers prove is that people can get used to anything. Near $4 gasoline,9% unemployment etc and a crappy economy and half of the people are prepared to"stay the course". Brilliant.

Wally Funk wrote:

<quoted text>The only "poll" that matters is next November. We haven't even had the conventions yet!

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
Maybe the GOP will have a shot in 2016 if Hillary decides not to run.

Judged:

1

1

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm not confusing anything. The U-3 number is the official unemployment number that has been reported for decades. The formula for calculating the number is basically the same as it's always been. We've never used the U-6 number as the official unemployment rate, for multiple reasons.
For year-to-year comparisons the U-3 number will be what is always officially reported. Not suprisingly there was no great outcry from conservatives to use the U-6 number under the GOP administrations.
The ONLY reason you people think the U-6 number should be used now is because you think it will hurt Obama's reelection. It's completely partisan politics.

Judged:

2

2

2

Wally Funk wrote:

<quoted text>It's customary for the incumbent Vice President to get the nomination but not sure if Joe will be up to it by then.

Judged:

1

1

1

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
Cry all you want, but the same formula has been used to count the unemployment rate for decades.
It stands at 8.1%.
Now cry some more.

Judged:

1

1

1

NoBama4Me wrote:

<quoted text>You are a lemming.
Use the U6 for Bush's years. I dare you! You mental giants make me laugh!
Point you fingers and magic happens, hahahahahahaha!

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
Cry all you want, but the same formula has been used to count the unemployment rate for decades.
It stands at 8.1%.
Now cry some more.

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually I fully support dumping the electoral college and just use the popular vote. But until that happens, we're stuck with the electoral college; and right now it doesn't look good for Romney. Obama leads by more than 10% points in enough states to get the 270 he needs to win. While many of he "swing states" are closer, he doesn't need any of them to win. In fact he can lose Florida, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, & Indiana (all states he won in '08) and he'll STILL win.

NoBama4Me wrote:

<quoted text>You are a lemming.
Use the U6 for Bush's years. I dare you! You mental giants make me laugh!
Point you fingers and magic happens, hahahahahahaha!

Kramers Attorney wrote:

<quoted text>That's untrue. The calculation methods changed in 1994.
http://tlrii.typepad.com/theliscioreport/2009...

Wally Funk wrote:

<quoted text>It's customary for the incumbent Vice President to get the nomination but not sure if Joe will be up to it by then.

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
I think Biden is done, but you never know. I can see a scenario where Biden steps down as VP in 2014 and Obama nominates Hillary to take his place. That would be an interesting confirmation battle in the Senate!

Kramers Attorney wrote:

<quoted text>It would be no battle at all...she'd breeze right through for two reasons: senatorial clubbiness is non-partisan and nobody wants to leave the office of VP opeen longer than necessary, especially if the Speaker of the House (think Pelosi or someone similar) is a kook. Now a nomination for Hillary to SCOTUS...THAT would be a battle to behold.

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm assuming the GOP keeps the House, so that would but Boner next in line. I can see the GOP Senators filibustering Hillary as VP in that case.